Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Inchon
Appearance
Self Nomination (Neutrality orginally started the page for Dannys Contest but I added much of the content). I believe the article contains a lot of information about a significant battle in the Korean War. It was refered to peer review and only two coments were made, both of which I adressed. [[User:BrokenSegue|BrokenSegue]] 20:10, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Support: A well written, concise account. Giano 13:21, 12 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Support. [[User:Neutrality|Neutrality/talk]] 18:23, Dec 12, 2004 (UTC)
- Object. (1) Needs a thorough copyedit.
Check spelling (e.g. "Koreann"); some things don't match Wikipedia style conventions, e.g. "0630 hours" for "06:30"; initialisms given but never used;abbreviations not expanded, e.g. "Lt." for "Lieutenant"; mispunctuation (mostly hyphens for dashes)etc etc. (2)Under "combatants" the article lists United Nations and also United States. Wasn't the latter a member of the former?Does the list of nations in the box represent an exhaustive list of troops present? The text could explain. (3) Two weeks is not several weeks. (4) No explanation of the military background to the assault, i.e. South Korean and UN forces trapped at Pusan. (5) Why the October 1 date for the end of the battle? Does the battle of Seoul deserve its own article or do you plan to include it here? (6) There ought to be eyewitness accounts that can be quoted. (7) The lead paragraph ought to note who was involved. (8) Was Kim Il Sung really the North Korean commander in the battle? We have (or should have) a principle of naming the most junior officer who was in tactical command of all the forces in a battle. (I understand that it might be hard to work out who this was in the NKPA, but in that case you might just write "unknown" and leave it to a later researcher to find out). Gdr 15:06, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)- I'll try to respond to some more of your criticisms later...I have more work than expected. First off, I agree having a someone below Kim Il Sung would be nice but from what I've read Sung was actively part of strategic decision making, so instead of leaving it entriely blank I added him to the list. Second, not many nations were part of the invasion (I added Canada today and mentioned its role) since the ugliest part of the war hadn't begun. Finally, the Battle of Seoul idea was considered in peer review. I posted some discussion on a split but got no feedback. I included that information in the Aftermath heading as to seperate it from the actual invasion. More discussion in the coming days (hoepefully :). [[User:BrokenSegue|BrokenSegue]]
- Battle of Chosin Reservoir was next, not Seoul. Wolfman 03:27, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- To Wolfman: Not so. There were four battles of Seoul in the Korean War. Here we're obviously talking about the one in September 1950 that immediately followed the battle of Inchon. To BrokenSegue: (1) I think it makes sense to split the battle of Seoul to a new page. If you feel that the two battles belong together, then the page ought to have a title that indicates the wider scope, perhaps Operation Chromite. (2) You removed the list of nations from the infobox but didn't put them anywhere else. A definitive list needs to go somewhere. (3) Someone removed the useful map showing where the landings took place and replaced it with two maps of Korea. Please restore the map of the landings (if copyright permits) and remove one of the maps of Korea. Gdr 14:41, 2004 Dec 14 (UTC)
- it seems a large number of changes have occured in the last 24 hours that removed some content. I didn't remove the list of nations, Neutrality did. I'm going to put the list back in now and I'm pritty sure the image of the battle arrows is not a copyvio so I'll put that back too. As too splitting, I'm against it, I'd rather change the article to Operation Chromite. [[User:BrokenSegue|BrokenSegue]]
- I'll try to respond to some more of your criticisms later...I have more work than expected. First off, I agree having a someone below Kim Il Sung would be nice but from what I've read Sung was actively part of strategic decision making, so instead of leaving it entriely blank I added him to the list. Second, not many nations were part of the invasion (I added Canada today and mentioned its role) since the ugliest part of the war hadn't begun. Finally, the Battle of Seoul idea was considered in peer review. I posted some discussion on a split but got no feedback. I included that information in the Aftermath heading as to seperate it from the actual invasion. More discussion in the coming days (hoepefully :). [[User:BrokenSegue|BrokenSegue]]
- Support once thoroughly vetted. -Joseph (Talk) 21:30, 2004 Dec 13 (UTC)
- Support, but do something about that map of Korea, because it doesn't clearly show me where Incheon is. - Ta bu shi da yu 05:43, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Support.
Object. It is difficult to find information on battle before and battle after. It should be added to the battlebox and to lead.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus 17:24, 14 Dec 2004 (UTC)- I'm going to make a campaign box which will include the war timeline and put the article into perspective. [[User:BrokenSegue|BrokenSegue]]
- Support. -- ALoan (Talk) 11:48, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)