Jump to content

Talk:Peace (law)

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Peace (law)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: TheMagikCow (talk · contribs) 16:32, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to take a look at this. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 16:32, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria

[edit]
Good Article Status - Review Criteria
Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review

[edit]
  1. Well-written:
    2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) A generally good standard of prose. Sentence starting By the time of the reigns of I feel is unnecessarily long and verbose. It could be broken into 2 smaller sentences to make the meaning clearer. I have similar issues with In the early common law, a breach of the king's as well.
    Update 1: This has now been addressed.    		 Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS) A 3 sentence lead section is too brief. This should better summarise the article by including a very brief overview of the history of the concept of peace and its application to modern law in all mentioned jurisdictions. Further, the material in the lead is not developed/supported in the article. I can't see anything in the article discussing how the King's Peace is significant regarding the study of the origin of the idea of crime. I also can't see the idea of sovereign power being developed enough.
    Update 1: The lead has been expanded and now summarises the article well. No issues with this.     		Pass Pass
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) All sources appear to be reliable and are presented inline with the MOS. Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) Citation 10 cites a book pages 63-73. Is there a way to be more specific here? A narrower poage range would be good, unless all 10 are equally relevant
    Update 1: All sorted.    		 Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) All facts are cited, nothing jumps out as original research. Pass Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) Copyvio checked, no issues. Pass Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) A few points here:
    * Jurisdiction: There is a section on the development in English Law, and then a subsection talking about Modern Britain. Being very picky here, Britain refers to the Island that contains England, Wales & Scotland. The modern law as described in the section above is presumably applicable in the jurisdiction of England and Wales. This then raises the question of when was the concept of peace in common law applicable in Wales, if it first developed in the (old) Jurisdiction of England.
    * There is a brief sentence on swallowing up the lesser peaces. I am unsure of what this actually means in context. Was it the case that the right to peace held by the Lord of the Manor was abolished, or that the Kings right to enforce the peace superseded the Lord of the Manors'. Update: More detail added - no issue here any more.
    * The discussion about the offices responsible for conserving the peace is quite brief. What did their duty mean in practise?
    * In the Modern Britain section, would it be worth mentioning the offense of breach of the peace? It seems directly relevant, but I am no legal expert.
    * Building on this idea of offenses, I understand that the offense of murder requires a killing to be committed under the queen's peace (amongst other criteria). This in itself is not too relevant to the topic, but I wondered if this is a theme amongst common law offenses - do they all need to be violated in the queen's peace to be an offense? This is pure speculation and comes from no legal knowledge though, but it may be relevant.
    * The section on Scots Law is extremely brief, and I feel leaves the reader wanting for detail. What is royal brieves of protection? How does it reflect the same idea?
    * The American Law section is brief too. It would be great to see how the law of breach of the peace developed - is it still enforced? What states did it apply in? are a few questions that might be expanded on.
    * Finally, is this concept of Peace applicable in other jurisdictions? I know many commonwealth countries legal system developed from the English one, and perhaps this concept is widespread. Thinking more internationally, is this concept commonplace across most legal systems?

    Update 2 All points have been developed and expanded in recent edits. I have no further issues with this section.    		 Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) The article is focused in all places, my main criticism is a lack of depth in some area. Pass Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Notes Result
    Comment as above: is the concept of peace relevant to more jurisdictions that just E&W, Scotland and America. If so, these place should be represented.

    Update 1: As above, detail on other jurisdictions has been added.    		 Pass Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Notes Result
    No issues here. Pass Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) There are no images in this article and I can see no particular need for an image to further illustrate this topic.

    Update 1: Image added and is relevant. Tagged & copyright looks ok.

    		Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) Image has a descriptive caption, I have added alt text for accessibility reasons. Pass Pass

Result

[edit]
Result Notes
Pass Pass Very happy to pass this article as a GA. Thank you very much for all of your hard work on this article.

Discussion

[edit]

TheMagikCow, thank you for all this. I've made some edits/additions to the article. Neutralitytalk 19:48, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for these edits - they are great. The article is looking in much better shape. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 10:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is some useful information at Breach of the peace that might be useful in the American Section - content in the first paragraph in the section entitled "England, Wales and Northern Ireland". There is also some great information & sources on breach of the peace there too. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 16:31, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have made some significant additions. Neutralitytalk 18:21, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much for all of your work with this article - it is fantastic and well on the way to FA status if you were so inclined to go down that route. TheMagikCow (T) (C) 09:46, 25 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Peace_(law)&oldid=1203392273"