Talk:Cowes Castle/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 02:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Will aim to get to this in the next few days. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
- Cheers Ian. Hchc2009 (talk) 07:25, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
Toolbox checks -- no dab or EL issues.
Prose/structure/detail -- let me know if any issues with my light copyedit, otherwise all seems fine.
Images -- licensing looks good.
Referencing
- Tweaked a few citations to standardise but otherwise formatting looked okay.
- I decided to check the Operation Neptune source as WWII's an area of interest; I would've thought we could do better source-wise than this but OTOH this is not FAC... ;-) However in the sentence cited to FN35, I could only find "HQ Naval Commander Force "J" Landing Craft base, known as HMS Vectis" in the source, where's the rest of the info in the sentence come from?
Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:17, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- I was having trouble in terms of sources - this bit is talked about by lots of local authors, but there don't seem to be many high quality ones! fn 35 has two sources cited, one is the Op Neptune Royal Navy source, pages 7-8, the other half is from Eric Finley's 1994 book, p.1. In combination they should be covering the sentence; let me know if not. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:21, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- Gah, sorry, I'm not really used to the style of grouping multiple sources in one citation -- I read it (perhaps in haste!) as Finley being the author of "Operation Neptune". That's fine, I'm sure the rest of the info is covered by the book but the reason I looked is that "headquarters of the HQ" (i.e. headquarters of the headquarters) reads a bit oddly, and an HQ isn't normally only for senior officers. It wasn't the mess or something was it -- how exactly does Finlay put it? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:18, 22 July 2015 (UTC)
- He calls it the "senior officer's headquarters"; I've changed accordingly. My suspicion, given the shape and size of the building, is that it was the office for the commanding officer and his immediate staff, probably with messing and accommodation attached - there was also another barracks down the road I think. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:30, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- So he actually uses "senior officer's", i.e. singular? Okay, fair enough, we can't mess with what the source says in the absence of anything else -- passing as GA. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yep - it's all slightly odd, but I can't find a more "official" description, and I suspect we're probably getting some mild colloquialisms coming through in the sources... Thanks for all your help with the review! Hchc2009 (talk) 19:56, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- So he actually uses "senior officer's", i.e. singular? Okay, fair enough, we can't mess with what the source says in the absence of anything else -- passing as GA. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:50, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- He calls it the "senior officer's headquarters"; I've changed accordingly. My suspicion, given the shape and size of the building, is that it was the office for the commanding officer and his immediate staff, probably with messing and accommodation attached - there was also another barracks down the road I think. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:30, 23 July 2015 (UTC)
- Gah, sorry, I'm not really used to the style of grouping multiple sources in one citation -- I read it (perhaps in haste!) as Finley being the author of "Operation Neptune". That's fine, I'm sure the rest of the info is covered by the book but the reason I looked is that "headquarters of the HQ" (i.e. headquarters of the headquarters) reads a bit oddly, and an HQ isn't normally only for senior officers. It wasn't the mess or something was it -- how exactly does Finlay put it? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:18, 22 July 2015 (UTC)