# Talk:Macedonian Mule Corps

This review is transcluded from Talk:Macedonian Mule Corps/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 04:34, 30 August 2021 (UTC)


### Comments
It's always good to see articles on topics like this at GA. I'd like to offer the following comments:

Can 'muleteers' be linked in the lead?
 Done
Link 'prisoners of war'
 Done
'On 18 October, special legislation banned emigration for Cypriot males of conscription age in order to halt the mass migration of Cypriots to the USA. Passports that were already issued were subsequently revoked' - this should be moved later in the para, after the material on how the muleteers were recruited.
 Done
"a statement that later triggered controversy over the compensation of those killed and injured" - can this be expanded upon in the 'Aftermath' section? (e.g. what was this 'controversy'?)
I removed this passage because the original source does not expand on the topic. Another source mentions that some of the veterans were not paid their arrears in full and felt neglected by the colonial government after being injured in action; but I could not conclusively link the two.--Catlemur (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
From memory, some of the sources on the Indian Labour Corps noted that establishing it under the Indian Army Act meant that veterans received relatively decent treatment after the war. I suspect the issue here is that the Mule Corps volunteers lacked these types of benefits. Nick-D (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Were the members of the corps volunteers throughout the war, or did the British bring in conscription in some form? (I recently developed an article on the comparable Indian Labour Corps, which started as a volunteer-only force but ended up being manned with conscripts).
The sources make no mention of conscription. As mentioned in the article the high wages and Greek nationalist rhetoric used by the recruiters were more than enough to draw in a steady stream of volunteers.--Catlemur (talk) 16:13, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
File:Φωτογραφία και Μετάλλιο του Γαβριήλ Χατζησάββα (Macedonian Mule Corps - MMC), item 3.jpg needs the PD UK Gov tag
 Done
Ditto File:Macedonian Mule Corps Recruitment Poster.jpg, whose copyright statement is incorrect at present (you may have photographed this poster, but it was originally created by the British Government). Nick-D (talk) 04:56, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
 Done
@Nick-D: I think I have addressed all the points you raised.--Catlemur (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
That all looks good, and I'm pleased to pass this nomination. Nick-D (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)


### Assessment
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct: 

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation: 

Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline: 

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines: 

C. It contains no original research: 

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic: 

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style): 

Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each: 

Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute: 

Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: 

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
Great work Nick-D (talk) 02:03, 2 September 2021 (UTC)

I question the inclusion of Constantinople - now Istanbul - among the list of British war cemeteries in which MMC personnel are buried. The only cemetery in that city with any Commonwealth war graves is Istanbul Protestant Cemetery which has only one CWGC registered grave, and that is of a casualty of WWII, not WWI. There is the possibility that Commonwealth personnel initially buried at Constantinople in WWI were later reburied in purpose made war cemeteries outside the city where permanent maintenance of the graves could be guaranteed by the CWGC.Cloptonson (talk) 20:45, 10 June 2022 (UTC)