Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Stephen Trigg/Archive 1

Stephen Trigg edit

Still feeling like a newbie -- I came across this stub and so expanded it and sourced it (it had none) and erased unsourced data. Wasn't sure if I wrote too much on him? plange 03:47, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kirill Lokshin edit

There's no such thing as writing too much, in my experience ;-)

Overall, it's a very nice article. The obvious suggestion is to expand it—both with text and images—if there is any more material available (I don't know whether this is the case). Regardless of how long the article becomes, though, the lead section should probably be increased to at least one (and possibly two) decent-sized paragraphs.

Keep up the great work! Kirill Lokshin 14:01, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback! I think the only other stuff I had were land purchases/deals (yawn!) but there might be more material -- I'll try to see if I can figure out any images that might be used....plange 18:08, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I now added more material.plange 20:32, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work! A minor point, though: I would try to work the "Trivia" section into the text somehow, as the existence of a section with that title is usually regarded as somewhat lacking in proper encyclopedic gravitas. Other than that, this looks great. Kirill Lokshin 20:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

sure thing-- in fact it was, I'll revert. I'd made it that way when I saw some other biographies do that that was in your A class (Robert E. Lee). Or, I've also seen others have a section called "momuments and memorials" and I can then just move the grandson back up where it was.... What do you think? BTW, do you know if there's a Virginia task force? That's my main interest and would love to help beef up articles on Virginia history. plange 21:00, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, those sections used to be all over the place; we've been trying to get rid of them, with mixed success, for some time now. As far as task forces, the U.S. task force would be the best place to go; I don't think we've reached the point where separate task forces for each state would be feasible (or productive). Kirill Lokshin 21:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've reverted them back to being within the article. Thanks so much for your help and I'm so excited that I just moved an article to A-Class! plange 21:34, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]