Draft talk:Participants of World War I

This page was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC

History

This page is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History 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.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory

Military history: World War I

This page is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history

Associated task forces:
/
	World War I task force

Article

This article has a bunch of issues, and I would currently be surprised if it was accepted in AFC.

First, the lead section is:

More of an overview on World War I, not the participants.
Too short to be a helpful overview
Factually incorrect in some areas

Second, the article is a bit too long:

In the list of countries participating, there is no need for certain categories (ex. Ally of the RSFSR, Enemy of the RSFSR, State actor, Etc.)
Certain sections, such as the one about the League of Nations, belong in the World War I, not here.
Neutral countries do not need to be discussed, as this is about the participants, (not the neutrals).
The whole sections about what country was allies or not allies with what other country, when they didn't participate in WWI is unnecessary.

Third, the formatting is extremely hard to follow:

The large amount of bulleted lists are unnecessary
The amount of space taken up by flags is also unnecessary
In some cases, there are links or notes in headers, which never should be the case
In the participants table, checks are not the best idea in a massive table were they are hard to see

Finally, the sourcing needs improvement:

The article references some sources 40 times, which is a bit too much
Every reference except for 1-3 has an citation issue
Most of these reference go to non-existent links
Notes should be in a separate section, not mixed in with the references

@Wiki the Octopus

@27 is the best number Starship SN20 (talk) 13:17, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! I am trying to fix these issues.

To be honest, I was still working on this draft, and I was surprised when it was submitted for review too early.

I would be grateful for any improvements you can make.

@Starship SN20

@27 is the best number

Thank you,

Wiki the Octopus Wiki the Octopus (talk) 00:29, 2 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merge from Draft:Participants in World War I

The reason should be obvious. Why didn't I do it myself? To preserve the histories of both pages. 27 is my favorite number. You can ask me why here. 16:22, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I was the person who created the original version of Draft:Participants of World War I. After the two drafts were merged, the links for the references from the other article (for example, Tennyson 2014, etc.) were broken. Do you know any way to restore them? I am not very experienced and would appreciate any advice.

Thank you,

Wiki the Octopus Wiki the Octopus (talk) 23:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]