Talk:2nd West Virginia Cavalry Regiment/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk · contribs) 02:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will come back shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:04, 1 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for starting the review. I work full time, so I might not be able to get to everything until this weekend. My initial thought is that all of these suggestions so far are great. TwoScars (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

9 November 2016[edit]

  • Section 1; It is better the section is renamed as "History and Organization"
Made change, but not so sure "History" is necessary. The whole Wikipedia article is "History". The regiment ceased to exist after the war. TwoScars (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@TwoScars: You're right. Second thoughts on this, "Formation and organization" would be apt. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk mail) 10:54, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 1; para 1; "Company I was organized in Mason City, (West) Virginia, which is located on the Ohio River", is it really located on the river? But I am sure this needs correction. I think it is to be along the river.
Changed to along the river. This was a language issue. I think of anything on the river as having riverfront property, not literally on the river. TwoScars (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 1; para 1; "were expected to serve for 3 years", is the term 3 years a minimum requirement? If it is, add "at least" before that. Or if it is only for three years, mention it clearly that were allowed for only 3 years or a similar one.
You commit for 3 years. At the end of the 3 years, you can re-enlist for more time or go home. Changed to "Volunteers for the new cavalry regiment committed to serve for 3 years."
  • Section 1; para 1; last line; What is this "3-month commitment"?
At the beginning of the war. Volunteers were required to commit for only 3 months because (as noted in the first paragraph) it was thought the war would not last long. Once it was determined that the war would last longer, recruits had to commit for a longer period of time. TwoScars (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Reworded the start of the paragraph to better explain the 3-month vs. 3-year issue. It now says "Recruiting for the new cavalry regiment began in September 1861 after an appeal by President Abraham Lincoln earlier in July. The rebellion in the southern states, which began earlier in the year, had lasted longer than expected—and many of the war's original recruits had been asked to commit to only three months of service. Most of the recruits for this new cavalry regiment were from southeastern Ohio," TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 1; para 2; last lines; You know that "colonel" and "lieutenant colonel" are ranks for individual, but not some posts of the unit (as they are presently mentioned. I suggest rewording the sentences as "Its first commander was Colonel William M. Bolles, and deputy commander was Lieutenant Colonel John C. Paxton". The information about commander and his deputy can be mentioned, but all other ranks need not be, unless the person is notable. For example, John J. Hoffman was one of the regiment's two majors, "John J. Hoffman" is not notable, so this sentence may be removed. The following sentence may be kept as they are the company commanders.
Made your change. It reads better. As info, all regiments were originally commanded by a colonel. As the war continued, lower ranking officers sometimes had to command. I left Hoffman and the others in (in less you insist they get removed). They are significant because they eventually became commanders of the regiment. TwoScars (talk) 17:49, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 1; para 2; "The regiment was equipped with weapons by December 15, 1861", may be reworded as "The regiment was armed by December 15, 1861", increases readability.
Made change. TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 1; para 2; Link "horse pistols"
Cannot find anything to link "horse pistols" to. Try Google for "Harpers Ferry Horse Pistol" to get a good description. TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 1; para 2; "These 58-caliber hand guns fired a single shot", but is the regiment armed with these 58-caliber hand guns, it isn't mentioned in the previous sentences. Please re-check.
The horse pistols were 58-caliber hand guns. "Horse pistols" is already in the sentence before and after. It seemed like saying "horse pistols" in three consecutive sentences would be bad prose. TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I know that, but what about a general reader? Explain it somewhere, probably in a paranthesis. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk mail) 02:10, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redid horse pistol. "Most of the regiment was equipped with horse pistols, a poor weaponry choice for a cavalry unit. Horse pistols were 58-caliber hand guns that fired a single shot.They were typically carried in pairs—one in each holster on the sides of the horse. They had a long barrel for a hand gun—nearly 12 inches (30.5 cm) long. Horse pistols were accurate up to about 25 yards (22.9 m)." TwoScars (talk) 22:23, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2; para 1; Change "During 1862 and 1863", "During 1862–1863", this is the preferred format for duration, and also the dash used must be endash
Made change. TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2; para 1; "in the southwestern portion of what is now West Virginia" may be reworded as " in the southwestern portion of the present West Virginia", increases readability. The same suggestion applies to the last line of 2nd para, also wherever such arises in the entire article.
Made changes. TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2; para 3; "Kanawha Division" must be linked to the article on its first mention in para 2. De-link it in this para.
Made change. TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.1; para 1; The second sentence is a bit confusing. Please revise it.
Now reads: "Rebel casualties were 72 men killed, over 100 wounded, and 157 men taken prisoner. They also lost four cannon, 300 small weapons, and 25 horses." TwoScars (talk) 22:09, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.1; para 1; It is mentioned as "General Henry Heth", but his article shows the highest rank attained by him was Major General. Please check this.
The source, on page 53, says "Col. Crook learned that Gen. Heth, a former class-mate of Crook,..." On page 54, it says "The rebel Gen. Heth, with his command, ...." On page 55, it says "But we were doomed to disappointment, as the cavalry soon found that General Heth, apparently not caring to cultivate the further...." Thus, the source does not identify what type of general Heth was. If you believe it is important, I can research additional sources. My guess is that he was a brigadier general, but the source does not say. TwoScars (talk) 03:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's all for today. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 03:51, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

