Assignment for March 31, 2017 edit
The article I chose to look at was Flying Elephant, a British tank used during World War I. The principle strengths of this article as it was, were that the sections entitled "Details" and "Results" were very well detailed and well sourced, and that it used more sources than what might normally be expected from an article of that it's length. It's main weakness was that, even though the section entitled "Development" maid several claims, it did not cite any sources what so ever.
The article was started in 2005, and in the beginning, was very colloquial in nature. The principle editors were some Englishmen, a Dutchman, and a couple of Americans. The Dutchman, though he seemed to mean well, did not have a very good grasp of the English language, at least insofar as it referred to vintage tanks. Editions ceased in November, 2016.
The Talk page was mostly complaints on one of two subjects: the Dutchman's grammar, and the personal research of one of the Englishmen being presented as a source. The tone was scholarly, yet still tense. The same editors as the history page were involved.
I added a citation to the "Development" section.
DFNO1997, you are invited to the Teahouse! edit
|
Hi DFNO1997! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:03, 26 March 2017 (UTC) |