Talk:Cromwell's Castle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cromwell's Castle/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Nick-D (talk · contribs) 03:05, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Comments[edit]

Great work as usual with this article. I only have some minor comments:

  • "the Isles had been Royalist supporters" - this sounds a bit odd (eg, that the islands were supporting the Royalists) - perhaps tweak it to something like "the leaders of the Isles were supporters of..."?
  • "made from massive pieces of rubble" - was the rubble from a previous construction, or was this local rock?
  • It might be worth noting that the castle is, according to English Heritage, one of "few surviving Cromwellian fortifications in Britain" Nick-D (talk) 03:14, 31 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers! Changes made as suggested. Hchc2009 (talk) 19:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Those changes look good, and I'm very pleased to pass the nomination. Nick-D (talk) 10:15, 2 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. 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:
  2. 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:
  3. 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):
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
  6. 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:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: