Battle of Backbone Mountain

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Good article189th Infantry Brigade (United States) 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
December 12, 2008Good article nomineeListed

Pre-GA Review Notes

Good article, but in the WWII section, 'THe troop fought with the Division through northern France, and eventually Germany capturing town after town until the end of the war.' isn't exactly a great amount of detail or even encyclopaedic. Please add some actual details of what the Brigade did; just some facts from the Combat Chronicle would be enough. Skinny87 (talk) 10:37, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not 100% sure what exactly to add. The combat chronicle for the 95th Infantry Division details at a few points that some of the units did one thing and some did another. I'll add as much as I can, though. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 15:27, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:189th Infantry Brigade (United States)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
    In the Organization section, you might want to explain what "Headquarters and Headquarters Company" is. I mean, I know what it is, but how 'bout your reader. In the Reactivation section, this sentence ---> "The brigade prepares other units for mobilization, trains, assists, and supports them during pre-deployment exercises", "trains" do you mean like in "training"? If so, I would change it. Same section, "All members of the PRTs hae assembled for the training", something is very odd.
    "The Headquarters and Headquarters Company of the brigade is located at Fort Bragg, and acts as the command element for the formation, overseeing all subordinate brigades which are also located at the Fort." for clarification. Everything else,  Fixed -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 17:35, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
    Dates need to be unlinked, per here. Throughout the article, link "Fort Bragg", "War in Afghanistan", "COL", "CSM", "Mechanized", and "public affairs" to their correspondence articles. The article tends to have red links, if they don't link to anything, it would be best to unlink them, per here. In the World War II section, the link "Company", do you mean it to the organization link or the military one? Same section, you might want to link "Stillwater, Oklahoma" once, per here. In the Reactivation section, it would be best if "Provincial Reconstruction Team" was followed by ---> (PRT), I mean, I know what it means, but how 'bout your reader. Same section, "In Fall of 2008", with seasons differing in different part of the world, a different wording than autumn or fall should be picked, per here. Same thing with the "spring" mention.
     Fixed
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
    The link in Reference 13 shouldn't be in all capitals, per here.
     Fixed
    Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
    C. It contains no original research:
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:45, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you to Ed for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:12, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:06, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 2

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:06, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 3

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 4

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 5

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 6

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 7

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:07, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 8

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead link 9

During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!

--JeffGBot (talk) 00:08, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 189th Infantry Brigade (United States). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 13:16, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 12 external links on 189th Infantry Brigade (United States). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:12, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:189th_Infantry_Brigade_(United_States)