Talk:Siege of Wardour Castle/GA1

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

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 15:49, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Happy to do the review for this article.

Lead section

 * fighting for the King - link king to Charles I of England;
 * Linked, and expanded to King Charles
 * Link mines;
 * Linked. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * the New Wardour Castle - consider removing the.
 * Changed as suggested. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Background

 * Link Wiltshire; the 5th Baron Lovel - as the link leads to all the barons, link to this instead, i.e. the 5th Baron Lovel.
 * Both done. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Who was John Aubrey?
 * Added. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Royal favour - the capital is not necessary here
 * Bad habit, fixed. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * "for his catholic zeal" and "stiff papist" - these look like quotations, and if so in each case the person who said it needs to be named, or the quote not used.
 * Attributed. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Should not parliament  be capitalised?
 * Another bad habit. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * multiple occasions,… - the number needs to be more specific, as 'multiple' is too vague.
 * Removed this completely. Harrias  talk 09:01, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * The castle was subsequently confiscated… - by whom? Please clarify.
 * Wardour Castle is located… - this sentence lacks a citation. Also, the following sentence does not appear to have the right citation, as Stanton does not refer to the 5th Baron Lovel. (However, Wright does refer to Lovell, perhaps this is the correct source.)
 * Sorted these references. Harrias  talk 09:01, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Please amend the text so that Matthew reads 'Sir Matthew', and the windows were not enlarged, but constructed (according to Wright).
 * Not for the only time in this article, my sources seem to have got mixed up here, I'll come back to these three. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Changed to Sir Matthew. There is ambiguity in the sources about whether windows were enlarged or constructed (I suspect that actually both were done, so I removed the reference to windows completely. Harrias  talk 09:01, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

First siege

 * ...out of Somerset… - link Somerset
 * Linked. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Lady Arundell's grandchildren were held until July 1644, when they were released… - Wright gives a different date.
 * I'll look into this, I'm sure it was July, but Wright does indeed give May as the date. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * I've changed this to May. Harrias  talk 08:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Second siege

 * ...the historian H. F. Chettle suggests… - replaced suggests with 'suggested'.
 * Changed. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ...which would place the second siege as starting in late May. - this is not stated by Ludlow and should be left to the reader to surmise (see WP:EDITORIALIZING).
 * Trimed. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Although there was no formal blockade of the castle, the country around it was controlled by the Royalists. - could a specific page in Ludlow be provided for this sentence?
 * It's a summary of the whole range of pages. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Ludlow recalls … - consider replacing with 'Ludlow recalled in his memoir…'
 * Tweaked. Harrias  talk 09:35, 4 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ..after three months they were prepared to blow the walls. - from how I read French the miners 'were eventually successful', i.e. it took them three months of attempts before they succeded. The text should I think be amended accordingly.
 * I rephrased this completely, how is it now? Harrias  talk 08:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * ...and a few days later the first mine was exploded. - I can't find this in Ludlow on p. 34.
 * In Ludlow, p. 34, he says "the two nights following we all continued upon the guard; and upon the thursday morning ... so that the mine springing". Harrias  talk 08:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Looking good
, it's looking largely sorted, thanks for the work you've done so far. Amitchell125 (talk) 18:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * - Hello, as the article has been on hold for over a week, can you complete the last remaining issues? Please let me know if there is a problem and you need more time, as it would seem a shame to fail the article now that you've done much of the work required. Amitchell125 (talk) 20:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, this completely slipped my mind. I'm unlikely to have much time until Monday now, but I'll see what I can do in the mean time. Harrias talk 19:20, 10 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Okay, had some unexpected quiet time this morning, so I've tried to work through the remaining points, let me know what you think now. Harrias  talk 09:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Passing
Great article - thanks for all your work, passing now. Amitchell125 (talk) 21:46, 11 April 2020 (UTC)