Talk:5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) 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.
Review: July 19, 2020. (Reviewed version).

A fact from 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 July 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that during the Battle of Port Gibson, the 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) was sometimes only 10 feet (3.0 m) away from their opponent?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2020/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate).

Wikipedia

Missouri Low‑importance

	Missouri portal This article is part of WikiProject Missouri, a WikiProject related to the U.S. state of Missouri. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.MissouriWikipedia:WikiProject MissouriTemplate:WikiProject MissouriMissouri
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War

This article 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:
/
	North American military history task force
	United States military history task force
	American Civil War task force

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 00:49, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that during the Battle of Port Gibson, the 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) was sometimes only 10 feet (3.0 m) away from the enemy? Source 31 in the text
- ALT1:... that for the 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), the Siege of Vicksburg was a "sharp conflict" and "deadly slaughter"? Source 56 in the text
- ALT2:... that the strength of the 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) went from 618 men to 276 men in less than a year despite the regiment receiving 100 reinforcements? Sources 1, 18, and 69 in the text

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Sociedad Gestora de Televisión Net TV
Comment: If none of these are deemed interesting, there's 19kb of readable prose in the article. I'm sure I can come up with others.

Moved to mainspace by Hog Farm (talk). Self-nominated at 02:30, 25 June 2020 (UTC).[reply]

General eligibility:

New enough:
Long enough:
Other problems:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: A well-written and -referenced new article. Its sources are reliable print sources, but almost none of the text is available online. The main hook is hooky enough, but its citation was not viewable online for me (nor were the citations for the ALT hooks). I assume good faith, but ask for a sentence quotation from the hook source. — AjaxSmack 01:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@AjaxSmack: - For the first hook, it's "In the Fifth Missouri's sector, the dug-in defenders behind the creek bank blasted away at targets only ten feet distant". For the first alt (this is part of a quote from a diary of a 5th Missouri soldier in the context of Vicksburg) "and after a sharp conflict drove back the foe with deadly slaughter". For the other alt, "At the regiment's initial muster [September 1, 1862] it counted 618 men", "a company of 100 exchanged prisoners, all Missourians, joined the regiment" and "276 regimental soldiers received paroles following the surrender [July 4, 1863]". Hog Farm _Bacon 03:53, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great. — AjaxSmack 05:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Background

Hi Hog Farm. If you are wanting to run this at ACR and possibly FAC then consider adding a bit of deep background on how the ACW started, both nationally and in Missouri. If you are stumped, I know where you can cut and paste something from . (Don't forget to attribute per WP:COPYWITHIN.) And this article, at 22kB, is currently small for a FAC - see graph showing the average size in kB of the individual FAC pages for both archived and promoted FACs. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: - It's been on my mind, but this one needs quite a bit of work yet, beyond the background. Tucker's only a medium-grade source, so he'll need support, and I'll need to dredge Google books for any other sources for comprehensiveness' sake. That graphs a little scary for me: the three longest article's I've worked on significantly are the Newtonia one, this one, and Bledsoe's Missouri Battery. All are under 25kb of readable prose. I lack sources for key battles on Bledsoe, so that one won't even see ACR for likely a long time. I'm getting ready to go back to university in a few weeks, and won't have room to take my books with me, so I've been trying to decide on whether I should try to crank out a couple more articles, or focus on improving already existing ones. My hope is to have all of the infantry and artillery entries in Template:Missouri Confederate units navbox bluelinked someday (I lack sources for two of the campaigns most of the cavalry units were in, so I am not the editor to write those articles). I hope you win your re-election for MILHIST coordinator come September, you've been doing a great job. Hog Farm _Bacon 03:51, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hog Farm, you worry too much. Peacemaker's current FAC is 22kB and that is not a problem. I was responding to your comment on GoCER that "Warning, it's a bit of a long one."

I don't really have an answer re the thinness of sourcing for some articles, other than what you are already doing: assign them a mental quality level which they won't be promoted over unless/until you find additional sources. Your tentative assignment of ACR to this one as an upper limit seems about right.

Working some deep background into articles at any level seems to me to be a good habit to get into. Personally I ask myself "If an intelligent undergraduate at a rural college in India were reading this, would they understand the context?"

Re what to work on: well I can tell you what I did, which may or may not help. I spent six months mostly working existing articles which took my fancy up to B class. Then 2 years ago I started doing some GANs. If you look at the icons at the top of my talk page, which are in chronological order, you can see that I generated quite a few before trying my first ACR, and got several of those before my first FAC. So by the time I was in full FA production mode I had a solid foundation to work on. I also kept/keep a note of articles which I may care to improve some time in the future - a real grab bag, see here, especially right at the bottom. So if I am away from my sources it is easy to find something to keep me amused which can be improved via online sources.

Sounds as if you need someone to buy you this for Christmas.

Have fun, take care.

Gog the Mild (talk) 09:38, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]