11 November[edit]

  • Section 2.2; para 1; Instead of "General J. D. Cox", just "General Cox" is enough. On the first mention, full name is presented, from the next, the rank and the last name are enough to address the person. Please follow the same through the entire article. Rank can also be omitted based on the situation (if the previous mention in much nearer). Same suggestion follows for the second sentence in the last para.
Will look into it tomorrow. Cox is a very common last name. Even I have relatives named Cox. There is also a General William Ruffin Cox, and a General Robert C. Cox. TwoScars (talk) 03:15, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Addressed the Cox situation. I assume I need to do something similar with others? TwoScars (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@TwoScars: Go ahead, and all good with the other comments. No more action required. Will review the other section shortly. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 02:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; para 1; It is mentioned that some of the units remained back. Can something be detailed about the reason why they were done so?
The region still had hostiles, but no huge hostile armies. I modified the text to say "On August 14, 1862, Cox began moving his Kanawha Division toward Washington as reinforcement for Major General John Pope's Army of Virginia. Exceptions to Cox's orders were the 2nd Loyal Virginia Cavalry and two regiments of Ohio infantry, which remained in the area for defensive purposes." TwoScars (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; para 2; What is "one route to the Ohio River"? I think it must be "en route to the Ohio River".
Changed to "After a brief incursion into Ohio, Jenkins positioned his cavalry at Barboursville, which blocked one of Lightburn's possible routes to the safety of the Ohio River. Jenkins also prepared to move toward the Kanawha River and Charleston—which could block all of Lightburn's retreat routes to Ohio. TwoScars (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; para 2; "to be 8 to 10,000 men" is to be replaced with "around 8,000–10,000 men" or "between 8,000 and 10,000 men" or "from 8,000 to 10,000 men", per MOS:ENDASH (other uses).
Made change. TwoScars (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; para 3; It is to be "close to Loring", not "closest to Loring".
Changed this. Both brigades were close to Loring. The brigade on the south side of the river was the closest to Loring. The sentence now says "One brigade, commanded by Colonel Edward Siber, was positioned on the south side of the Kanawha River (between the river and Loring)." TwoScars (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; para 4; The first sentence is bit confusing. Both "Colonel John Paxton and Major William Powell" led the cavalry and Company B, revise the use of commas (,) for better understanding.
At the time, cavalries usually had an advance guard of 20 to 60 men. If the cavalry was surprised, the entire unit would not be in jeopardy. Several men, Powell, Dove, and Davidson, were very good at leading the advance guard. They were often surprising the hostiles instead of being surprised. I changed the sentence to say "The cavalry pursuing Jenkins was led by Colonel Paxton, and the advance guard consisted of Company B led by Major William Powell." TwoScars (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; para 4; last sentence; In "Union army", I think "a" needs to be capitalized.
Made change. TwoScars (talk) 18:23, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; para 5; Where did this "Raleigh Court House" and "Fayette Court House" come from (never mentioned in the previous paras)? Please explain about, preferably about their locations.
Added a note that explains Raleigh Court House. Some of the tiny communities that were county seats were identified differently. The note says "At the time of the American Civil War, some of the small county seats were identified with the county name followed by "Court House". For example, Beckley, Virginia (later Beckley, West Virginia) is identified in one of the maps displayed earlier as "Beckley", but it is identified in the adjacent map as "Raleigh C.H." or Raleigh Court House. Beckley is the county seat of Raleigh County. Some of these smaller communities consisted of not much more than a courthouse during the 1860s." For some of my past articles, reviewers wanted me to use maps that were so small that they were mostly decorations. I believe maps can be very important in "explaining" situations, and prefer to have them large enough that they aid with the reader's understanding of the situation described in the text. In this case, Union troops were stationed at Raleigh Court House (a small community that was not much more than a courthouse) and retreated to the adjacent county's Fayette Court House. TwoScars (talk) 22:15, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; last sentence; Use non-breakable space between "Company" and "I", for me both came in at two different lines, that makes it to break the continuity while reading. See WP:NBSP for details.
Working on this. About half done. TwoScars (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Finished. TwoScars (talk) 17:17, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.2; Links to be made to wiki-articles—Charleston, Fayetteville, James River and Kanawha Turnpike. Link them on their first mention.
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk mail) 11:53, 11 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

