Talk:24th Infantry Division (United States)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Review ongoing. There are a few points I feel could be improved prior to completing the GAR. I'll list a few thoughts below. SGGH ^ping! 20:04, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The lead could use a slight copy edit. The opening sentence is a bit awkward to, perhaps with a more general opening line and the reactivation information in a second sentence.
- Done. —Ed!^(talk) 14:16, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It is a bit unclear as to which brigade and regiment we are talking about sometimes, and whether we are talking about units from within the 24th or from other units. As such, it is difficult to see what is relevant and what is overly detailed info about another Division's activities.
The image captions need a bit more than just what is in there, particularly "North Korean tanks advancing through Seoul, 1950." and "The Pusan Perimeter, August 1950" for example.
- Added more to most of the captions. How does it look now? —Ed!^(talk) 03:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. SGGH ^ping! 08:40, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A copy edit is needed, in places, for example there is a full stop missing in "...surrounding and destroying elements of the US 2nd Infantry Division, 7th Infantry Division, and South Korean forces[50] The 24th Infantry Division, on the... " and the image caption "patch of the 187th Regimental Combat Team" needs a capital letter.
Is there a wikilink or two for the honors section? So we know what campaign streamers are?
- Done. —Ed!^(talk) 03:52, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So basically, a general copy edit, some image caption expansion and a slight reword in places. I'll keep watcing for these changes and complete the GAR. SGGH ^ping! 20:12, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do a more thorough copy-edit over the next day or so. Please let me know of anything major that I overlook. —Ed!^(talk) 03:57, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have copy-edited the article, per your request. I believe I have addressed all of the issues you pointed out. —Ed!^(talk) 03:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted the issues have been addressed. It is well written, informative, with good coverage. I am happy to rate this as a Good Article. Well done. SGGH ^ping! 10:59, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]