Talk:Thomas Neville (died 1460)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Hchc2009 (talk · contribs) 21:00, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Will read through, and review fully on Monday. Hchc2009 (talk) 21:00, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct;


 * First mention of Neville in the main article needs to be by full name, i.e. "Thomas Neville..."
 * "Neville's first mention in contemporary official records" - I was trying to work out what this excluded... "contemporary unofficial records"? Felt a bit odd.
 * I was surprised that the main article didn't start off by describing Neville's family - i.e. who his mother and father were, when he himself was born etc.
 * "alongwith" - missing space
 * "receining £20 per annum ro the diocese's revenues" - I'm guessing this was supposed to be "receiving £20 per annum from the diocese's revenues", but there are a few bits missing
 * "the king's" - where this refers to a specific need, it needs to be capitalised
 * "Percys" v. "Percies" - I don't know which is right, but you need to be consistent
 * "Thomas Neville was knighted by the king (Henry VI) alongside" - no need for the brackets here, you could just say "knighted by King Henry VI"
 * "the crown" - capitalisation, and worth linking
 * "but the new Cromwell connection" - you haven't mentioned who Cromwell is yet
 * "It was Thomas's wedding party" - the previous sentence gives two Thomas's, so you need to specify which one here

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

Factually accurate and verifiable:

(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;


 * Not a formal GA requirement, but surprised that the web links don't at least have author and publication information shown with them.
 * "The North-East of England during Wars of the Roses" - a missing "the", and "during" should be capitalised. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:32, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;

(c) it contains no original research.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.


 * Stable. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Illustrated, if possible, by images:

(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;


 * ;File:Arms of Neville, Earls of Westmorland.png needs a citation (i.e. how we know this was the arms used by the Earls). The depiction/reimagination looks very modern vice 15th century, btw, and this is probably worth pulling out in the caption. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.


 * The two photographs use the phrase "today"; probably worth being specific, given the MOS guidance (2006 for the first one, 2008 for the second). Hchc2009 (talk) 18:01, 23 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much for all this - I've done all of those things except the "web links don't at least have author and publication information shown with them" bit- not understanding :) also, I got rid of the Neville armorial, they do smack of modern reinterpretations, and I'm not sure it was neccessary- the article's not that big is it? Thanks again for your help. &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  18:42, 26 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Ref the web page references, where you've currently got:




 * you could have the much more informative




 * Hchc2009 (talk) 18:54, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Any better? Think I caught them all- it was a little fiddly! &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  16:56, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Sup, ; everything OK? &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  12:47, 31 July 2017 (UTC)


 * "Ralph, Lord Cromwell,[8] one of the richest non-nobles in the kingdom, " - the "non-noble" bit here is a bit odd, given that he is a "lord". Is it trying to say that he was a baron rather than (say) a duke or similar?
 * "and later that year he was deputized by his father and elder brother" - do you mean he was deputizing for his father and brother, or that they deputized for him?
 * The text quotes, e.g. historian x says "xxx, xxx, xxx", need double speechmarks, vice single (see MOS:DOUBLE).
 * I've made some minor edits - pls feel free to revert if I've misunderstood anything. Hchc2009 (talk) 07:30, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, think that's done. I ommited the whole 'non-noble' bit about ralph in the end as the statement is true enough on its own without much qualification; re-worked the sentence about his deputizing (and split it up- I felt it unwieldy); adhered to MOS:DOUBLE. No problem with your previous alterations. Cheers, &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  14:08, 15 August 2017 (UTC)
 * There are still some single speechmark problems - "known as the 'Kingmaker.'"; "...Griffiths has called 'an attempt to retain a loyalty [of the Nevilles] that had recently been strained.'"; "and 'the price the Nevilles could extract was a measure of Cromwell's desperation.'" etc. Hchc2009 (talk) 20:23, 16 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Believing that the 'Kingmaker' is as per MOS:SINGLE- a 'simple gloss' for n 'unfamiliar term' etc.- and not actually a quotation (quoting whom?). However the others are to be done. &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  13:45, 20 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks &mdash;  fortuna  velut luna  13:51, 20 August 2017 (UTC)