The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:01, 25 May 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Rudd Concession ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
This article covers the Rudd Concession, one of the most important events in the history of the country today called Zimbabwe. It was a grant of mining rights by the Matabele king Lobengula that, through a series of political machinations and deceptions, became the basis for the foundation of the British South Africa Company and, ultimately, for the creation of that corner of Africa called Rhodesia.
I wrote this article from scratch over the past couple months and today (16 April) it appeared on DYK and gained GA status, the latter following a very helpful review from Khazar2 ( talk · contribs), who amongst other things reviewed the prose, length and image licensing. After passing the article for GA he recommended I bring it here. I feel the article is at least close to FA status, and so have nominated it for consideration.
Note that the article is written in South African English, which is basically British English with a few extra words thrown in. Thanks, and I look forward to all your comments. — Cliftonian (talk) 20:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC) reply
I hope to return in due course. Brianboulton ( talk) 11:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC) reply
SupportLeaning to support: This is an excellent article, very thorough and comprehensive and generally well written. I made a few small edits during my readthrough, mainly punctuation fixes and minor rephrasing. I have a few suggestions for further consideration:
When these are addressed, and subject to no problems arising from the sources review, I shall be happy to upgrade to full support. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Image review
Support on prose and comprehensiveness. Top stuff and all the more impressive that you wrote this from scratch. Just one minor query -- under Agreement, there's a quote which states "...the said monthly payment of one hundred pounds..."; I take it the bit in bold is a spelling mistake? Lemonade51 ( talk) 22:37, 11 May 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments Support from Tim riley (see below)
This is a most impressive piece of work. I have little doubt that I'll be adding my support in due course, but, for now, here is the first batch of very minor comments from me. Nothing to frighten the horses, and to be acted on or ignored as you think best:
More soonest. – Tim riley ( talk) 19:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC) reply
Concluding batch of comments. All so minor that I am happily adding my support, below.
That's all I find to quibble about. –
Tim riley (
talk)
08:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
reply
Support – the narrative of this complicated story is clearly laid out (which can't have been easy), the prose is fine, the proportions sensible, there is no hint of bias and the referencing is full and from varied sources. This article will be a valuable addition to Wikipedia's top flight. – Tim riley ( talk) 08:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments. A few suggestions, not a complete review: - Dank (
push to talk)
The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:01, 25 May 2013 (UTC) [1]. reply
Rudd Concession ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
This article covers the Rudd Concession, one of the most important events in the history of the country today called Zimbabwe. It was a grant of mining rights by the Matabele king Lobengula that, through a series of political machinations and deceptions, became the basis for the foundation of the British South Africa Company and, ultimately, for the creation of that corner of Africa called Rhodesia.
I wrote this article from scratch over the past couple months and today (16 April) it appeared on DYK and gained GA status, the latter following a very helpful review from Khazar2 ( talk · contribs), who amongst other things reviewed the prose, length and image licensing. After passing the article for GA he recommended I bring it here. I feel the article is at least close to FA status, and so have nominated it for consideration.
Note that the article is written in South African English, which is basically British English with a few extra words thrown in. Thanks, and I look forward to all your comments. — Cliftonian (talk) 20:00, 16 April 2013 (UTC) reply
I hope to return in due course. Brianboulton ( talk) 11:45, 18 April 2013 (UTC) reply
SupportLeaning to support: This is an excellent article, very thorough and comprehensive and generally well written. I made a few small edits during my readthrough, mainly punctuation fixes and minor rephrasing. I have a few suggestions for further consideration:
When these are addressed, and subject to no problems arising from the sources review, I shall be happy to upgrade to full support. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:59, 26 April 2013 (UTC) reply
Image review
Support on prose and comprehensiveness. Top stuff and all the more impressive that you wrote this from scratch. Just one minor query -- under Agreement, there's a quote which states "...the said monthly payment of one hundred pounds..."; I take it the bit in bold is a spelling mistake? Lemonade51 ( talk) 22:37, 11 May 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments Support from Tim riley (see below)
This is a most impressive piece of work. I have little doubt that I'll be adding my support in due course, but, for now, here is the first batch of very minor comments from me. Nothing to frighten the horses, and to be acted on or ignored as you think best:
More soonest. – Tim riley ( talk) 19:58, 21 May 2013 (UTC) reply
Concluding batch of comments. All so minor that I am happily adding my support, below.
That's all I find to quibble about. –
Tim riley (
talk)
08:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
reply
Support – the narrative of this complicated story is clearly laid out (which can't have been easy), the prose is fine, the proportions sensible, there is no hint of bias and the referencing is full and from varied sources. This article will be a valuable addition to Wikipedia's top flight. – Tim riley ( talk) 08:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC) reply
Comments. A few suggestions, not a complete review: - Dank (
push to talk)