Talk:Richard Coeur de Lion (statue)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 17:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments for me in the meantime. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 17:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


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

, I've completed my review and re-review and find that your article meets GA criteria, but I do have a few comments that should be addressed prior to its passage. Thanks again! -- Caponer (talk) 17:34, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Lede
 * Per Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article adequately defines the statue, establishes the necessary context for the statue, and explains why the statue is notable.
 * The template is beautifully formatted, its contents are cited within the prose and by the references below, and its image is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0 and is therefore eligible for inclusion in this article.
 * Did the German bomb land near the statue during the London Blitz? If so, that should be stated in the lede as it was a notable event.
 * It did; I've added that info. Prioryman (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The lede is well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Description
 * I recommend wiki-linking first mentions of Carlo Marochetti, Old Palace Yard, Palace of Westminster, and Richard I in the main prose of the article. Would it be superfluous to mention that the statue is located in the City of Westminster in London?
 * As far as I know the usual style is not to repeat links that have appeared in the lead; does the manual of style say something different somewhere? Prioryman (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * This section is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

History Creation and display at the Great Exhibition
 * The image of the original clay statue on display in Hyde Park during The Great Exhibition (1851) is released into the public domain and is therefore eligible for use here.
 * I recommend linking royalist French government to July Monarchy.
 * Good idea, done. Prioryman (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * This subsection is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this subsection.

Conversion to bronze and dispute over location
 * The close-up view of the statue is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0 so it is free to use here.
 * "proved a bone of contention" may be too colloquial; would it read better if it were rewritten "proved a contentious issue"
 * OK, I've reworded this. Prioryman (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * The image of the sculpture in Old Palace Yard is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0 and is therefore free to use here.
 * Perhaps add a comma after In 1856 of "In 1856 Marochetti..."
 * Done. Prioryman (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * I suggest de-linking subsequent mentions of Westminster Abbey as it is linked above in the prose.
 * Done. Prioryman (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * This subsection is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this subsection.

Installation and subsequent history
 * The side view of the statue in 2014 is licensed CC BY-SA 4.0, therefore it is acceptable for use in this article.
 * The detail of the bas-relief panel is also licensed CC BY-SA 4.0 and is good to go for use here.
 * It should be specified that the bombs that damaged the statue were dropped during the London Blitz.
 * Done. - thanks for taking this on. Prioryman (talk) 21:06, 26 February 2015 (UTC)


 * This subsection is otherwise well-written, consists of content that is adequately sourced and verifiable, and I have no other comments or questions for this subsection.
 * Prioryman, congratulations on another job well done. I've completed my review of this article and thank you for all your hard work on it. I hereby pass it to Good Article status! -- Caponer (talk) 22:43, 26 February 2015 (UTC)