English invasion of Scotland (1400) has been listed as one of the
Warfare good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 14, 2017. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
English invasion of Scotland (1400) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from English invasion of Scotland (1400) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 3 December 2016 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
I am giving this an article a Review for possible Good Article status. Reviewer: Shearonink ( talk · contribs) 04:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Passes the threshold "immediate failure" criteria: No cleanup banners, no obvious copyright infringements, etc Shearonink ( talk) 04:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I am listing these issues separately below, for visual clarity - not because they are awful or more important, but because it will be easier to keep track of as they get attended-to. Shearonink ( talk) 18:18, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Not only was no pitched battle was ever attempted, -> The grammar of this sentence needs to be fixed (two was'es...)
to thesitting parliament in November 1399. -> spacing but one of Scotland's own greatest military commanders ->This is a little hard to understand, the wording needs to be adjusted.
Likewise, the Scotichronicon suggesting that 'nothing worthy of remembrance was done' by their enemies. -> is this verb tense what you wanted it to be? Seems like it should be "suggested" instead of "suggesting".
@
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Did another read-through and came upon a phrase/word-choice that I think needs to be adjusted... "came directly from the royal [[Household]]" which renders as "came directly from the royal
Household".
There are a couple of possible issues here:
I think it should probably not link to the generic household (which is to the definition of the term that applies to anyone and everyone) but instead link to the more specific understanding of the unit of the English government of that era [[Royal Households of the United Kingdom#Historical overview|Royal Household]] which will then be rendered as Royal Household but am willing to discuss etc. It does seem to me that, since the term is referring to a unit of government with a specific form and function - like a Member of Parliament or White House Staff and so on - that both words should be capitalized, but let's work that through. Shearonink ( talk) 16:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Done O Fortuna! ...Imperatrix mundi. 12:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Going forward (and if the writer-editor is considering FA) I think some of the wording and phrasing in the article could perhaps be reworked to read more smoothly. For instance:
These are simply issues to keep in mind for future editing & possible improvements. Shearonink ( talk) 20:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 10:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
English invasion of Scotland (1400) → 1400 English invasion of Scotland – Per WP:NCWWW. Also, it's a more natural disambiguation than parenthetical disambiguation. Stevie fae Scotland ( talk) 10:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
someone' is; I assume you refer to who
wrote this particular piece of junk? Cheers! ——Serial 14:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
English invasion of Scotland (1400) has been listed as one of the
Warfare good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 14, 2017. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
English invasion of Scotland (1400) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
A fact from English invasion of Scotland (1400) appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 3 December 2016 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. |
Reporting errors |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
I am giving this an article a Review for possible Good Article status. Reviewer: Shearonink ( talk · contribs) 04:01, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Passes the threshold "immediate failure" criteria: No cleanup banners, no obvious copyright infringements, etc Shearonink ( talk) 04:12, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
I am listing these issues separately below, for visual clarity - not because they are awful or more important, but because it will be easier to keep track of as they get attended-to. Shearonink ( talk) 18:18, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
Not only was no pitched battle was ever attempted, -> The grammar of this sentence needs to be fixed (two was'es...)
to thesitting parliament in November 1399. -> spacing but one of Scotland's own greatest military commanders ->This is a little hard to understand, the wording needs to be adjusted.
Likewise, the Scotichronicon suggesting that 'nothing worthy of remembrance was done' by their enemies. -> is this verb tense what you wanted it to be? Seems like it should be "suggested" instead of "suggesting".
@
Fortuna Imperatrix Mundi: Did another read-through and came upon a phrase/word-choice that I think needs to be adjusted... "came directly from the royal [[Household]]" which renders as "came directly from the royal
Household".
There are a couple of possible issues here:
I think it should probably not link to the generic household (which is to the definition of the term that applies to anyone and everyone) but instead link to the more specific understanding of the unit of the English government of that era [[Royal Households of the United Kingdom#Historical overview|Royal Household]] which will then be rendered as Royal Household but am willing to discuss etc. It does seem to me that, since the term is referring to a unit of government with a specific form and function - like a Member of Parliament or White House Staff and so on - that both words should be capitalized, but let's work that through. Shearonink ( talk) 16:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
Done O Fortuna! ...Imperatrix mundi. 12:48, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
Going forward (and if the writer-editor is considering FA) I think some of the wording and phrasing in the article could perhaps be reworked to read more smoothly. For instance:
These are simply issues to keep in mind for future editing & possible improvements. Shearonink ( talk) 20:10, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: not moved to the proposed title at this time, per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 10:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
English invasion of Scotland (1400) → 1400 English invasion of Scotland – Per WP:NCWWW. Also, it's a more natural disambiguation than parenthetical disambiguation. Stevie fae Scotland ( talk) 10:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)
someone' is; I assume you refer to who
wrote this particular piece of junk? Cheers! ——Serial 14:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)