The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that one reason the medieval English writer Robert of Cricklade's biography of
Thomas Becket may have been lost is it was too favourable to the side of King
Henry II of England rather than Becket?
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! --
Khazar2 (
talk) 16:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)reply
Initial comments
This looks very solid on first pass: well written, well sourced, and ripe for promotion. It's brief, but checks of Google Books and Scholar show there's clearly not much out there on the subject. I made some tweaks to the prose for small issues (a minor redundancy, a sentence where a clause didn't match the subject, a sentence that had dashes-within-dashes, etc.) Please feel free to revert anywhere you disagree, and take a look that I didn't accidentally introduce any errors.
Prose is good. I can only access a few of these sources due to my university's apparently limited JSTOR subscription, but what I can see shows no evidence of copyright issues.
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline.
2b.
reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that one reason the medieval English writer Robert of Cricklade's biography of
Thomas Becket may have been lost is it was too favourable to the side of King
Henry II of England rather than Becket?
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following
WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
the Middle Ages on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
I'll be glad to take this review. Initial comments to follow in the next 1-3 days. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! --
Khazar2 (
talk) 16:50, 19 March 2013 (UTC)reply
Initial comments
This looks very solid on first pass: well written, well sourced, and ripe for promotion. It's brief, but checks of Google Books and Scholar show there's clearly not much out there on the subject. I made some tweaks to the prose for small issues (a minor redundancy, a sentence where a clause didn't match the subject, a sentence that had dashes-within-dashes, etc.) Please feel free to revert anywhere you disagree, and take a look that I didn't accidentally introduce any errors.
Prose is good. I can only access a few of these sources due to my university's apparently limited JSTOR subscription, but what I can see shows no evidence of copyright issues.
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline.
2b.
reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).