Talk:Jean-Marie Defrance/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS): }

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Reviewer: MisterBee1966 (talk) 08:43, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments by MisterBee1966

• Inconsistent date format: Example September 21, 1771 and 14 June 1804. Choose one please

Fixed. You could have just fixed it. I would not have had a problem with that. Auntieruth55 (talk) 02:26, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

yes, you are righ, sorry MisterBee1966 (talk) 12:10, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

so is this okay now, or are there more comments? I'll work on Louis Klein some more. I found a little more information on him (not much). Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:37, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

• A number of French terms such as Chef-de-Brigade, Carabiniers, volunteers Cape Dragoons, royal-étranger and Armée de l'Ouest a brief English explanation could help the unknowledgeable reader, like myself
• "He also served in the Council of the Five Hundred" add a sentence briefly telling me what the council did
• First citation: you have dash after 1850, does this serve a purpose?
  • Yes, it indicates that the citation is a periodical, and that it is still published (beginning 1850 and so on) (or at least that the generally used bibliographic databases have not included an end date.) I'll take care of the other things. auntieruth (talk) 19:26, 24 June 2010 (UTC)

Nice! I like it