This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the David B. Bleak article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies |
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | David B. Bleak has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassessit. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
![]() | Afact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 23, 2012.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that combat medic David B. Bleak (pictured) was awarded the Medal of Honor in the Korean War after killing five Chinese soldiers, four using only his hands?
|
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The CIB is possibly displayed in error as a awarded to the late SSG Bleak, as he was a Combat Medic and would have been awarded the Combat Medic's Badge. The Photograph illustrating the article Shows SSG Bleak wearing the Combat Medic's Badge on his uniform. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.134.107.237 (talk) 01:54, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
SSG Bleak should also have the Army Good Conduct Medal added to his awards display. The GCM is awarded to all enlisted Soldiers who complete three years of honorable service, or complete a shorter enlistment and are honorably discharged. His DD214 will have it annotated as a matter of routine. The photo of SSG Bleak on the entry appears to show the GCM after the Purple Heart. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 214.26.214.162 (talk) 06:03, 23 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
GA toolbox |
---|
|
Reviewing |
|
Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 13:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC) I don't think I've had the pleasure of reviewing one of your GA noms yet, so here it goes. This particular article caught my fancy at DYK, and if I remember correctly shouldn't need much work. Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:57, 4 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | See below |
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Good |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | See below |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Accepting that after the war he settled into a citizen's lifestyle, so no problems with the lack of information before his death |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Good |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Good |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Per definition |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | One image excluding medals and ribbons, of the subject so clearly relevant |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | Pending |