Requests for assessment
[edit]
Editors can self-assess articles against thefive B-class criteria(FAQ) up to and including C-Class. If you have made significant improvements to an article against one or more of B-class criteria and would like an outside opinion on a new rating for it, please feel free to list it below, specifying which criteria you have worked on. If you feel unable to assess against one or more of the B-class criteria, please say so when posting. Requests for formal A-Class review should be madeat the review department. Please consider entering articles you have improved in themilitary history article writing contest.
Experienced assessors are encouraged to take a look atWikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators#AutoCheck report for September and check a few of ≈ B-Class assessments. Feel free to downgrade them if you consider they don't meet one or more the criteria. Please also delete any that you have checked. See alsoWikipedia:WikiProject Spaceflight/Assessment, whose articles often overlap with military history topics.
ADD NEW REQUESTS AT THE BOTTOM OF THIS SECTION AND BEFORE THE LINE FOR THE BACKLOG CHECK REQUEST
Please remember to sign your requests.
Battle of Maritsa — 14th-century battle of the Serbian–Ottoman Wars, please assess for B Class, thank you.-Aeengath (talk)16:32, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]- B class. As the old talk page discussion notes, the strength and casualty figures given by the old sources look suspect, especially for a medieval engagement. I think you have explained the figures given by the sources with the caveats raised by some modern writers, in particular. That seems to be the best anyone could do with these figures, considering the sources. Thanks.Donner60 (talk)01:09, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you @Donner60, I completely agree, the figures are problematic so leaving them with a sourced explanation felt like a reasonable compromise for now. Those numbers will need a closer review if this ever goes for GA nomination. -Aeengath (talk)10:02, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Douglas St George: new article for a Chief of the Air Staff of the RNZAF, please assess. Thanks,Zawed (talk)09:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]HMS Repulse (1868) Please assess for B class.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk)20:25, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- B class.Lineagegeek (talk)21:24, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- 64th Air Division, expanded and referenced. Please review for B class.Lineagegeek (talk)21:24, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe that I am required to ask for a citation for each bullet point to assess an article with this format as B class. That is what the bot would do and assessors have been following that routine. It may well be that citations otherwise in the lists are the ones that would be cited. Unlike a table or list, where a citation at the first sentence or caption or even the end of the list suffices, that needs to be obvious to differ from the bot (if the bot had gotten to it). In this format, it does not appear to me to be obvious that a citation covers more than one entry. I do not like giving this assessment for such a good, comprehensive article. But I will need to leave it as C class until the citations are added. I hope this will not cause much extra work for you. As explained in an edit summary, I capitalized Arctic and linked the Arctic article.Donner60 (talk)01:19, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Donner60 Thanks for the suggestions. Unlike most of the USAF unit articles I work on, this unit has important subordinate units (like the SAW battalions and fighter control squadrons) that are not mentioned in AFHRA lineage documents. While I have tried to get source for these (and why this article has an unusually high number of citations for a USAF unit). If you'd let me know (not here, but on either my or the article talk page) what specific elements of lists you are concerned with, I'll see if I can improve the citations, or give up and leave it as a C.Lineagegeek (talk)22:43, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please also check themilitary history assessment backlog for articles needing assessment.