12 November[edit]

Linked. TwoScars (talk) 02:22, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.3; para 1; "the regiment's Colonel Paxton", just "Colonel Paxton" or just "the regiment" is enough. I mean the sentence is to be "On November 23, Colonel Paxton was ordered to attack two rebel cavalry camps in Sinking Creek Valley" or "On November 23, the regiment was ordered to attack two rebel cavalry camps in Sinking Creek Valley", because if one is mentioned, it would probably bring in the other. The same suggestion follows for the 4th sentence of para 1 of section 2.4.
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.3; para 1; Sinking Creek Valley; Why is the valley's location put in parenthesis? It can be revised as ".... cavalry camps in Sinking Creek Valley, located to north of Lewisburg near the Greenbrier County border.) Also link "Greenbrier County"
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.3; para 3; "General George Crook said in 1889 that he regarded" is to be "In 1889, General George Crook said that he regarded"
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.3; para 3; "William H. Powell and Jeremiah Davidson, were promoted", can their ranks of promotion be mentioned?
Fixed - "The leaders of the advance guard, William H. Powell and Jeremiah Davidson, were promoted shortly afterwards—Powell from major to lieutenant colonel, and Davidson from second lieutenant to first lieutenant." TwoScars (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.4; para 1; sentence 3; I doubt this sentence maintains neutrality. It is somewhat praising the officer. Consider removing it.
Checking to see if I can find more sources on this. It is no coincidence that disaster struck when Powell was not available. TwoScars (talk) 22:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I thought of a way to reword this, which I can get to tomorrow. It is a shame to change this. Powell rose from captain to general, and was the only officer in the regiment to receive the Medal of Honor. I already have the note with praise from three generals. However, if you think it does not maintain neutrality, then I will change it after I hear back from you. TwoScars (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Changed to "Thus, the 2nd Loyal Virginia Cavalry lost the man who led the attacks at Barboursville and Sinking Creek—and was respected by generals on both sides of the conflict." TwoScars (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.4; para 2; Remove "who was popular with the regiment". Because the popularity which is mentioned is always uncertain, it changes.
No problem removing it. However, Private Joseph J. Sutton said in his book said "While the command severely criticized, and did not excuse the conduct of Colonel Paxton in permitting the surprise and making the sacrifice possible, yet, the very high esteem in which both officers and men regarded him for his many admirable qualities and gentleman, his kindly interest in and attention to the wants of his command, his genuine and undoubted loyalty to the flag, and devotion to the union, made all deeply sympathize with Colonel Paxton." Still think it should be removed? TwoScars (talk) 22:46, 13 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.4; para 3; "He became the regiment's colonel", as I mentioned before, "colonel" is a rank not a position, it ought to be "commander" or a similar one. Sometimes there is a possibility that a regiment having two officers with the rank of colonel, but only one commander.
Fixed.TwoScars (talk) 02:07, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk mail) 14:24, 12 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

