Talk:15th Marine Expeditionary Unit

message: A few redlinks need fixing. Well written. Oldwildbill 14:35, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Article

message: this article is well organized but it could use more references.  it has no inline references nor "citation" sections.
Justforasecond 15:43, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  It's looking good. When I have a bit of time, I'll comment a bit more. It is probably close, if not ready, to promote from the quick once over I've done. --CTSWyneken(talk) 23:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  good article nom 

message: Thank you for working to add the references. It is now a very nicely done article, worthy of the GA status. If you decide to pursue FA status, may I suggest requesting a peer review next? Congratulations! --CTSWyneken(talk) 12:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA Passed 

message: This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed. 
*Lead is inadequate, does not explain the purpose and time span of the unit. The mission section might well be incorporated into lead and expanded in more detail elsewhere in the article because at the moment it is far for clear what the purpose of the unit is.
*Much more detail about the unit's concept, organisation, development and historical relevance is needed. The article launches into history without giving any context.
*Swathes of the article are unreferenced. I recommend a reference at least once every sentance and further references for any statistics, quotes or anything likely to be challenged.
*Article needs to be updated from February 2007 when it was last significantly added to.
*Article is poorly written, with a lot of short sentances and numerous jargon-heavy phrases which are not well explained.
*Sources are more or less OK, but they could be better laid out and many more are needed.
This is just an initial response. If no one works on this then I will have to delete it, if someone does take on the task I will be happy to work with them to immprove it further in the future and get it to GA standard. I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 22:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm afraid that since no work has been done and the article has significant problems, I am regretfully going to have to delist this from GA. When it is back up to standard please renominate it.--Jackyd101 (talk) 09:34, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Sweeps (on hold)

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.usmc.mil/meus/meu_organization.htm
** In 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit on 2011-05-25 01:50:17, 404 NOT FOUND
** In 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit on 2011-06-01 18:29:08, 404 NOT FOUND
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:29, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 

message: During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
* http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/policy/vision/vis00/v00-a.html
** In 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit on 2011-05-25 01:50:17, 404 Not Found
** In 15th Marine Expeditionary Unit on 2011-06-01 18:29:18, 404 Not Found
--JeffGBot (talk) 18:30, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dead link 2