Talk:Storming of Shelford House/GA1

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 09:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I will take this one, comments to follow over next few days. Zawed (talk) 09:11, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I made a few tweaks for minor clarity issues as I went through this, please check you are OK with my changes.

Lead
 * link Colonel-General


 * The Royalist garrison, owned by Philip Stanhope, 1st Earl of Chesterfield...: the wording here suggests that he owned the garrison, i.e. the military force, rather than the estate (which I assume is what you meant).


 * were killed in the resulting sack, commanded by: Suggest "were killed in the resulting sack by the Parliamentarian attacking party, commanded by...". Also suggest linking sack (Looting)
 * ✅ with a minor tweak to phrasing


 * With the Royalist garrison having lost 80 per cent of its men, mostly the Catholics, killed,: the placement of ",killed" seems really clumsy, consider rephrasing
 * ✅ - moved the word, does that work?

Background
 * Shelford was situated in Nottinghamshire, nine miles east...: suggest using the conversion template to show distances in km as well.


 * As part of these plans Henderson...: no explicit context for "plans". Suggest "As part of his plans for fortifications Henderson..."


 * Duke of Gloucester's Regiment of cavalry: is there a unit that could be linked here, or maybe the Duke himself?


 * Sir Philip Stanhope. Stanhope...: suggest rephrasing to avoid the back-to-back usage of Stanhope.


 * was aware of Shelford's part played in Royalist attacks on his town: suggest "was aware of the role Shelford played as a staging post for Royalist attacks on his town"


 * link Colonel-General, Major, also Queen's Regiment of Horse (if a suitable link can be found)

Siege
 * Greatly outnumbered by the Royalist forces: can the number of Royalists be quantified? If so, maybe add to the previous paragraph referring to the remnants of King Charles's forces.
 * ✅ - have adjusted the wording too

Attack
 * Fearing that delaying any more at Shelford: suggest "Fearing any further delay at Shelford"


 * with Hutchinson given direct command of it.: suggest "with Hutchinson given direct command of the attacking party."


 * Colonel Webb's force of Londoners...: this is first mention of Webb. Was he in command of the 1,000 cavalry from London (mentioned in first sentence of Siege section) - maybe mention him there, then drop the "Colonel" here.
 * I expect Webb was the commander of the London brigade, but no source explicitly says so. I can't provide any background for him apart from his position in the attack, so I've removed mention of him.


 * Hutchinson led...: this starts off a real long sentence, suggest breaking it up.
 * ✅ - also rephrased content a little

Significance
 * Royalists or Parliamentarians during the Civil War to: Civil War is used earlier in the sentence, suggest replacing the quoted instance with "conflict"

Other stuff
 * Image tags check out OK
 * Dupe links: only one (sic) and in the context I think it is fine.

That's it for me, sorry for the delay in getting to this. Zawed (talk) 09:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for picking this up and apologies that I too was delayed! I have responded to all your comments above. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:57, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
 * This looks good for GA as I believe the article meets the necessary criteria in coverage, sourcing, structure, readability and supporting materials. Cheers, Zawed (talk) 11:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)