Talk:First Battle of Kilrah - 2667: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
: I've been referencing this article as [[Raid on Kilrah]] in my edits. I don't know why it's titled like this. The thing in question is repeatedly and often referred to as the "Kilrah raid". - [[User:Bob McDob|Bob]] 10:39, 21 August 2010 (CDT) | : I've been referencing this article as [[Raid on Kilrah]] in my edits. I don't know why it's titled like this. The thing in question is repeatedly and often referred to as the "Kilrah raid". - [[User:Bob McDob|Bob]] 10:39, 21 August 2010 (CDT) | ||
:: I concur. Will move in a few minutes unless anyone objects? - Wedge | |||
Revision as of 15:45, 21 August 2010
This does need to be totally redone. Writing is poor, facts are wrong and it oversteps its bounds by trying to relate the withdrawal of the Tarawa and Intrepid from Kilrah.
Personally, I'd recommend a rewrite from scratch by someone more familiar with the material.
- Dundradal
Maybe it's time that I correct the flaws in this article. I realize it has a lot of reworking that needs to be done. Question: Should we change the title to "Raid of Kilrah" or something? I know this was officially classified as a raid rather than a battle. (Not much of a difference, but regardless, what sounds more appropriate?) -Aeronautico
- I've been referencing this article as Raid on Kilrah in my edits. I don't know why it's titled like this. The thing in question is repeatedly and often referred to as the "Kilrah raid". - Bob 10:39, 21 August 2010 (CDT)
- I concur. Will move in a few minutes unless anyone objects? - Wedge
I reviewed this one already, and only did some basic rephrasing. What sort of direction did you want for the article, it doesn't seem that bad to me? - Wedge
Removed fact-check tag, as per #wingnut discussion. - Wedge