20 November[edit]

  • Section 2.5; para 2; Colonel John T. Toland, from the 34th Ohio Infantry, was the brigade commander; generally a brigade commander holds the rank of "Brigadier", anyway this is not a must. Please recheck the rank.
I have been to Wytheville, and read numerous books that discuss the raid. I can add additional footnotes, if necessary. Toland held the rank of colonel but was assigned brigade commander. That is probably why there was friction between Toland and Powell, who was also a colonel. During the first half of the American Civil War, the Union Army did not know how to make effective use of the cavalry, and typically favored the infantry. This changed when General Philip Sheridan began commanding forces in the east. TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.5; para 3; "Union horsemen was heading" is to be "Union horsemen were heading"
Are you sure? It is a large group that was heading. "of Union horsemen" describes the group. Saying a large group were heading seems incorrect. Microsoft Word grammar review does not object to either. TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.5; para 5; The Union brigade retreated toward its camps in West Virginia, and was attacked on July 19 and 20; There is nothing mentioned about this attack. I mean any causalities and losses faced by the regiment. Anyway, if the information is not available, ignore it.
The Wytheville section was getting too long, so no detail was provided on the retreat. I can add more information if necessary. There is a whole Wikipedia article, which is "see also", for the Wytheville Raid. TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.5; para 5; Is the last sentence related to the attack on July 19 and 20? If so, them chronologically it is in wrong position. Why is July 23 put in the middle? Please revise this.
Rearranged paragraph 5. However, the entire excursion began when the troops left camp and ended when they returned. They had some skirmishes on the way to Wytheville, fought in Wytheville, and had to fight off two attacks on the way home. I changed the last part of the sentence to say "and repelled attacks on July 19 and 20." The casualties for the entire excursion include those on the way to, and on the way from, Wytheville—so the July 23 date is fine. I modified the sentence to say "Losses for the entire excursion (including the trip to Wytheville and the return to camp) were 14 killed, 32 wounded, 17 taken prisoner, and 26 missing." As info, I have never seen any book say "the camp"—it is always "camp". TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Linked TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.5; para 6; Powell unexpectedly healed, and was moved to a Richmond prison where he survived on a bread and water diet; Revise this sentence something as "Surprisingly Powell was healed. and was moved to a Richmond prison where he survived on bread and water". "a bread" is a bit awkward, because a single bread is not the diet. And also "diet" is not necessary here.
Changed to "Surprisingly, Powell recovered enough from his wound that he was moved to a Richmond prison. While in captivity there, he was fed only bread and water." TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.6; last sentence; "he was not as skilled as a soldier" may be reworded as "he was a good soldier", cause the former reads a bit confusing.
You totally misunderstood that. He was not a good soldier, as mentioned in the footnote. I reworded much of the paragraph. It now says "During August, Brigadier General Alfred N. Duffié, a veteran of European wars, became the commander of all cavalry in the Kanawha Valley. His headquarters, and the regiment, was located in Charleston. The regiment's Company H was trained to be Duffié's bodyguards. Duffié was an excellent drillmaster, and his drills helped prepare the regiment for future fighting in the Shenandoah Valley. He was not as good at fighting as he was at training. He was eventually transferred, and later captured." TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.7; para 1; Link "William W. Averell"
Linked TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.7; para 2; Link "E. P. Scammon" to "Eliakim P. Scammon"
Already linked in Section 2.4. Second link? TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.8; While in prison, Powell survived on a bread and water diet—and was held in a basement cell with no bed; This sentence is repeated, it was already mentioned section 2.5, para 6.
Removed sentence TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.9; para 3; "General William "Grumble" Jones plus John Hunt Morgan's Raiders", "plus" must be replaced by "and"
These were two separate commands. Jones had his men, and Morgan had his men. Both were brigadier generals. Changed it to say "Confederate forces under the command of General William "Grumble" Jones, assisted by John Hunt Morgan's Raiders, prevented the Union cavalry from moving through Cove Gap." TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.9; para ;Cove Gap
  • Section 2.9; para 3; Link "Cove Gap"
Wikipedia's Cove Gap is in West Virginia, and is not the Cove Gap in Wythe County, Virginia. Battle of Cove Mountain is already linked. TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 2.9; para 5; Link "John McCausland" as this is the first mention and also "Stonewall Jackson"
Linked TwoScars (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:59, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

