Talk:Raglan Castle/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Ben MacDui 15:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Commencing review. Ben MacDui 15:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC) Initial comments below:

Lead - "the equal of any other other in the kingdom". Which kingdom?

Changed. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Infobox - I think the rock names should be in title case e.g Old Red Sandstone - also lower down.

Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Notes. 1 and 4 are substantially duplicates. If you need two my suggestion would be to have the marks vs £ calculation in one and the reference to the average baron in 1436 in another.

15th - 16th centuries:

- House of York can be linked

Done.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

"William Herbert was executed in 1469" - I was just getting to know the fellow! Why?

Alas, he was a Yorkist at a moment when the Lancastrians were winning... I've added a bit! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Last two sentences should be in the next section

Moved.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Image caption - "Gatehouse, built by William Herbert, with machicolations probably of French influence". William H should be linked. Phraseology is poor. Needs a cite.

Done.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

17th century

"Charles himself visited the castle twice," - King or Prince?

Changed.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think cannon names should be italicised.

I think the MOS implies that they should be: it recommends that italics be used for the names of works of art and artifice, along with named vehicles - I think therefore that a named cannon would also fit under this guidance.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

why "Marquesse" with an "e"

A good question. I've changed it! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Architecture

"but having been hopefully impressed by the outside of the Great Tower as they arrived". This is slightly clumsy and POV in a small way. "but perhaps having been impressed by the outside of the Great Tower as they arrived"?

Changed. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Gatehouse

Some of the Closet Tower was altered in later years..". This is a little picky but I think you mean "The Closet Tower was partly altered in later years.."

Changed.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Pitched Stone Court - needs a note or more informative short description. The reference to cobbling doesn't explain anything to me. A court made of pitched stones, a stone court that is pitched or perhaps has pitch added? What is the connection to cobbles? This may be obvious to military historians...

Try my revised version.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Notes

Kenyon (1987), p. 164, cited Johnson, p.84. There are a couple of these that contrast with those that say "citing". Unless there is a difference, pls be consistent. Ben MacDui 16:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Changed.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Changes made as per above, but I'm not sure about the italics/cannon name bit. See what you think! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Remaining points:

Pls comment on or attend to Notes 1 and 4 (above).

I've tweaked the text, but I'm stumped as to how to get a cited footnote given a name to avoid the duplication (I know how to do it for the standard ref name, but not in this wikiformat).Hchc2009 (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

There is guidance at WP:REFNOTE but the format does not seem to allow for a citation embedded within the note itself. There are various options:

Bodge by referring to the "above note", which works and I have done, but probably wouldn't pass an FA review. On reflection the note as it stands does not need a ref and I will remove. Also note that this was a duplicate reference - which I fixed. I checked for others but could not see any. A bot will will pick any up in due course.

Use the REFNOTE guidance and move the actual citation outside of the note. Works, but slightly clumsy perhaps.

Move the citation into the note i.e. include "Pounds, p.148." inside the note. Also a possible FA grumble.

Still at least one "citing". (I have a mild preference for "citing" rather than "cited" but no matter as I should have stated that earlier).

Changed it.Hchc2009 (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't believe a cannon is a vehicle as described in WP:MOSTITLE. Ben MacDui 08:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

I don't think that it's a vehicle either - rather, I think that the intention of the MOS, given that it talks about works of artifice, is that it should be in italics, but I'll change it! Hchc2009 (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

OK & thanks. Ben MacDui 15:24, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   Very well written

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   Pass

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   Pass

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Pass

5. It is stable.

   'Pass

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   Excellent images

7. Overall:

   Pass

Ben MacDui 15:26, 11 June 2011 (UTC)