Talk:Norway Debate/GA1

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

Reviewer: Femkemilene (talk · contribs) 15:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)

First glance of this article is quite good. Only concern is that the language, while beautiful, is sometimes a tad bit too difficult. Femke Nijsse (talk) 15:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello, Femke. I've replaced the image of Chamberlain with one that seems to be in the public domain, though it's not as good as the portrait. No Great Shaker (talk) 15:46, 6 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Just seen that a lot of work has been done on this article and on the May 1940 Crisis, both of which were on my extensive "get round to working on one of these years" list!


 * Re the comment above, that a photo of the debate is "not possible", there actually is one, taken by an MP who had smuggled in a tiny camera disguised as a lighter or something. He had to put it away when he noticed a Sergeant at Arms eyeing him suspiciously. It's blurry but you can make out NC standing to speak and WSC sitting on the front bench (and I think that's John Simon sat next to Churchill). It has appeared in a number of books since it came to light in (I think) the early Nineties. I'm pretty sure it's discussed in the Shakespeare book which came out a couple of years ago.


 * Here is a link https://winstonchurchill.hillsdale.edu/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/Chamberlain7May40Crop-1-840x430.jpg


 * Not sure whether it's copyright or not - I don't get involved in pictures, as it were.Paulturtle (talk) 19:16, 9 September 2019 (UTC)

Final round of comments (sorry to have put the article on hold before noticing these)

 * which accurately reflected the mood of the House bit of OR?
 * Reworded to "In answer, Lloyd George said".


 * raucous laughter raucous would probably be word to watch.
 * Word is used by the source but removed anyway as unnecessary.


 * Could you paraphrase some of the quotes in Churchill winds up for the Government to improve readability. One sentence quotes + one-sentence prose makes it difficult to read.
 * Okay. Have edited these.


 * paraphrasing the quotes in Attlee's response to Chamberlain would be beneficial as well.
 * As above, but not "missed the bus" as that is significant.


 * Again, I am a bit concerned by the use of quotes whose significance is not made clear in secondary sources. It's typically advisable to not base large portions of your text on primary sources: WP:PRIMARY.
 * In an article like this, which is an account of a debate, the opinions and statements of the participants as quoted directly by Hansard are of fundamental importance to an understanding of what the debate achieved. The secondary sources do support the significance of the speeches quoted but if you would like to see any additional citations, please add a "citation needed" flag at the appropriate place. Thanks.


 * leapt to his feet words to watch.
 * Replaced with "stood".

Femke Nijsse (talk) 13:52, 8 September 2019 (UTC)


 * I think one should perhaps be a little wary of over-zealous trimming - if the source account says that there was "raucous laughter" (assuming it's deriving from a primary account and isn't just the writer getting a bit carried away and writing sloppily) then that's not quite the same thing as "friendly laughter" or "hearty laughter", although it might be the same thing as "derisive laughter" or "scornful laughter".Paulturtle (talk) 22:30, 9 September 2019 (UTC)