22 November 2016[edit]

  • Section 3; para 1; sentence 1; What is this "plus others", who are they?
Changed sentence to say "On June 2, 1864, the 2nd West Virginia Cavalry (plus additional cavalry and infantry regiments) marched from Charleston towards White Sulphur Springs in eastern West Virginia." Removed "the" from in front of White Sulphur Springs—which is a town name. Source does not specify what regiments marched with the 2nd WV Cavalry. Can research this if necessary. TwoScars (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Section 3; para 1; Link "David Hunter"

Linked TwoScars (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Linked VMI and unlinked Stonewall Jackson and John McCausland since they were linked earlier. TwoScars (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 3; Throughout the section and its sub-sections there are many cases where double space was given after full stops and sometimes between words. Please correct these.
Eliminated the second space in this section. Will check the entire article tomorrow. TwoScars (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Eliminated the second space from intro through Shenandoah Valley section. Will get more tomorrow. TwoScars (talk) 22:25, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Eliminated the second space from end of sentences to end. TwoScars (talk) 22:22, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Linked TwoScars (talk) 18:14, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 3.3; All good.
  • Section 4 and its sub-sections; Please only use the last names of the commanders of respective formations, after their first mention of full name. For more detail, please see MOS:LASTNAME.
Cleaned up first names in Section 4. TwoScars (talk) 22:40, 23 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 09:32, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

27 November 2016[edit]

  • Section 4; promoted to Lieutenant Colonel effective ..; de-capitalize "L" and "C" in the rank.
fixed TwoScars (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4; per MOS:DATEVAR, no need to mention the year every time, after mentioning it once, only mention if the year changes. For example, it was first mentioned at "July 5, 1864", in the next i.e. "July 8, 1864" just "July 8" is enough.
fixed TwoScars (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.1; para 1; last sentence; the latter clause after the comma is a bit confusing, please revise.
Reworded - now says "Ramseur's division was ordered to assume a defensive position at Winchester, which would enable the main portion of Early's army to safely withdraw south from Berryville and Winchester to the more secure city of Strasburg and a hospital in Mount Jackson. (Early had no plan to attack the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad—it was more important for it to appear that he would attack it.)
  • Section 4.2; para 1; spent its time searching for the enemy south of Winchester; may it is to be "spent its time searching for the enemy to the south of Winchester"
Made change TwoScars (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.2; para 2; The 2nd West Virginia Cavalry lost a lieutenant, and sergeant, among additional enlisted men; may be reword as "The regiment lost a lieutenant, a sergeant, and a few enlisted men". There is no need to mention "2nd West Virginia Cavalry" every time.
Bad prose to say "regiment" so often. Reworded to say "The regiment suffered casualties, and was forced to retreat. It lost a lieutenant, a sergeant, and a few enlisted men. TwoScars (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.2; para 2; last 3 sentences; They contradict each other, in the first of the three it is mentioned as "left for dead", but in latter it is said he survived. And also if he died, then the prior sentence about regiment's losses must include this.
If someone is "left for dead", the others believe that person is dead or will soon be dead—and therefore left behind. I have reworded it: "Captain Jeremiah Davidson of Company E was shot twice and lost his horse after it was also shot. He was thought to be dying and left behind. Davidson survived by crawling to a nearby house where he was given medical attention."
  • Section 4.2; para 3; by future president Rutherford B. Hayesl; Please mention what was his rank then? Mention about his presidency in parenthesis.
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.3; "The 2nd West Virginia Cavalry" may be replaced by just "The regiment" wherever required, because the article is about the same.
Made change to first sentence. TwoScars (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.4; para 1; Link "Shenandoah Campaign", "Philip Sheridan"
Linked TwoScars (talk) 21:50, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 10:04, 27 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

