Talk:Château de Navarre

Peer Review
I found a few minor errors during the reading of the article that I'll address here:

-First, I would recommend a better flow in the writing to make for easier reading. What I mean is parts of it read more like they should be in point form, rather than paragraph format. Perhaps you can link these sentences somehow?

-Overuse of commas somewhat stunts writing, for example: "It also became the residences of the Duke of Bouillon and then later the Duke of Leuchtenberg, his grand-son, authorized by an Act, sold this area, in 1834 to the Marquis de Dauvet, for the sum of 1.2 million francs." Maybe try removing excess punctuation for a smoother read, or splitting parts into separate sentences.

-I would also recommend creating a Table of Contents using headers to separate individual subjects pertaining to the château once you've researched further. That way, instead of a big chunk of information, important elements are highlighted and easily accessible.

-It isn't a major issue, but to be consistent, perhaps you can match the spelling of "Chateau" in the article to that of "Château" in the title?

-If you can find the information, maybe you could expand on the fall of the castle in 1836 and make a separate section for it? There's a few little bits mentioned briefly in the article that seem important enough to merit extra research, if possible.

-Perhaps you could also make sections for the property owners of the château, giving a little more information on the Duke of Bouillon, for example, and expand on whatever might be significant in relation to the château.

It seems an interesting topic, and I look forward to learning more about it! Roseice8 (talk) 23:50, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review 2
-I found it confusing to read and keep attention to all the detail invested in the article. From it's destruction to it's reconstruction it was quite smooshed together. Recommend listing headers stating who's possession it was in and to which they owners changed it or did not change it to have a better flow and keep the timeline accurate.

-Recommend taking the added information about what Josephine did the castle to make it more appealing in a section by itself along with the information about Josephine acquiring the castle and the reasons to which she got it.

-In the section titled property owners it states that the Duke of Bouillon rebuilt the estate for himself in 1689 but at the very top of the article it says that the castle was built in 1750. Maybe more research should be invested into the actual time line because all the years and the people who owned do not match up with other information on the article.

-Just mainly correct the timeline from the time it was built, to the owners and the times they owned and lost it, and finally what happened to it in modern times. Was interesting to read but scrambled of the article made it confusing to read somewhat. Skeletonfish (talk) 13:27, 21 November 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.209.17.254 (talk)