The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by GrahamColm 10:01, 25 April 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]


George S. Patton slapping incidents[edit]

George S. Patton slapping incidents (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): —Ed!(talk) 12:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article provides an in-depth insight into World War II U.S. military politics at the highest level. It's passed GA and a MILHIST A-class review. —Ed!(talk) 12:25, 16 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sources and images - spotchecks not done

Comments

  • 1a: The article is well-written overall. A few concerns:
  • Should the dates follow American formatting since the subject is tied to that particular country?
  • My understanding is MILMOS applies since Patton is notable exclusively in his military exploits. —Ed!(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • We mention how much destruction Patton's forces caused in Sicily, but is it worth mentioning what he lost (troops, vehicles)?
  • This phrase seems odd: "Patton created a larger-than-life personality" Do you really "create" a personality?
  • In this case, I think so. As is in the Patton article, his personality was mostly artificial. —Ed!(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • How was Eisenhower's noting of Patton's colorful leadership style "in spite" of his effectiveness? The "however" that begins the following sentence suggests contrast but, to what?
  • Punctuation should not be inside quotation marks unless it's part of the quoted material (Battle fatigue section, para 1 & 3; 3 August section, para 1, possibly elsewhere). See WP:LQ.
  • Checked the sources. In both instances, the punctuation is as used. —Ed!(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1b: The article seems to be comprehensive.
  • 1c: I did note that a book named Patton: Ordeal and Triumph by Ladislas Farago seems to be well-regarded and makes several mentions of these incidents. Since the majority of your information seems to be from the Axelrod and Blumenson books, did you consider the Farago book for additional insight?
  • It didn't have a ton more to add so I figured it wouldn't need to be included. —Ed!(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1d: No POV or neutrality issues.
  • 1e: The articles seems stable.
  • 2a: The lead summarizes the article content appropriately.
  • 2b: The structure and headings are appropriate.
  • 2c: The citation style is good.
  • 3: The licensing on the included images is good; each photo is in the public domain.
  • 4: The article is of appropriate length.
Very cool article and an interesting read. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 23:25, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for looking it over! —Ed!(talk) 02:12, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Reviewed this article at A class and believe that it meets the FAC criteria. Hawkeye7 (talk) 03:21, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.