This article is within the scope of WikiProject France, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of France on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
1a. the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct.
Minor comments; My concerns have been addressed.
"They then fought their way to the main Russian naval base on the peninsula, the city of Sevastopol, which they then placed under siege." -> They then; they then -> The army then fought their way to the main Russian naval base on the peninsula, the city of Sevastopol, (which they placed under siege. Or. which was then besieged.)
"the only purpose of te operation" -> the only purpose of the operation
"medium-caliber guns and smaller" -> medium-caliber and smaller guns. Or. medium and small caliber guns.
"Bazaine's infantry conducted a reconnaissance toward Kherson..." -> Bazaine's infantry conducted reconnaissance towards Kherson...
"the following year, to strengthen..." -> the following year to strengthen...
"Bruat informed his superiors that "Everything may..." -> Bruat informed his superiors that "[e]verything may..."
Good points, they should all be fixed now. Parsecboy (talk) 22:46, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
I have managed to access two of the sources and can confirm that the material in the article is an accurate reflection of the material in the source. I say reflection because the editor has used significant paraphrasing.
Earwig had nothing to compare the article too, and, my own comparisons of the source material and the article show very different styles of writing. The information is ostensibly the same, but, written in one's own words.
The images have appropriate captions and are relevant to the article.
7. Overall assessment.
Some minor issues that need addressing. Passes GA
I will be using the above table for my review so you can expect my comments to be under the appropriate criterion. If something is affected between two or more criterion then I will place it under one and make a note under the others. Mr rnddude (talk) 07:12, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Parsecboy, a fine article you have here, only a few minor issues to the prose, a dab, a citation question and some image tags that need fixing. The images themselves are fine, but, they lack the correct tags to identify them as such. Feel free to ping me if you need any assistance. Mr rnddude (talk) 11:56, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
Mr rnddude, thanks for your thorough review of the article. I think everything has been corrected. Thanks. Parsecboy (talk) 22:46, 14 August 2016 (UTC)