Talk:Dutch invasion of Saint Helena/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 03:20, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one. Comments as follows:

Lead

No obvious issues identified but wonder if Anthony Beale worth a redlink

Agreed and linked - Dumelow (talk) 08:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Background

the settlement at Cape Town in Southern Africa.[2][1] : if it's your preference, I note the refs are not in chronological order here. Actually, just noticed, these refs are redundant anyway as they are used again for the following sentence. I would just cite the entire paragraph to [1] and [2] at the end.

I don't usually bother with the order of the refs but am happy to do so for GA level. I don't like whole paragraph citation where individual sentences come from different sources but agree that [1] and [2] should move here - Dumelow (talk) 07:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

established a settlement and fort.: perhaps namedrop Jamestown here (I assume that is the settlement referred to).

Agreed, think I must have had it that way as it wasn't Jamestown until after the Restoration. I've referred to it now as "later known as" - Dumelow (talk) 07:45, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dutch invasion

Is there an appropriate link for the Dutch navy?

Linked to Royal Netherlands Navy - Dumelow (talk) 08:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would Jacob de Gens be worth a redlink? Ditto Anthony Beale.

Agreed and linked - Dumelow (talk) 08:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect it is not available, hence its absence, but anything on the size of the attacking forces/garrison at Jamestown?

Alas no - Dumelow (talk) 08:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

which they renamed Good Fortune.: is the original name of the fort known?

It was originally the Castle of St John, then James Fort. I've gone back and added some more detail to the Background section - Dumelow (talk) 08:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like, apart from the first sentence, the entire paragraph could just be cited at the end with [3] and [4].

Again, I prefer to not merge where individual sentences come from different sources, I did get rid of two [3][4]s in consecutive sentences - Dumelow (talk) 08:04, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Recapture by English forces

Link sloop, Royal Navy

Done - Dumelow (talk) 08:09, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add 4 May somewhere into the narrative; I assume that was the date the expedition arrived at Fisher's Valley.

Yes, good point! Added - Dumelow (talk) 08:09, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The second paragraph could be entirely cited to [3] and [5] at its end.

Again, prefer not to do this as I am only using one of the refs for one sentence - Dumelow (talk) 08:09, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aftermath

and, later in 1673,: is this year correct? If so, suggest rewording to the effect of "later that year" or similar.

Yes, it came through a Royal Charter of the same year. Changed to "later that year" - Dumelow (talk) 08:11, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Other stuff

No dupe links
Image tags checked and OK

That's it for me. Zawed (talk) 03:20, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Zawed, thanks so much for looking at this (and so quickly!). I think I've addressed all your comments above, the only thing I didn't action was the refs, which I prefer to keep separate - Dumelow (talk) 08:12, 7 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looks all fine to me, passing as GA as I believe that this article meets the relevant criteria. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 02:33, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]