28 November 2016[edit]

  • Section 4.5; para 3; Capehart's brother, Charles, was promoted to commander of Capehart's 1st West Virginia Cavalry regiment; It is to be "was appointed as the commander of", because "commander" is not a rank in an army, but in the sentence it appears to be a position.
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.6; "General Philip Sheridan" -> "General Sheridan" or just "Sheridan" per MOS:LASTNAME as mentioned before.
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.6; "artillery lost earlier in the battle, plus 22 cannons belonging to Early's army" -> " artillery lost earlier in the battle, and also 22 cannons belonging to Early's army" or " artillery lost earlier in the battle, and 22 additional cannons belonging to Early's army", use of "plus" is a bit awkward.
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.7; They stopped near Winchester, Virginia, and voted; "voted" for what? Mention that.
Fixed by changing "voted" to "voted in the presidential election". Presidential election is wiki-linked to the United States presidential election. TwoScars (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.7; A short time later -> After a short period
Changed. TwoScars (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5; para 2; Link "Wesley Merritt", "Thomas Devin", "General George Armstrong Custer", "Henry Capehart"
Henry Capehart and his brother Charles were already linked in 4.5. Custer was also linked—when he was a colonel. Changed part of sentence to say 3rd Division was commanded by George Armstrong Custer, who was now a general. Linked Merritt and Devin. TwoScars (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5; para 3; Many of the troops in this proud and well-equipped brigade had served with General Jeb Stuart; Why is this sentence necessary? It not related to the regiment nor the union army, this goes out of context.
Jeb Stuart is the most famous Confederate cavalry officer. The point is that Sheridan defeated the most famous cavalry brigade in the Confederacy. Modified text and added a note explaining Jeb Stuart. TwoScars (talk) 18:26, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.1; Robert E. Lee -> Lee, per LASTNAME
Made change. However, General Fitzhugh Lee (Battle of Opequon) and Colonel Richard H. Lee (Powell returns) are also mentioned in this article—and should not be confused with Robert E. Lee, the Confederacy's highest ranking officer and most famous. TwoScars (talk) 18:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.2; para 1; Link "James River Canal"
Linked. Also linked Amherst Courthouse. Linked White House, Virginia, earlier (It is also circled on the map.) TwoScars (talk) 18:09, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.2; para 1; What do you mean by "swollen river", explain it in the article. Also the same is repeated in para 2, may be, use plain English, some may not get the meaning.
Remember that, at the time in Virginia, rivers were major obstacles. Bridges were often destroyed for military purposes, and shallow places (fords) were used to cross rivers if available. Reworded text to say "Rainy weather had caused the James River to swell. The deeper and wider river became dangerous to cross, and fords became unusable. The swollen river, and bridges that had been destroyed by the Confederates, persuaded Sheridan to move east toward Richmond instead of moving south across the river to link with Sherman's army in North Carolina." "Ford" is linked for those unfamiliar with that term. TwoScars (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.2; para 2; At White House? Do you mean the President's, in Washington, but they were in Virginia? If not mention it clearly.
Reworded to make things clearer. "Both divisions reached a Union Army base at the river port community of White House, Virginia (not to be confused with the "White House" in Washington, D.C.), on March 18, 1865. Both White House, Virginia and the White House are wiki-linked. White House, Virginia, was already circled on the map—which clearly shows it close to Richmond. TwoScars (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.2; para 3; Link "Army of the Potomac", explain about it.
Linked, and added explanation of its importance and purpose. TwoScars (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.2; para 3; Link "U. S. Grant", also mention his position in the army.
Linked, mentioned position, and mentioned he was working in the area with the commander General George Meade (also wiki linked). TwoScars (talk) 18:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 12:56, 28 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

