Talk:Raglan Castle/GA1

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

Reviewer: Ben   Mac  Dui  15:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Commencing review. Ben  Mac  Dui  15:05, 5 June 2011 (UTC) Initial comments below:

Lead - "the equal of any other other in the kingdom". Which kingdom?


 * Changed. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Infobox - I think the rock names should be in title case e.g Old Red Sandstone - also lower down.


 * Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Notes. 1 and 4 are substantially duplicates. If you need two my suggestion would be to have the marks vs £ calculation in one and the reference to the average baron in 1436 in another.

15th - 16th centuries:
 * - House of York can be linked
 * Done.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * "William Herbert was executed in 1469" - I was just getting to know the fellow! Why?
 * Alas, he was a Yorkist at a moment when the Lancastrians were winning... I've added a bit! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Last two sentences should be in the next section
 * Moved.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Image caption - "Gatehouse, built by William Herbert, with machicolations probably of French influence". William H should be linked. Phraseology is poor. Needs a cite.
 * Done.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

17th century
 * "Charles himself visited the castle twice," - King or Prince?
 * Changed.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * I don't think cannon names should be italicised.
 * I think the MOS implies that they should be: it recommends that italics be used for the names of works of art and artifice, along with named vehicles - I think therefore that a named cannon would also fit under this guidance.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)


 * why "Marquesse" with an "e"
 * A good question. I've changed it! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Architecture
 * "but having been hopefully impressed by the outside of the Great Tower as they arrived". This is slightly clumsy and POV in a small way. "but perhaps having been impressed by the outside of the Great Tower as they arrived"?
 * Changed. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Gatehouse
 * Some of the Closet Tower was altered in later years..". This is a little picky but I think you mean "The Closet Tower was partly altered in later years.."
 * Changed.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Pitched Stone Court - needs a note or more informative short description. The reference to cobbling doesn't explain anything to me. A court made of pitched stones, a stone court that is pitched or perhaps has pitch added? What is the connection to cobbles? This may be obvious to military historians...
 * Try my revised version.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Notes
 * Kenyon (1987), p. 164, cited Johnson, p.84. There are a couple of these that contrast with those that say "citing". Unless there is a difference, pls be consistent. Ben   Mac  Dui  16:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Changed.Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Changes made as per above, but I'm not sure about the italics/cannon name bit. See what you think! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Remaining points:
 * Pls comment on or attend to Notes 1 and 4 (above).
 * I've tweaked the text, but I'm stumped as to how to get a cited footnote given a name to avoid the duplication (I know how to do it for the standard ref name, but not in this wikiformat).Hchc2009 (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * There is guidance at WP:REFNOTE but the format does not seem to allow for a citation embedded within the note itself. There are various options:
 * Bodge by referring to the "above note", which works and I have done, but probably wouldn't pass an FA review. On reflection the note as it stands does not need a ref and I will remove. Also note that this was a duplicate reference - which I fixed. I checked for others but could not see any. A bot will will pick any up in due course.
 * Use the REFNOTE guidance and move the actual citation outside of the note. Works, but slightly clumsy perhaps.
 * Move the citation into the note i.e. include "Pounds, p.148." inside the note. Also a possible FA grumble.
 * Still at least one "citing". (I have a mild preference for "citing" rather than "cited" but no matter as I should have stated that earlier).
 * Changed it.Hchc2009 (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't believe a cannon is a vehicle as described in WP:MOSTITLE. Ben   Mac  Dui  08:04, 7 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think that it's a vehicle either - rather, I think that the intention of the MOS, given that it talks about works of artifice, is that it should be in italics, but I'll change it! Hchc2009 (talk) 07:51, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

OK & thanks. Ben  Mac  Dui  15:24, 11 June 2011 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

Ben  Mac  Dui  15:26, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * Very well written
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * Pass
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * Pass
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Pass
 * 1) It is stable.
 * 'Pass
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * Excellent images
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * Excellent images
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass