Talk:Craigiehall/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Initial thoughts
I will be reviewing this article. Having just quickly read through it, it appears fairly comprehensive. My main suggestions are likely to be around ensuring that all key facts are referenced, while also making sure there are no copyright violations. I think this article is probably close to being passed for GA. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:20, 23 March 2009 (UTC) I enjoyed reading this article, and look forward to it passing this review.
 * My initial attempt to get this link to work were unsuccessful: "Craigiehall House, NT17NE 29". RCAHMS. http://lmid1.rcahms.gov.uk/pls/portal/newcanmore.details_gis?inumlink=50408. Retrieved on 2007-10-01.
 * RCAHMS have changed their website, all links there have been updated. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The article should include a statement of when and why the property received a heritage listing. This might also be relevant to the lead section, in terms of notability.
 * When is easy enough, I've added a note on the lead, but the why isn't really explicit in the listing, though i think its pretty clear implicitly. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Why use the word "doocote", of which I have never heard, when it is a dovecote? This also prompted the following question:
 * "Doocot" is a Scottish English word, entirely appropriate for an article on a Scottish location. See WP:ENGVAR. I have included a "translation". Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Can an editor check carefully that none of the text is a copyright violation of the Innes reference? If more than a few words are being quoted, they should be in "quotation marks". I appreciate the citations are linked to particular pages, which all look to be in good order, but if Innes exact words are useed, this should also be indicated.
 * Nothing has been copied directly from Innes' book. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * There is a reference to a room being called the "Blue Room". As this is the only time this is mentioned, it might need an explanation. Why does this room alone have a colloquial name?
 * Don't know why, I suppose its because its a dining room, but it isnt the Dining Room, but not sure. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 13:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * i do not think a protest by 30 people outside a meeting involving defence ministers is notable. The meeting yes, the phone-box-full of protesters, not so much. That can be deleted.
 * Only 1 sentence so I left it in. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 13:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Points in the text that need a citation at the end of the sentence:
 * "The Stewarts sold the estate, which by this time had a tower house, in 1643 to John Fairholm, treasurer to the City of Edinburgh."
 * "At the summit, Hope-Weir had an ornamental temple built in 1759, commanding wide views of the expanded estate and beyond."
 * "The structure was burned by vandals in the early 1970s, and in 1977 the upper storey was removed as a hazard to aviation, following the development of a new longer runway at nearby Edinburgh Airport."
 * "In 1818 Hope-Weir's grandson James Hope-Vere (1785-1843) asked Thomas Brown to provide designs for an attic extension, although this was never carried out."
 * "Ten years later, William Burn was commissioned to design a new north wing, incorporating a dining room, with new kitchens below and bedrooms above."
 * "Through the early 1950s the Army made alterations to Craigiehall. The original roof was replaced in 1953 due to woodworm, and extra rooms added in the attic. This resulted in the loss of Bruce's chimneys, and Burn's dining room pediment."
 * "Further land was purchased from Lord Rosebery and married quarters were built close to the river."

I'll pop back in to see how things are going. hamiltonstone (talk) 00:41, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * All addressed. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 13:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The book mentioned in the references, (Fenwick, Hubert (1970) Architect Royal: the Life and Work of Sir William Bruce, Roundwood Press), could be used in in-line citations to strengthen the article and balance a little the reliance on Innes as a source.
 * Checked this, but he says little on Craigiehall, useful as a general reference on Bruce though. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 13:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Somewhere in the references the acronym RCAHMS should be spelt out, as most readers would have no idea what it is.
 * Done, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't suppose the military are keen on photos being taken of their facilities. Otherwise, a current photo of the house would be good!
 * You are quite right, it's a bit difficult to go wandering in there with a camera! Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 09:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Progress
All those changes look good. I would suggest that, while it would be good for everything to be addressed, the only thing i would want to see for GA would be the inline cites for those sentences listed above. I am guessing that means getting hold of the Innes book again. Hope Jonathan or another editor is able to do that. Cheers. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:39, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll try to look up some refs tonight. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 16:08, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, a little later than planned, real life huh. I think I've addressed all the points. I dug up some more refs and info on the building works, so you might want to go over the Bruce house section again. Anyway, I'll leave it in your hands. Thanks for the review, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 13:55, 30 March 2009 (UTC)