Talk:Jagdschloss radar

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Germany Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Germany, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Germany on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GermanyWikipedia:WikiProject GermanyTemplate:WikiProject GermanyGermany articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: Aviation / Technology / European / German / World War II This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met Associated task forces: /  Military aviation task force Military science, technology, and theory task force European military history task force German military history task force World War II task force

Needs to be broken up in sections, unbolded, unusual terms like "parabolic dish" or"PPI" linked, and the Notes section actually used for notes, not parenthetical comments. --Gwern (contribs) 15:47 29 January 2007 (GMT)

What has to be unbolded? I was under the impression that any "name" for an object being covered in the article should be bolded. Also, PPI is linked. And I'm not sure what you mean about the notes. In every book on writing style I've read, parenthetical are either supposed to be removed (because they break up reading flow, like this) or replaced by comma'ed sections, or removed to a footnote. Maury 18:13, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The phrase Jadgschloss radar would be bolded, once, in the introduction since that is what the article is about, but you wouldn't bold every new term - you might italicize non-English words, but not one wouldn't bold them. The notes section is supposed to be for actual references, either simple bibliographic references or footnotes for specific pieces of text generated through use of Wikipedia:Cite.php. As it is, the notes section is just some mildly interesting and disconnected stuff from the rest of the article. They don't seem to be referencing any assertions in particular, and so would probably be better off if you could incorporate them into the main body of text. --Gwern (contribs) 19:41 29 January 2007 (GMT)

I always used Notes for notes and References for References. I do see what you are talking about in the cite link, but that's a style I have yet to come across. Is this common? Can you suggest a better name than "notes" perhaps? Maury 20:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]