Talk:Dutch expedition to Valdivia/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 00:29, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
I will take this one. Comments to follow in due course. Zawed (talk) 00:29, 29 July 2018 (UTC)
An interesting article. I've done a little bit of copyediting, please review my changes to check you are OK with them.
- Your changes were all improvements.
Comments as follows:
Lead
- Dupe link: Dutch Republic; Spanish Empire
- Done.
Background
- Dupe link: Huilliche
- Done.
Expedition
- link Hendrik Brouwer on first mention
- Done.
- Dupe linl: Valdivia
- Done.
- "Except for Brouwer and other leaders, the true objectives were not known to the participants of the expedition." This is a little unclear; are the objectives recited not the true objectives? What did the participants believe was the expedition's purpose?
- Added a bit to try and clarify. Does that help? If not I will rewrite it to make clearer.
Chiloé
- Dupe link: Chiloé Archipelago
- Done.
- "According to Diego de Rosales...": we need context for who he is; a historian presumably?
- Yes. Apologies. Added.
Valdivia
- Manquipillan is not redlinked but Manqueante is?
- Done.
Spanish response
- Dupe link: Arauco War (on Mapuche resistance)
- Done.
Other stuff
- References: note 10, Robert Kock ref needs formatting using the website template I think, to match note 11. Chile is spelt incorrectly
- Done. I think. Wiki-referencing is not a strong point.
- Bibliography: the Lane ref needs dashes in its ISBN.
- Done. (Possibly.)
- The Montt Pinto ref needs a place of publication and a OCLC number
- Done
- Captions for images shouldn't finish with fullstops
- Umm. That's not my reading of MOS:CAPFRAGS. "Most captions are not complete sentences, but merely sentence fragments, which should not end with a period. If any complete sentence occurs in a caption, then all sentences, and any sentence fragments, in that caption should end with a period."
- Images themselves have appropriate tags
- No dablinks
- External links check out OK
That's my review completed. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:59, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- @Zawed: That was embarrassing. Thank you for soldiering through it. Hopefully it is a little better now. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:03, 23 August 2018 (UTC)
- Have reviewed your changes and comment and this is looking good. I think this is well written and illustrated, covers the subject to an appropriate depth and referenced with reliable sources. Passing as GA now. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 09:31, 24 August 2018 (UTC)