Wikipedia:Peer review/Battle of Trafalgar/archive2
Battle of Trafalgar[edit]
This ought to be WP:FA on October 21. It has had significant expansion since its last peer review (the credit doesn't go to me). More comments please and also try to keep it in the public eye. I think the consequences section needs work. Dunc|☺ 21:02, 22 July 2005 (UTC)
- References please. --malathion talk 02:13, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- Maps please. They are very important for battles. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 12:28, 23 July 2005 (UTC)
- I don't how successful it would be, but you could try posting a request to the Wikipedia:Requested pictures page for somebody to draw up a map. You could also search for out of copyright works on the battle to see if they have suitable maps.[1] [2] [3] Also I was thinking that there could be a separate order-of-battle page, in addition to the section on the BoT page, that would give more detail on the ships.[4]. — RJH 16:11, 24 July 2005 (UTC)
- Map and OoB page added. But the page will probably still have some difficulty making it through for feature status due to the lack of references and reference tags. — RJH 16:00, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
- Well a lot has been written about it and no doubt lots more is coming out this year, although we have to watch for pro-British pov, I think much of it presumably is general knowledge and doesn't need citations per se, but that an indication of which books are the better resources would be better(?) Dunc|☺ 17:37, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
- In suggesting references, I was just giving a common criteria for failure to obtain FA status. Perhaps you could give it a try for FA status with the proviso that it should not be posted until said date? If it fails you can always bring it back htrough here again. :) — RJH 16:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
- Yeah, I suppose I'd better go for it. At Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Trafalgar/archive1. Dunc|☺ 17:40, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
- In suggesting references, I was just giving a common criteria for failure to obtain FA status. Perhaps you could give it a try for FA status with the proviso that it should not be posted until said date? If it fails you can always bring it back htrough here again. :) — RJH 16:19, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
- Well a lot has been written about it and no doubt lots more is coming out this year, although we have to watch for pro-British pov, I think much of it presumably is general knowledge and doesn't need citations per se, but that an indication of which books are the better resources would be better(?) Dunc|☺ 17:37, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
- Map and OoB page added. But the page will probably still have some difficulty making it through for feature status due to the lack of references and reference tags. — RJH 16:00, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
- I don't how successful it would be, but you could try posting a request to the Wikipedia:Requested pictures page for somebody to draw up a map. You could also search for out of copyright works on the battle to see if they have suitable maps.[1] [2] [3] Also I was thinking that there could be a separate order-of-battle page, in addition to the section on the BoT page, that would give more detail on the ships.[4]. — RJH 16:11, 24 July 2005 (UTC)