The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 21:35, 26 November 2010 [1].
Thomas Percy (Gunpowder Plot) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
Sorry, its another Gunpowder Plot article. Thomas Percy was something of a rogue, a man who would do whatever it took to get the job done. He also reportedly had a bit on the side, was into bribery, killing and most importantly, pork pies. Huge pork pies, so large that when King James I didn't do what Percy had said he would do, he promptly joined up with Robert Catesby, and attempted to blow the king and his government sky high. The rest is history. Parrot of Doom 19:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply
Sourcing comments
Support with just a few quibbles that don't prevent me supporting.
Support: I reviewed this article at GA and could find very little wrong with it. It covers the topic thoroughly, is very well written and is easy to follow. Three trivial points which may be ignored and do not affect my support.
Comment - Wondering if any of the following sources might have additional info? Sasata ( talk) 19:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC) reply
Support - an excellent article, meeting all the FA criteria, in my opinion. A handful of tiny queries, none of which affect my support:
*"Northumberland, whom it seems might…" – should be "who" – this is not an accusative
Tim riley ( talk) 13:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC) reply
The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 21:35, 26 November 2010 [1].
Thomas Percy (Gunpowder Plot) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
Sorry, its another Gunpowder Plot article. Thomas Percy was something of a rogue, a man who would do whatever it took to get the job done. He also reportedly had a bit on the side, was into bribery, killing and most importantly, pork pies. Huge pork pies, so large that when King James I didn't do what Percy had said he would do, he promptly joined up with Robert Catesby, and attempted to blow the king and his government sky high. The rest is history. Parrot of Doom 19:34, 6 November 2010 (UTC) reply
Sourcing comments
Support with just a few quibbles that don't prevent me supporting.
Support: I reviewed this article at GA and could find very little wrong with it. It covers the topic thoroughly, is very well written and is easy to follow. Three trivial points which may be ignored and do not affect my support.
Comment - Wondering if any of the following sources might have additional info? Sasata ( talk) 19:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC) reply
Support - an excellent article, meeting all the FA criteria, in my opinion. A handful of tiny queries, none of which affect my support:
*"Northumberland, whom it seems might…" – should be "who" – this is not an accusative
Tim riley ( talk) 13:12, 18 November 2010 (UTC) reply