29 November[edit]

  • Section 5.3; para 1; 1st Cavalry Division, plus a brigade from Crook's; replace "plus" with "and"
Made the change. However, you should learn to like the word "plus". A quick search on its definition reads "with the addition of"—making it perfect for that situation. The 1st Cavalry Division, with the addition of a brigade from Crook's 2nd Division..... The word "plus" definitely works in that situation. By using the word "and", you are giving a brigade equal "weight" with a division. TwoScars (talk) 22:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.3; para 1; sent north toward Five Forks; what is "Five Forks", a place? or five places? a bit confusing.
Added this sentence: "Five Forks is a small community in Dinwiddie County, located between Dinwiddie Court House and Petersburg." Five Forks and Dinwiddie County are wiki-linked. Note also that Five Forks is circled on the map in the Sheridan joins the Army of the Potomac near Petersburg section, as is Dinwiddie and Petersburg. TwoScars (talk) 17:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.3; para 2; last sentence; Delete "meaning" after em dash, the em dash itself tells that the you trying to clarify something more. I don't prefer use of "plus" replace it with "and a", it seems a bit awkward.
Made your changes. Better check it—I think it now looks awkward. TwoScars (talk) 17:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.3; para 3; "Virginia brigade" -> "Virginia Brigade", because it is the name.
Fixed. TwoScars (talk) 17:43, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.4; para 1; Link "Fifth Corps"
Linked. Also linked Army of the James. TwoScars (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.4; para 3; "After 5:00 that afternoon" -> "After 5:00 pm"
Changed TwoScars (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.5; para 1; Link "Jefferson Davis"
Linked TwoScars (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.5; para 2; Link "Appomattox River"
Linked TwoScars (talk) 18:03, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.5; para 4; Lieutenant Colonel James Allen, just Lieutenant Colonel Allen is enough, as he was already mentioned with full name.
fixed TwoScars (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.5; para 4; De-capitalize "C" in "Ewell's Corps", "A large portion of Ewell's Corps became surrounded" -> "A large portion of Ewell's corps was surrounded"
fixed TwoScars (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.5; para 4; Please explain the need of "and/or"
Dropped and/or because the two generals mentioned surrendered. TwoScars (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.5; para 5; Link the two Medal of Honor recipients.
Linked all three (including Thomas Custer). TwoScars (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.6; para 3; Custer's entire division attacked at night using light from the moon; may be reworded as "Custer's entire division attacked during the night in moonlight"
Reworded and added footnote. The main point is that nighttime attacks were rare, but the moonlight made the attack possible. TwoScars (talk) 18:12, 2 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
"Finally, Custer made a rare night attack using his entire division. Strong moonlight reduced the risk of getting lost or misidentifying friendly and enemy soldiers. The night attack was successful, and Custer's division captured 24 to 30 artillery pieces." TwoScars (talk) 16:42, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.6; Use only last names, and rank if necessary, after the first mention. For example, General Robert E. Lee and General Ulysses S. Grant.
Fixed. It is a shame that the most famous leaders of each side can't get their full names mentioned as a conclusion. Many streets in the U.S. are named Grant or Lee. Grant became president of the USA, and has the Ulysses S. Grant Memorial in his honor near the United States Capitol. Robert E. Lee was the top military officer of the Confederacy, and was president of a University named after him—Washington and Lee University. Arlington National Cemetery sits on land once owned by Lee's family. TwoScars (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 6; para 2; Mention the name of General Custer's wife when first mentioned about her i.e. in the second sentence.
Fixed and wiki linked TwoScars (talk) 17:22, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 6.2; para 1; Baltimore & Ohio train -> Baltimore-Ohio train, train linking two places.
You misunderstand—the name of the railroad company is Baltimore & Ohio Railroad. It was the first common carrier in the United States, and is usually called the "Baltimore & Ohio" or the "B&O". There is a B&O Railroad Museum in Baltimore. I changed it to say "On June 17, the men and their horses were loaded onto a Baltimore & Ohio Railroad train where they departed for Wheeling." It was already wiki-linked in Section 4. TwoScars (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead; para 1; last sentence; The name was changed to 2nd West Virginia Volunteer Cavalry after the state of West Virginia was created in 1863, bold is necessary, it is also another name as others were.
Changed it to say "The "Loyal Virginia" part of the name was replaced with "West Virginia" after the state of West Virginia was created in 1863. Today, the National Park Service lists them as 2nd Regiment, West Virginia Cavalry under a heading of Union West Virginia Volunteers." TwoScars (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead; para 2; first sentence; first serious war -> first full-scale war or first full-fledged war
Made change TwoScars (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead; Mention the about the four Medal of Honor recipients in the lead.
Added as last sentence in last paragraph of intro. TwoScars (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Almost done here. After these are addressed, I'll do a final skim including images, dup-links etc. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 13:13, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you—I am learning a lot. Your knowledge of the MOS is impressive. I have heard that wiki-links in the intro do not "count"—right? TwoScars (talk) 21:16, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on the editor. There is no restriction that you must or mustn't count them. However WP:REPEATLINK permits the linking irrespective of the lead. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:44, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

