Jump to content

Talk:Privy Garden of the Palace of Whitehall/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 13:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Grabbing this for a review over the next few days. Miyagawa (talk) 13:24, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, still planning to review this one, just lost track of it. Miyagawa (talk) 23:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, let's finally get this started. I work near Westminster so it's very interesting to see what the old "floor plan" of the area once was.

  • Image licences are all good.
  • References are fine.
  • No dab links.
  • You link Palace of Whitehall twice in the lead.
  • "a monstrous act of vandalism" - I'd suggest that you say who said that in the article text itself. Otherwise you'll only get someone come along later and throw in one of those "by whom?" templates.

I think that's it. An interesting read, and I never knew one of the Trafalgar Square statues originated from these gardens. Normally I'd suggest adding an image of it to the article, but I think there's already the right balance between text and images already. Miyagawa (talk) 13:11, 25 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for doing this. I'm sorry I've not had a chance to respond until now, but I'll address your suggestions over this weekend. Prioryman (talk) 12:53, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Miyagawa: OK, thanks for your patience. There weren't many changes to make, but I've taken out the redundant link you identified and attributed the statement in your last point. Hopefully that's everything that's needed? Prioryman (talk) 19:40, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Prioryman: Thanks, I'm happy to promote on that basis. Very interesting article! Miyagawa (talk) 21:07, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.