Talk:Karl Wilhelm von Dieskau/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 05:58, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

Will take this one. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 05:58, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

• Lead and infobox;
  • Karl Wilhelm von Dieskau, (9 August 1701 in Kontoppe, part of the Prussian Neumark–14 August 1777 in Berlin); just the date range is enough, no need of geographical details done
  • Link lieutenant general done
  • Why "a campaign in Hungary" is separately mentioned? done
• Section 1;
  • Period of his father, (16727–1762) is unnecessary, it is out of context I left his dates in
  • a daughter of I struck out "a" but it changes the meaning. And the German was specific that she was a daughter, not the only daughter.
  • General Field Marshal? Is he a general or field marshal? Both of them are two different ranks, or it is a special case? Anyway, link whatever it is. fixed.
• Section 2;
  • Dieskau entered the Prussian military -> Dieskau joined the Prussian military done
  • Link bombardier done
  • Comma (,) after "On 12 April 1727" done
  • he was raised to second lieutenant; I suggest "promoted" over "raised" done
  • Dieskau's military career modeled that of other Junker sons. military career modeled that of other Junker sons; recheck the use of punctuation removed
  • The context on Junkers is a bit out of context, cut it down removed
• Section 2.1;
  • Not only were there not enough guns, but "also" their quality was poor done
  • This made the gun unreliable -> This made their guns unreliable done
  • Field Marshal Samuel von Schmettau done
  • What is "number artillery"? No. of units, the men, the guns or what? Make it clearer done
  • at which time the king had given him a magnificent tobacco pot -> and also the king had given him a magnificent tobacco pot at the same time done
  • Dieskau was appointed Lieutenant-Colonel -> Dieskau was promoted lieutenant colonel on; it is a rank not a position, one gets promoted not appointed done
  • 20 April 20 1755; check this done
  • and on 28 February 1757,^[5] finally colonel -> colonel on 28 February 1757
  • Link major general and lieutenant general done
  • 3‐pound gun; check this correct done yes it is
• Nothing about the Equestrian statue of Frederick the Great and Frederick the Great's vaunted artillery is mentioned in the prose. But it is in the lead, fix this. done
• 0% confidence, well done.
• No need to red link the writers in the sources if the articles are not there done

Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 10:58, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

• thank you! auntieruth (talk) 20:38, 6 March 2017 (UTC)

---

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 14:37, 8 March 2017 (UTC)