Talk:Gleaston Castle/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 14:37, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct;


 * "It has a quadrilateral plan, with a tower at each corner. " - as it follows on from a sentence about the village, this should probably be "The castle has..."
 * Good point, done.
 * "From the 12th century the manor of Muchland was administered from Aldingham Castle" - is this the same as the motte mentioned in the lead? It's slightly unclear...
 * It is. I've gone for 'Aldingham Motte' as that's what the 2015 monograph on the site is called.
 * "Scottish Wars of Independence" - worth linking
 * Absolutely, done.
 * Only a suggestion, but would "In the 14th century, the Scots attacked the Furness peninsula during the Scottish Wars of Independence; around the same time, coastal erosion threatened Aldingham Castle." work better? It would set the paragraph up nicely for the "These factors may..." next sentence.
 * That's a bit tidier and avoids a slightly short sentence. Done.
 * "establishing the head of the manor at the newly built Gleaston Castle" - unclear who/what the "head of the manor" is here (the head of the Harrington family?)
 * True, I've changed it to "administrative centre".
 * "thought the construction work could have been the result of enhanced social status" - "though" (typo); "the result of their growing social status"?
 * Changed to "though the construction work could have been the result of enhanced social status"
 * "The castle was probably built for John Harington, 1st Baron Harington" - missing full stop at the end. As we don't give any other date here for the construction, could we give birth/death range instead?
 * I like that idea, how about "The castle was probably built for John Harington, 1st Baron Harington (b. 1281–d. 1347)."? I thought I would include 'b.' and 'd.' as when I read those ranges without I'm sometimes unsure if it means that's when the person held a particular title or was alive.
 * "Gleaston Castle was first mentioned in 1389" - "is first mentioned"? (I'm assuming these are from surviving docs etc.)
 * Yes, I think it should be present tense - changed.
 * "The castle and barony the passed" - "The castle and the barony passed", or "The castle and barony then passed"
 * Mean to be 'then' - done.
 * "In 1540, antiquarian John Leland " - "the antiquarian"?
 * Changed.
 * " which is one of the earliest visual depiction of the site " - "depictions"
 * Done
 * "The castle is attached to an active farm, which partly incorporates some of the fabric of the castle in the farm buildings. " - I wasn't sure about the "is attached", as it seems to be pre-1922?
 * It now read "The castle is now part of an active farm which dates from the 19th century. The farm buildings incorporate some of the fabric of the castle."
 * "An engraving by Samuel and Nathaniel Buck from 1727... The Buck brother’s engraving showed the castle in a state of ruin" - seems to be repeating the previous paragraph? (it also changes from being "one of the earliest" to "the earliest")
 * I've removed the first mention and it definitely doesn't need to be there twice. I've opted for "one of the earliest depictions" as the source I was working from wasn't crystal clear on the matter, and while it's likely the Buck brothers got there first there may be an earlier one out there which hasn't been mentioned.
 * " a visual record of the castle from which elevations and plans can be derived" -"could be derived"? (would be consistent with the rest of the sentence tense)
 * Yep, that makes sense, done.
 * "The survey indicated there was a garden to the north of the castle" - "there was formerly a garden"?
 * Done
 * "Gleaston Castle may have been abandoned around a century after its construction" - slightly unclear here; it was certainly abandoned - the ambiguity is over the exact date?
 * ah I see, changed to "Gleaston Castle was abandoned, perhaps around a century after its construction"
 * "from a beach two miles " - metric equivalent needed
 * oops, absolutely right and now added.
 * Could the article link the types of stone in the main text?
 * That would be handy, done.
 * "curtain wall " - worth linking
 * Agreed, done.
 * "and while its location is uncertain it may have been east of the castle" - I'd have gone for "and, while its location is uncertain, it may have been east of the castle"
 * Absolutely, I think those commas help make it clearer - done.
 * "Establishing how the castle related to the wider landscape has been identified as a future research priority." - I think this needs attribution in some way (either the person who has identified it, or the person/group it has been identified as a priority for)
 * Good point, it now reads "According to Greenlane Archaeology,". A tricky one, since I could put it in the voice of Morecambe Bay Partnership, or the Castle Studies Trust (or all three).

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.


 * Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2017 (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;


 * Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2017 (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;


 * Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:41, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

(c) it contains no original research.


 * None found so far. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;


 * Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).


 * Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:40, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.


 * Neutral. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

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


 * Stable. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2017 (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;


 * Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.


 * Yes. Hchc2009 (talk) 14:39, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to go through the article and all the useful feedback. I've gone through and made all the changes. Richard Nevell (talk) 19:44, 9 April 2017 (UTC)