Talk:Oslac of York/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I am beginning a GA review of this article. Please feel free to leave any comments regarding the review below. Vicenarian (talk) 08:41, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Review Result = On Hold

ON HOLD I am very close to passing this article. I was concerned at first about the lack of detail given, but it seems a lot of work was put in to reading through secondary sources to find as much information as is available in the historical record. I went through and edited for style (ideas by historians from written works should be stated in present, not past, tense), and removed the infobox, which is superfluous as not enough information is available to fill it out. My last big concern is this line:

...though Alex Woolf has suggested that the part about Lothian may have been fabricated later to give credence to the claim that the Scottish kings owed homage to England for lands in Lothian.

What is this part about Lothian? No reference to Lothian is made elsewhere in the article. This detail needs to be added, or the sentence removed. Over all, good work. Vicenarian (talk) 09:25, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Also, please check the ISBNs of the references, some appear invalid. Vicenarian (talk) 09:32, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the review and doing so many things yourself. Lothian is referred to in the primary source quotation, from which the historical commentary (Woolf and Barrow) derives. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 20:49, 18 May 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely, Lothian is mentioned in the primary source quotation. Well, I guess I have no choice but... Vicenarian (talk)

GA Review Result = PASS

...to PASS the article. Good work! Vicenarian (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:21, 18 May 2009 (UTC).