Talk:Jacket's Field Long Barrow

Jacket's Field Long Barrow has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 28, 2019. (Reviewed version).

Archaeology Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Kent Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Kent, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the county of Kent in South East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.KentWikipedia:WikiProject KentTemplate:WikiProject KentKent-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Kent tasks:

Here are some Kent related tasks you can do:

Clean up an article: Here are automatically generated lists of articles needing cleanup sorted alphabetically and by category.
Edit the Top and High importance articles.
Refine/polish: Ashford, Royal Tunbridge Wells, Canterbury
Expand:: List of churches in Kent, Maidstone Borough Council
NPOV: K College
Citation needed: Unreferenced Kent articles
Cleanup/Copyedit: Kingdom of Kent
Expert attention: Channel Tunnel, Bromley Civic Society
Stubs: see Kent geography stubs articles

Note: These articles may overlap with those on other related lists. If you would like to make a change, either do so yourself, or make a suggestion.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Jacket's Field Long Barrow/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review."

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 19:21, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review, but, as before, it may be a bit bitty! Josh Milburn (talk) 19:21, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Archaeologists have established that the monument was built by pastoralist communities" Presumably it is not the case that this barrow was built by multiple communities.

Well, you never know... Maybe it was a project that brought together multiple communities as some kind of monument to unity; marking a marriage or something of that nature. Nevertheless, it's probably best to switch "communities" to "community" in the lead. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:33, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Of these, it lies on the western side of the river, while Julliberrie's Grave and Shrub's Wood Long Barrow are found on the western side" Is this an error?

Indeed it is; the second example should read "eastern". I've also added a cited sentence into the main body of the text relating this information, which otherwise appears only in the lead. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:56, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Do we have an OS grid reference?

I've located the coordinates and added the infobox map of Kent. Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:00, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"they represent markers" It's not clear to me what represent means here.

Ah, a much better word would be "were". Far simpler and to the point. Changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Stour Long Barrows or Stour long barrows?

I'm not sure that there's a 'right answer' here. I went with "Stour Long Barrows" to mirror the use of "Medway Megaliths", which is almost always kept capitalised in the Reliable Sources, but I won't object to it being changed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:27, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it worth naming all 12 long barrows in Kent? Redlinks would be good!

I've added the list. Thankfully we don't have to have any redlinks as all of the long barrows now have articles. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:41, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"While Julliberrie's Grave had been known to antiquarians since at least the 16th century, Jacket's Field Long Barrow—as well as Shrub's Wood Long Barrow" Immediately following on from the previous comment - I don't know what these are! They haven't been introduced!

Oh, how on Earth did I miss this! A silly error. I've introduced these when introducing the Stour Long Barrows. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:43, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In the lead, you mention that the site is ruined, but this isn't mentioned again. What do you mean by this?

Difficult one. I copied the idea of it being "ruined" from some of the Medway Megalith articles I worked on; those, however, are very visibly ruined, with the stones being pulled out of their original places and stuff like this. The Jacket's Field barrow is almost certainly smaller now that it was when it was built (although I don't have any RS to back that up), although perhaps it is going a step too far to say that it is "ruined". I'll take that term out. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:26, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please double-check my edits. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:57, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for this, Josh! Midnightblueowl (talk) 23:04, 26 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Great; happy to promote now. Given that relatively little investigation of the barrow has been done, and given that the notability of the subject (this particular barrow) is borderline, I think this is a great article. I don't think it could realistically go to FAC, though. Maybe a combined article on the Stour barrows could. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:28, 28 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]