Hi @
FormalDude: Thanks for picking up the review. I look forward to working with you. I see that you have already made a couple of changes to the article:
You have removed the sentence about the death of
Emily Davison from the lead.
Davison's death following the 1913 Derby is one of the most important events in the history of
Women's suffrage in the UK. Almost every British citizen is aware of the event and it is taught in every school. It is critical to the re-shaping of UK parliamentary democracy that takes place following the end of the First World War. Given the fundamental importance of the event in our nation's history, it must be mentioned in the lead.
You have changed "is" to "was" and "probably" to "likely" in the sentence "The town is first recorded as Ebesham in the 10th century and its name probably derives from that of a
Saxon landowner."
The original version is correct in British English. (The present tense is used, because the record still exists and "probably" is preferred over "likely".)
Great, thanks for the clarification
Mertbiol. My review of the lead section makes me believe this article should be fast tracked to GA. I will get started on my review of the body sections. ––
FormalDude talk22:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Hi @
FormalDude: Oxford commas are only used in British English if a list is unclear without them. 99% of the time they are not necessary and are therefore not used. Best wishes
Mertbiol (
talk)
23:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Mertbiol: Oxford commas are commonly used in British English. Its name comes from the Oxford University Press (OUP), where for over a century it has been standard in the
Oxford Style Manual. See
MOS:OXFORD which states that it is common to use them when ambiguity is caused without one. There are several instances where ambiguity is caused, so the article should make consistent use of the oxford comma. ––
FormalDude talk23:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Hi @
FormalDude: Yes that's right. Oxford Commas are only used when ambiguity is caused without one. None of the instances that you have identified so far require an Oxford Comma. Best wishes
Mertbiol (
talk)
23:48, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
But they do cause ambiguity. It can be mistaken that the last two items in the lists are one item when there is no oxford comma to separate them individually. ––
FormalDude talk23:54, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Final review
GA review (see
here for what the criteria are, and
here for what they are not)
Hi @
FormalDude: Thanks for picking up the review. I look forward to working with you. I see that you have already made a couple of changes to the article:
You have removed the sentence about the death of
Emily Davison from the lead.
Davison's death following the 1913 Derby is one of the most important events in the history of
Women's suffrage in the UK. Almost every British citizen is aware of the event and it is taught in every school. It is critical to the re-shaping of UK parliamentary democracy that takes place following the end of the First World War. Given the fundamental importance of the event in our nation's history, it must be mentioned in the lead.
You have changed "is" to "was" and "probably" to "likely" in the sentence "The town is first recorded as Ebesham in the 10th century and its name probably derives from that of a
Saxon landowner."
The original version is correct in British English. (The present tense is used, because the record still exists and "probably" is preferred over "likely".)
Great, thanks for the clarification
Mertbiol. My review of the lead section makes me believe this article should be fast tracked to GA. I will get started on my review of the body sections. ––
FormalDude talk22:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Hi @
FormalDude: Oxford commas are only used in British English if a list is unclear without them. 99% of the time they are not necessary and are therefore not used. Best wishes
Mertbiol (
talk)
23:18, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Mertbiol: Oxford commas are commonly used in British English. Its name comes from the Oxford University Press (OUP), where for over a century it has been standard in the
Oxford Style Manual. See
MOS:OXFORD which states that it is common to use them when ambiguity is caused without one. There are several instances where ambiguity is caused, so the article should make consistent use of the oxford comma. ––
FormalDude talk23:43, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Hi @
FormalDude: Yes that's right. Oxford Commas are only used when ambiguity is caused without one. None of the instances that you have identified so far require an Oxford Comma. Best wishes
Mertbiol (
talk)
23:48, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
But they do cause ambiguity. It can be mistaken that the last two items in the lists are one item when there is no oxford comma to separate them individually. ––
FormalDude talk23:54, 14 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Final review
GA review (see
here for what the criteria are, and
here for what they are not)