Deddington Castle 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: December 30, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deddington Castle 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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've gone through and expanded the article a bit. The photographs don't quite bring out the scale and shape of the earthworks; when the UK summer returns, I'll try to get across there and get some clearer ones, but if anyone lives near Deddington, and fancies taking a camera out with them in the meantime, I'd be very grateful! Hchc2009 ( talk) 08:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ian Rose ( talk · contribs) 08:59, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
How can I resist another castle (this time one I've never heard of)...? Will aim to complete sometime between Xmas and New Year. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 08:59, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Toolbox check -- No dab or EL issues.
Prose -- copyedited for verbiage, repetition, consistent tense, etc, so of course let me know if I've broken anything; outstanding points:
Structure/comprehensiveness -- seem quite okay to an admitted non-expert.
Referencing -- everything is sourced to what look like reliable references; only formatting issue is some Harv errors (should install Ucucha's script).
Supporting materials -- infobox and images licensing look fine.
Summary -- nothing really holding this back from GA, well done as usual. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to revamp the lead par, for quite important reasons. It's not true to say that Deddington Castle WAS a castle; officially, according to English Heritage, it still is. On the other hand, it quite clearly isn't. Many visitors turn up (sometimes having followed the signs, sometimes having made a special trip) and are disappointed or even angry to find that the site doesn't contain what they consider a castle. English Heritage won't change the name or the signs.
The article as it stands begins in the past tense, and then plunges straight into the history, only describing the site's present condition much later, and with a brief and not very helpful reference in the infobox. I propose to insert a new lead, describing the site as it is, before the historical background is explained. Hengistmate ( talk) 12:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
Deddington Castle 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: December 30, 2013. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Deddington Castle 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: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I've gone through and expanded the article a bit. The photographs don't quite bring out the scale and shape of the earthworks; when the UK summer returns, I'll try to get across there and get some clearer ones, but if anyone lives near Deddington, and fancies taking a camera out with them in the meantime, I'd be very grateful! Hchc2009 ( talk) 08:25, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Ian Rose ( talk · contribs) 08:59, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
How can I resist another castle (this time one I've never heard of)...? Will aim to complete sometime between Xmas and New Year. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 08:59, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Toolbox check -- No dab or EL issues.
Prose -- copyedited for verbiage, repetition, consistent tense, etc, so of course let me know if I've broken anything; outstanding points:
Structure/comprehensiveness -- seem quite okay to an admitted non-expert.
Referencing -- everything is sourced to what look like reliable references; only formatting issue is some Harv errors (should install Ucucha's script).
Supporting materials -- infobox and images licensing look fine.
Summary -- nothing really holding this back from GA, well done as usual. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:04, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm going to revamp the lead par, for quite important reasons. It's not true to say that Deddington Castle WAS a castle; officially, according to English Heritage, it still is. On the other hand, it quite clearly isn't. Many visitors turn up (sometimes having followed the signs, sometimes having made a special trip) and are disappointed or even angry to find that the site doesn't contain what they consider a castle. English Heritage won't change the name or the signs.
The article as it stands begins in the past tense, and then plunges straight into the history, only describing the site's present condition much later, and with a brief and not very helpful reference in the infobox. I propose to insert a new lead, describing the site as it is, before the historical background is explained. Hengistmate ( talk) 12:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)