Talk:Scottish crest badge

List

I added a list of crests and mottoes used in crest badges. But it might make the article too long. Should it be turned into a stand alone list, with a link to it on this page?--Celtus (talk) 06:34, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

moved it to List of crest badges used by Scottish clan members.--Celtus (talk) 08:07, 28 June 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Scottish crest badge/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   In the Introduction section, this sentence ---> "There are several established clans which do not have a chief recognised by the Lord Lyon King of Arms. In such cases. clan members usually wear a crest badge which contains the crest and motto of the last known chief", a period is between "cases" and "clan", that needs to be fixed.

   I changed it to comma, is that OK?--Celtus (talk) 09:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

   Yup, works fine. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

   The article tends to have "red links", if they don't have articles, it would be best to un-link them, per here. When reading in the Clan chiefs section, there are 3 edit buttons that do not let me read the second line in the section. It might be my browser, but, is that suppose to happen?

   Red-links removed. The images were causing me problems too. I have made them smaller, and re-ordered them. So now they appear in the sections, though don't have captions. I'm not sure they need them tho, since they fit perfectly in their section, and it'd be impossible for someone to mistake one for another.--Celtus (talk) 09:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

   Check. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   It would be best if the book sources use {{cite book}} template.

   OK, as of now i've got all sources in the "Footnotes" section. The book sources use a shortened form, which can be easily looked up in the "References" section below it to see the full book reference. I have it like this cause i think its easier and faster to make sense of them if they are shortened. Also, if one needs the isbn or publisher or whatever, they can just look it up a couple lines below in the "References" section. A few FAs use this system, like Stigand. I added a "Notes" section above these sections to separate the notes from the bare footnotes which are really only sources.--Celtus (talk) 09:51, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

   Here's a blurb on shorten notes at WP:CITESHORT.--Celtus (talk) 09:56, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

   It works fine. I would've recommended using the {{Harvard citation}}, I've used it and its very fast to use. But, the book format is fine. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

   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):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!

--  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:14, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you to Celtus for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:39, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

tell me again, tell me again, tell me again!

I'm not acquainted with {{#tag:ref}}. Is there a way, as with <ref>, to avoid multiple copies of the same footnote? —Tamfang (talk) 22:23, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Also, how many times does the page need to say that "there is no such thing as a 'clan crest'"? —Tamfang (talk) 19:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

took article back

a huge amounts of changes were added, images were added deleted etc...many of these changes were unreferenced and added information was not in references given. I took a bold step and rolled back to 7 june. My thinking is that the editors who made the changes: User:97.82.45.48 and User:Wyvren were using the changes to pursue an agenda expressed at Talk:Akins. Yours ever, Czar Brodie (talk) 10:54, 7 August 2010 (UTC)