5 December 2016 (Final)[edit]

  • Section 8; You cannot use the semi-colon as a header because screen-readers for the visually impaired cannot handle them; change them to the standard header markup using level three headers.
  • Rename sections (This doesn't fall within the GA criteria, but just a suggestion if you would wish to take it further, A-Class review and Featured article candidate)
  • Notes and references -> Notes
  • Notes -> Footnotes
  • References -> Citations
  • Cited works -> References
Made changes TwoScars (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed first one by using another already in. TwoScars (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Just one dead link needs to be fixed, and the article is good to go. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:01, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed second dead link, and the only redirect link. TwoScars (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dup-links
  • Section 2.2; para 1; Ohio River and Kanawha River
Removed wiki links TwoScars (talk) 17:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 4.6; Abraham Lincoln
You removed TwoScars (talk) 17:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.2; para 3; Washington, D.C.
Removed to WDC wiki links in this paragraph TwoScars (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 5.7; para 4; Appomattox Court House, Virginia
You removed TwoScars (talk) 17:36, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 6; para 1; William Tecumseh Sherman
Removed dup wiki link TwoScars (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Section 6.1; Army of the Potomac
Fixed TwoScars (talk) 17:35, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Copyvio detector shows 54% violation. Consider rephrasing the highlighted paras.
Wow! New to me—and pretty cool. Not sure if I understand it yet. How does it handle: 1) quoted material with a citation; 2) US government documents (which are owned by the citizens, so no copyright violations?
Re-worded a few minor things. It appears the major "violations" are for material that is quoted and attributed. For example: in 2.2 Kanawha Valley Campaign, Note 3 quotes a report made by Colonel Lightburn. Another section of his report is quoted in the next to the last paragraph. Both are in quotes and cited, but the Copyvio appears to be flagging them. TwoScars (talk) 17:59, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Images; All images are licensed. But MOS:IMGSIZE strongly opposes the size used by the some of the images. Some maps dominate the adjacent text. Images are for better understanding the of text, but not substitutes. The recommened size is 220px, as it is the default for most of the users. May limit to a max of 300px, not beyond that.
Changed images that were larger than 300 to 300. TwoScars (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 01:38, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
All issues resolved. Good to go. I suggest a copy edit at WP:GOCE/R so that the article can put to its best, if you wish to take it further (A-Class review or Featured article nomination). Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:17, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:17, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2nd_West_Virginia_Cavalry_Regiment/GA1&oldid=964729026"