Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Peveril Castle/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 00:44, 4 January 2011.

Peveril Castle

 * Nominator(s): Nev1 (talk) 18:18, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Peveril Castle isn't particularly well known, but standing over the Hope Valley it's an impressive site. It's just a little castle, and most of the history revolves around ownership, passing in and out of royal control. This article covers the history of Peveril, from its construction in the wake of the Norman Conquest to its decline from the 14th century onwards, to it featuring in Sir Walter Scott's novel Peveril of the Peak. There's not an awful lot on the architecture because not a lot remains of the castle; the keep is the best surviving part and even that is quite damaged. Thanks in advance to anyone who takes the trouble to review the article. Nev1 (talk) 18:18, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Support Cheers! Hchc2009 (talk) 15:56, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Commenting on categories 1b, 1c, 1d.
 * It covers the topic well. I'd be quite keen for it to make explicit reference between the castle and the Forest of High Peak though; the article mentions the administrative role of the castle and the local lead mining, but Creighton's work on the castle landscapes brings out a bit more of the explicit detail in a useful way (Peveril has some similarities to St Briavels Castle in this respect).
 * Really minor point: " Its design was simple, 7 m (23 ft) with a gatepassage 2.5 m (8 ft 2 in) wide." Unclear if the 7m was tall or wide.


 * I've not gone into much detail, but I've added a note about the link between the forest and the castle. Do you think more is required? I've also tweaked the bit about the gatehouse. Nev1 (talk) 21:21, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. It gives the nod towards the whole regional landscapes school of analysis, and draws out the link. Cheers! Hchc2009 (talk) 07:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Sources comments:
 * Ref 20a: Source says: "The castle forms the backdrop to Sir Walter Scott's novel 'Peveril of the Peak'." Your text: "Sir Walter Scott's 1823 novel Peveril of the Peak sparked renewed interest in Peveril Castle." Not quite the same thing.
 * Ref 20b: I can't find, in this source, where the castle'd Grade I listing is confirmed.
 * Ref 21: The source described what a scheduled monument is, but does not confirm your statement that Peveril Castle is one.
 * Ref 22: The source is a general information site that has no specific mention of Peveril Castle
 * Ref 23: The source refers to Bodiam Castle; what is its relevance to this article?

It is a little disconcerting to find problems with each of the article's online sources. I am not able to extend verification to the book sources as I don't have these. The sources all look reliable, and the citations are all properly formatted. Brianboulton (talk) 22:01, 22 December 2010 (UTC)


 * I used the Bodiam Castle article as a model for describing the site as a Scheduled Monument and a listed building and went a bit overboard so that's why source 23 didn't make any sense. What is now source 23 is used to explain the significance of Grade I listed buildings, so where it now says "It is also a Grade I listed building,[22] and recognised as an internationally important structure.[23]" source 22 confirms the castle is listed, source 23 demonstrates that Grade I listed buildings, and therefore including Peveril Castle, are considered of international importance. I think when I added the pastscape source years ago it mentioned the castle's listed status and has since changed, but a new source stating the same has now been found . Nev1 (talk) 22:20, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The bit about Scott's book is now closer to the source. Nev1 (talk) 22:33, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Dab/EL check - no dabs or dead external links. 1 external redirect, which I've fixed. -- Pres N  05:59, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

