Talk:Battle of Tabu-dong

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Battle of Tabu-dong has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
February 20, 2011 Good article nominee Listed

Time Format comment[edit]

Time Format[edit]

Article looks great, but I have a question about date and time. If you look at the 3rd paragraph, in the section Battle of Tabu-dong#Further US Withdrawal, the time "03:00" is mentioned, and somewhere nearby is "08:00". This is a mixture of civilian and military time formats. Shouldn't it be one or the other? 3:00, 3:00am, or 3pm, if its civilian format, 0300 or 1500 if it's military time. If you go with military time, then for the sake of consistency, dates should likewise probably be put in military format as well; (23 September 1950, not September 23, 1950). Something of a quibble, I admit, but had to throw it out there for consideration. Does the MilHistoryProject have any guidelines on this? Over. Boneyard90 (talk) 02:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Battle of Tabu-dong/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 02:13, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Generally good prose. A couple instances of awkward speech, fixed those.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Battery of well formatted reliable sources.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Very excellent work here again.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Cropped one of the maps
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Well written article. Unequivocally passes GA criteria, but additional images, and improvement of prose would be required for FA. Also think expansion would be required.