Wikipedia:Peer review/Description of the Western Isles of Scotland/archive1

Description of the Western Isles of Scotland

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I believe this article would make a fine featured list, although a number of issues need an objective assessment. These include:

1) The introductory section is lengthy. In order to understand the list one needs to know something of its author and its history. I am loathe to imagine a situation in which there was an article about the book and a separate list of the islands it refers to.

2) There are linguistic issues. The Scots language that Monro wrote in is (I think) just about understandable to someone who is not familiar with it, but in places it may become unduly obscure. There is also the issue of Scottish Gaelic. Few readers will have a working knowledge of the language and although having such is not necessary to read the article, an understanding of Gaelic pronunciations makes it much easier to grasp why some of the names seem so varied (appearing as a few do in their Gaelic, Scots and English guise).

There are issues of this sort with, for example, No 212 "Garvellan". Why should we associate this island with the modern name Garbh Eilean? The answer is that that the latter is the spelling of a Gaelic name that is pronounced as the former.

3) The list itself is a long one although I don't think this should bar it from consideration.

4) Garvellan is also an example of an identification not made by any outside authority. There are only two of these, the other being 233 "Ere". The maps available to Munro in 1961 presumably didn't name Garbh Eilean or Eire. The text makes it clear that this is the case and I find myself caught between indulging in a minor piece of "research" or alternatively pretending that there is no possible identification, when it is blindingly obvious that there is one.

I am aware that the lead and references need a little work, but it would be helpful to know where the article may be going before I complete that. All comments gratefully received.

Thanks, Ben MacDui 15:53, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

comments from Tim riley

I have had to scratch about to find anything to quibble at, but these are my meagre comments:

• Lead
  • "The Hebrides" – the capital T looks odd to my eye. I see that the WP article on the Hebrides doesn't capitalise the article in mid-sentence.
  • Equal opportunities notwithstanding, I think you are wise to link the Scots language but I think all your readers will, ipso facto, know what the English language is.
• Publications
  • Not clear why you have "chapters" in inverted commas.
  • "published in Scots/English" – unclear what this means: in both Scots and English? In some sort of blend?
• Critiques
  • " Buchanan was fulsome in his praise" – careful with "fulsome"! Chambers' defines it as "sickeningly obsequious, nauseatingly affectionate, admiring or praiseful".
  • "In 1840 Rev. Alexander" – it is usual to write …"the Rev. Alexander…"
  • "MacCulloch's statement…." – the quotation marks look a bit odd here; I wonder if leaving the "of" outside the quote might make the sentence flow better
• Craignish, Taynish, Jura and the Firth of Lorn
  • "On my screen (a smallish one) the pictures after "its entirety from the Auld and Moniepennie publications" cause a four-inch gap of white space before the tables resume with No 54. Later: I consulted a WP luminary: people use so many different screen sizes that one can't cater for them all. Pray ignore this comment. Tim riley (talk) 23:49, 4 February 2013 (UTC)
• Islay
  • "added a few islet's" – possessive apostrophe not wanted, surely?

This is a remarkable article, and I am enormously impressed. Please let me know if you take it to FAC. – Tim riley (talk) 20:18, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Many thanks. I'm on the road at present and will take a proper look at your comments later in the week. Ben MacDui 18:37, 4 February 2013 (UTC)