Support with a few tweaks: A good piece of work. I'm no expert on castles, but it seems as comprehensive as possible. It is easy to understand and well written. I have been unable to check most of the sources. A few comments:
 * "It was first recorded in the Domesday Survey of 1086, and was built sometime between then and the Norman Conquest in 1066." The order seems a little odd as this effectively says "between 1086 and 1066". Would it be better to have "It was built sometime between the Norman Conquest in 1066 and its first recorded mention in 1086, in the Domesday Survey."
 * Link "lordship"?
 * "...to a force led by 20 knights shared with the castles of Bolsover and Nottingham": A little vague: were there three knights prior to this (this is covered in the main text), or just three men? And how many others were there apart from the knights, as I'd imagine it was not easy to share 20 knights like this.
 * "There is a story that Peveril was William's illegitimate son but is unsubstantiated.": Something missing here. "...it is unsubstantiated"?
 * "Water storage would have been a concern form the garrison of the castle,": Is from the correct word, or should it be for?
 * "It has not been excavated and so the exact form the enclosure took, and whether it was an elaborate outer bailey for defence or was used for storage or stabling is uncertain." A little clumsy, too many "and"s and "or"s to flow.
 * "Finally, the keep occupies the southern corner of Peveril Castle." Is finally necessary?
 * Is it worth adding a little about how the castle featured in Scott's novel?
 * Is there anything that could be said about the architectural style of the castle? And maybe a few more comparisons to contemporary castles? However, I understand that this may be impossible. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:33, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Good point about the foundation date, so I've swapped the sentence round.
 * The closest I could get to a link for lordship was manorialism.
 * I've clarified in the lead who the three men were, ie: two watchmen and a porter. The thing about 20 knights is tricky. Garrisons were often provided by castle-guards, relying on feudal ties. While the king had 20 knights in the area in his service and had to pay them, the knights would have had their own soldiers and retinue, swelling the fighting force. However, these records were not of royal concern and unfortunately do not survive. It's an annoying situation.
 * Sorry about the missing word, I thought it worked without "it". Now sorted. Nev1 (talk) 22:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It was meant to be for rather than form.
 * I've had a go at splitting the sentence. What do you think?
 * "Finally" was there in an attempt to round things off. I think readers are more interested in the history of castles rather than the layout and architecture, especially as not much survives of Peveril. As a result, the usual approach I take is to put the history section first and architecture last (when the layout or architecture is essential to the understanding of a site's history, as at the Tower of London, then it comes first). The problem is the natural point at which to wrap up the article is the end of this history section and the architecture just seems to leave things hanging slightly. I thought "finally" might help ease the end of the article, but it's not major.
 * The sources were milked as much as possible as far as Scott's novel is concerned, and to be honest I had to tone things down a little. I've been able to add a little more, but it seems that the castle wasn't really significant. I was surprised that the English Heritage guidebook didn't mention Scott's novel.
 * Again the problem with Peveril's architecture is that so little survives. There's only the keep, which is unusually small, and the curtain walls. The rest of the buildings survive as foundations. Nev1 (talk) 22:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * No problem on architecture, I thought there would be little to say (I've seen the castle!).
 * If you wish to keep the "finally", that's fine. It wasn't a big issue.
 * Everything else fine. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:21, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Support This is a well written, nicely illustrated and comprehensive article. My only suggestion is that the castle's coordinates should be added using template:coord so it can be easily located using Google maps and equivalent (the use of a 'grid reference' alone will be unfamiliar to many readers). Nick-D (talk) 22:52, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sceptical if most readers actually realise you can access Google maps and so on by clicking on the co-ordinates, but they are now included at the top of the article. Nev1 (talk) 23:16, 26 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Image review? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:26, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Ok, there's an issue with File:007-Peak-Castle,Derbyshire-q75-404x500.jpg. It's listed as PD in the US, but there's no evidence it is PD in the UK, the source country, which it would need to be to be hosted on Commons. Also, ideally, the provenance of the map belongs in the caption on the article. File:Model reconstruction of Peveril Castle.jpg also needs clarification of the copyright of the pictured reconstruction; it's probably copyrighted, but if on display in a museum, it could be tagged with FoP-UK. The other images are fine. J Milburn (talk) 23:55, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The model is on display in a museum, so I've tagged it as freedom of panorama. The plan was published in 1909 but the author, John Alfred Gotch, died in 1942 so I don't think his work is free in the UK as the UK has a copyright term of life of the author plus 70 years. Is that correct? On that assumption, I've removed the image. Nev1 (talk) 00:05, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Please ping my talk when this is settled. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:21, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * That works, but an easier solution would be to upload it locally- here, the image needs only to be free in the US, so its copyright status in the UK is not important. You could upload it here with the same information as on Commons and tag it with PD-US-1923-abroad; either way, I'm gonna nominate it for deletion at Commons. J Milburn (talk) 00:28, 27 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Image restored and moved, image page updated, image readded to the article, caption expanded to include the date of the map. I'm now happy with the copyright status of the images in the article. J Milburn (talk) 00:37, 27 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.