Talk:Maiden Castle, Dorset/GA1

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


 * Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 09:16, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments
I've read through the article a couple of times: it seems OK, so I will mostly likely award it GA-status in due course, but a few questions/comments first:


 * Hill fort - "Since the 1960s, the dominant view has been that the rise of iron lead to social changes in Britain." Did iron rise, somebody lifted it, or goobeldy gook (not sure about the spelling - my spell checker does not like it)?
 * I've tweaked the sentence slightly, and I'll try to add something later on why iron caused social changes. (When I re-read that sentence, I was wondering what wonderful alloy iron-lead must be!) Nev1 (talk) 09:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I assume it is to do with iron weapons replacing bronze ones rather some special kind of "yeast" that causes the iron to rise like dough. You have addressed the question and I'm happy with the new text.Pyrotec (talk) 21:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Decline - I'm not clear what 'it' refers to, is 'it' Maiden Castle, or the Wealde?
 * Made clear that it's Maiden Castle. Nev1 (talk) 09:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Dates/ownership.


 * Your information is quite comprehensive covering the last 6,000 years, Neolithic to Pitt-Rivers and you say it is Scheduled and maintained by EH. However, there is no mention of when it was Scheduled or when it came into public ownership (I assume it is). In fact you don't really mention any 'recent' land ownership, other than the 1st century tribes and the anonymous 16/17th century barn builder.
 * I've added the scheduling date and will see if I can dig up any more info on later ownership, such as when EH got their hands on it. So far, most of the sources don't seem interested in that. Nev1 (talk) 09:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)


 * The WP:lead Looks quite reasonable as an introduction, but as a summary Pitt-Rivers, Sharples (and Thomas Hardy) don't get a mention. I can understand Hardy, but Pitt-Rivers (and Sharples)!
 * They've now all been given a mention in the lead. I was initially a little sceptical about Pitt-Rivers as he's not directly involved with Maiden Castle, but it does give good background. Nev1 (talk) 09:57, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Pyrotec (talk) 22:13, 8 June 2009 (UTC)

Review
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding GA-status at this point as I regard the article as being compliant with the requirements of GA. My question above on "ownership" has not been answered yet, but that does not preclude the awarding of GA-status. Finally, Congratulations on the quality of the article. Pyrotec (talk) 21:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)