Talk:Wressle Castle
Wressle Castle has been listed as one of the Warfare 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: April 17, 2016. (Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
It is requested that a map or maps be included in this article to improve its quality. Wikipedians in England may be able to help! |
New draft
[edit]Hello, I've prepared an extended draft at User:Richard Nevell/sandbox. Since it mentions work of the Castle Studies Trust and I'm on the charity's board I would appreciate it if someone could have a look and check that the balance is ok. Then if everyone's happy I'd like to copy the contents over to this article. Richard Nevell (talk) 16:52, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Looks OK for balance at a quick read through. Probably some copy edits and changes needed in places. I could do those in the draft but then a history merge would then be required to preserve the edit history. Keith D (talk) 21:00, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- Copy edits very much appreciated! I'll leave it up to you where those edits take place (sandbox or here). Richard Nevell (talk) 21:27, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Hchc2009: do you have any thoughts on the article? Richard Nevell (talk) 21:35, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Will take a quick look on Thursday night Richard. Hchc2009 (talk) 21:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
- Apologies for the delay. Looks balanced and reasonable to me - nice work! Hope the Trust is going well. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Thank you :) I'll copy the text over later today. I'll look for a bit more detail on the structure and see if I can take the article to GAN. The Trust's work is certainly interesting and luckily some of the projects have been fitting with my own research. Richard Nevell (talk) 11:25, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Apologies for the delay. Looks balanced and reasonable to me - nice work! Hope the Trust is going well. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:24, 20 March 2016 (UTC)
- Will take a quick look on Thursday night Richard. Hchc2009 (talk) 21:50, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Wressle Castle/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 07:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
I'll read through and start the review proper later on today. Hchc2009 (talk) 07:52, 6 April 2016 (UTC)
Well-written:
(a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct;
- I'd usually advise giving inline attribution to quotes like 'Wressle Castle was built “as a residence reflecting [the Earl’s] pedigree and distinguished state service”' to make it clear that it is Emery's voice, rather someone cited in Emery.
- "Eric John Fisher suggested" - can we say who Fisher was? (e.g. "the historian Eric John Fisher"?)
- "whether this was a previous manorial centre, or whether it was an entirely new site." - may be worth tweaking this slightly; we both know that "previous" means "prior to Norman invasion", but the reader may not.
- "late 15th century" - should this be "late-15th century"? I can never remember.
- "was made private with a brick wall" - unclear if this means it was always private with a wall, or if it wasn't originally private and was later made so.
- Minor, but the rest of the article talks about ranges in the castle; this isn't picked up in the architecture section though; not necessarily inconsistent, but it read oddly to me
- I think it's 'late-15th century' - that one tends to fox me too. I've gone ahead and made those changes, and explained who Emery is since he's now mentioned in the text. Richard Nevell (talk) 23:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
- Could the lead describe the castle's architecture in outline?
- I've added a little in. Richard Nevell (talk) 23:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;
- Is Fisher 1954 or 1955? (you give both!)
- One use of Holye 2004b (spelling)
- fn 26 - Emery needs a "|" after it before the year
- "Ed Dennison Archaeological Services 2015, pp. 7–8" - the biblio gives the authors here as Richardson, Shaun and Dennison, Ed, rather than the Archaeological Services organisation (and the harvnb link won't work as a result!)
- Worth checking the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography dates; I think you're using the on-line editions, which were published in 2008 rather than 2004.
- v. minor, but there's an inconsistency in whether just the publisher is given, or publisher and location.
- I think I've got most of them. Not sure how I managed to confuse 1954 with 1995 for the Fisher reference though. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:13, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;
(c) it contains no original research.
- None found.
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).
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- Stable. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:28, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
Illustrated, if possible, by images:
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
- All fine. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:28, 7 April 2016 (UTC)
(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
- Thank you for taking time to review the article, your feedback was very useful. Richard Nevell (talk) 15:12, 17 April 2016 (UTC)
- Wikipedia good articles
- Warfare good articles
- GA-Class Yorkshire articles
- High-importance Yorkshire articles
- WikiProject Yorkshire articles
- GA-Class military history articles
- GA-Class fortifications articles
- Fortifications task force articles
- GA-Class British military history articles
- British military history task force articles
- GA-Class European military history articles
- European military history task force articles
- GA-Class Medieval warfare articles
- Medieval warfare task force articles
- GA-Class Archaeology articles
- Low-importance Archaeology articles
- Wikipedia requested maps in England