Talk:160th Rifle Division (1940 formation)

Military history: National / Russian & Soviet / World War II C‑class

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

C

This article has been rated as C-class on the project's quality scale.

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	National militaries task force
	Russian, Soviet and CIS military history task force
	World War II task force

Soviet Union Low‑importance

	Soviet Union portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Soviet Union, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) 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.Soviet UnionWikipedia:WikiProject Soviet UnionTemplate:WikiProject Soviet UnionSoviet Union articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Hatnote[edit]

@Wreck Smurfy: You reverted my edit where I converted some badly-formatted hatnote-like text into text in the lead of the article ([1]) and left me an explanatory note User talk:Shhhnotsoloud#160th Rifle Division (1940 formation) – thank you. However, the current arrangement cannot continue to exist. A WP:HATNOTE must be properly formatted, and since "Their purpose is to help readers locate a different article if the one they are at is not the one they're looking for" a hatnote must have a valid link to another article. Is the different 1941 formation covered in any article? If it is, then a properly-formatted hatnote (for example using {{about}}) could be used. If there is no other article (yet) then the thing to do is mention it in the article. I wouldn't characterise what I did as "burying" but there may be other ways to alert the reader: perhaps as a sentence immediately after the lead sentence? Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:57, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. The 1941 formation will be my next article after this. As I mentioned, I'm happy to reformat this as appropriate, but it seems to me that the purpose of a hatnote as you quote above is exactly what is needed here. Wreck Smurfy (talk) 23:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for your work generally. I'll leave the hatnote properly-formatted but with a redlink, on the basis that the redlink won't exist for long. Happy writing, Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:46, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I've created an WP:SIA at 160th Rifle Division. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 07:50, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That looks great. Thanks for your help. Wreck Smurfy (talk) 00:17, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]