Talk:Scottish society in the early modern era/GA1

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

Reviewer: Chiswick Chap (talk · contribs) 13:52, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Thanks. I think the clarification issues can be dealt with fairly easily. Some of the expansion issues might take a bit more research. I will probably look at those over the week and hope to sort them out at the weekend.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:46, 18 March 2013 (UTC)


 * OK. Please see note on repeated references, it would be a lot better to tidy it up. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:03, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * At the risk of upsetting someone in the middle of a review, Whoa!. Please don't change the referencing system. Whether that is better is a matter of opinion and should perhaps be a suggestion (is not a GA criteria afterall).--  SabreBD  (talk) 09:46, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * No, it's purely a suggestion. Feel free to do as you like with the references. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:49, 20 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have taken the step of reverting the restoring the footnotes. I know it seems tidier, but Wikipedia can afford the room and in my experience short titles create a number of problems in an electronic formats, including the issues caused when subsequent edits are made and they get disordered and the issues created when part of an article is taken off to form a summary or contribute to another article and the references have to be reconstructed. However, a bibliography is always a good idea, so we can complete that.
 * Va bene cosi.
 * I am also unsure what is being looked for in the [which?] in the Poverty and Vagrancy sub-section. It is one of the three acts mentioned in the previous section. What is being requested here - it is a link or a full title?--  SabreBD  (talk) 09:09, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Suggest you name the specific one of the three acts (or link), I just felt unsure what exactly was being denoted.

We're nearly there. Could you please extend the lead slightly to reflect the additions made, and indicate under "3. Broad" above your response to the suggestions there.


 * I am working on the two outstanding issues in 3a and then will take a look at the lead. I hope to get this done today.--  SabreBD  (talk) 12:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think I have implemented all of the suggestions I can. I have changed the plan of Edinburgh and made some adjustments that I hope will make the expansion point clearer and, I think, dealt with the issue of patterns of settlement. I have expanded the lead to incorporate the new material. The only thing I have not done is the suggested table of grain imports. I only have access to two sets of figures, so I am not sure this will help make the demography point. However, if I can find some better information I may use this idea in a future break-out from the Demography of Scotland article, so the observation may not be wasted. If you could take a look and see if I have missed anything that would be great.--  SabreBD  (talk) 13:39, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I think the effort at expansion and clarification has improved and balanced the article. Of course more is always possible but I'm satisfied we've crossed the GA threshold convincingly. Keep it up! Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:11, 24 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Many thanks for a conscientious and helpful review that has led to considerable improvements in the article. As you say, there can always be more, but it is good to have reached this landmark. Much appreciated.--  SabreBD  (talk) 18:27, 24 March 2013 (UTC)