Talk:2nd Canadian Division during World War II/GA1

The following discussion is archived. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

GA Review

Typo in the first sentence wasn't a good start... ;)

• ("The 2nd Canadian Infantry Division was and..." I fixed that and a few other typos.)

In terms of outstanding issues:

• WP:DASH Lots of dash issues here. You should have an endash in-between dates. So 1944–1945 When we have a dash as a separator, you should have an emdash so Order of battle—1944–1945 I think I caught them all for you.

I think I've got them all (there were a few date ones that were still emdashes), although it wouldn't hurt to do one more check of it. Cam (Chat) 16:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Dates, make sure you are consistent. Some of them are unlinked, particularly in the Battle of Normandy section. I would suggest, though no way impose, that you don't link the dates in this article as many of them are dates without years.
• What is the Canadian way for depicting the Second World War? I thought it was the Commonwealth Second World War rather than the more American WWI/World War II/World War Two. Anyway, make sure it is consistent.

I think you might be right on that one (although I have seen both, though "Second World War" is more common). Fixed the few instances. Cam (Chat) 16:41, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• Is that really the only descriptive image for the infobox? A blue square seems a bit strange to be honest. (though of course, I do understand its relevance, just don't think the general reader will). Perhaps explain the significance of the flash in the caption?

Ironically enough, that was only their shoulder-emblem until 1941! I've found the newer one, I'll just retouch it, and then upload it later. Cam (Chat) 17:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• In the 1941-continued training "...and was adopted throughout the Army." Which army? The Canadian? British? Allied?

Fixed. "All commonwealth forces in Britain". Hope that's better. Cam (Chat) 17:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• In the last section, "But a path to the Rhine River had been cleared;" That "but" is very sudden. But what, what is this related to? That needs rephrasing.

Done. Cam (Chat) 19:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

• "...loomed in their path." Seems a bit colloquial, which seems to be an issue elsewhere in the text. Before A-Class, I recommend a good copyedit.

Fixed that instance as well. I'll get the copyedit from someone once the review is over. Cam (Chat) 19:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

I've started doing some of it myself. I'll keep working on it this week (not sure why I didn't spot the colloquial stuff before, it does stick out quite a bit;) Cam (Chat) 07:21, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

So a few issues before I can promote it. I have done a few fixes, but the above issues are outstanding. Regards. Woody (talk) 15:16, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

thanks very much for the quick response! Cam (Chat) 17:00, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Passed

Great, after those fixes, it meets the Good Article criteria. Thanks for being so responsive. Woody (talk) 17:43, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.