Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article failed a GA nomination a few years ago. I have recently addressed all outstanding tasks from that nomination. I would like to re-nominate this article as a good article. Please peer review this article with that objective in mind.
Thanks, Senra ( talk) 12:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I assume you have looked at the
automated tips.
I made one pass over the introduction. Here are my comments:
I hope this is helpful - I welcome feedback on my feedback. I'll try to get to the rest as I am able in the next few days. Joja lozzo 06:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Indeed it is very helpful. I am not a good lead writer but I have done my best. With your permission, I wish to seek help from another editor to write the lead? Or perhaps we should wait until you have completed the review? -- Senra ( talk) 11:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC) Note: I no longer have the sources. It will take me a while to obtain one of them via inter-library loan. As a result, I may be reluctant to make some changes until I can check the source for that change -- Senra ( talk) 11:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
This section is in good shape generally:
Thus I guess I can replace "To put that into perspective, ..." with "In 1815 in the House of Commons, Earl Grey said 'At the present price of 60s. the quartern loaf was 1s. and therefore at 80s. one third more, the price of the quartern loaf must be 1s. 4d.'" (sourced to Hansard) and 2012 prices added?At the present price of 60s. the quartern loaf was 1s. and therefore at 80s. one third more, the price of the quartern loaf must be 1s. 4d.
— Earl Grey, Earl Grey State of the Corn Laws (13 March 1815). http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1815/mar/13/state-of-the-corn-laws#column_137. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). House of Commons. col. 137.{{ cite book}}
:|chapter-url=
missing title ( help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list ( link)
Joja lozzo 21:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I've been mulling over a response on this section for a few days. I don't have access to the sources so some of this is inference. I think it will be easiest to copy it here (green text) and intersperse my comments.
There was rioting in the first months of 1816 in West Suffolk, Norfolk and Cambridgeshire;[10]
on 16 May in Bury St Edmunds and Brandon in West Suffolk; also in Hockwold, Feltwell and Norwich in Norfolk;
then on 20 May in the morning a meeting was held in Southery, Norfolk.
The group, including a Thomas Sindall,[11] marched through Denver to Downham Market, both in Norfolk, to meet with the magistrates at their weekly meeting at The Crown.[12]
The 1,500 rioters, mainly men but some women, besieged The Crown until the magistrates agreed to allow a deputation of eight rioters inside to make their pleas;
to have work and two-shillings (£6) per day.
The magistrates agreed but they had already called the yeoman cavalry from Upwell, who arrived at 5 pm. Backed by the troops, the Riot Act was then read in the market place by Reverend Dering[v] causing further tussles, which only subsided after arrests started to be made.[14]
I am not sure how to handle the imbalance of the general opening of the section and the very specific ending. This is emphasized by the section title which is very vague. I think it might help if the section were renamed to something like "Precedents" or "Preceding events in the region", something that includes time as well as geography.
These are some general ideas which I hope can guide improvement. Joja lozzo 01:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I made a copy edit pass and have a couple of questions:
Joja lozzo 22:31, 13 January 2013 UTC
This section is pretty dry and not very informative. Indictments were made (for what?), testimony happened (saying what?), jury was addressed (saying what?). If the meat of these events aren't critical to the story (and I doubt they are) then I don't think the fact they happened is important to us. Does it matter on which day these events occurred? It might be better to shorten the whole section, point out the highlights and list the verdicts. I am willing to take a crack at condensing if we want to go that route.
In case we want to keep it more or less as is, I have a couple of quibbles:
Joja lozzo 00:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
This section is good, except the play mentioned in the last sentence is not part of the aftermath. Perhaps start a new section for "Popular culture references" or, if there's just that one sentence for popular cultural references, add an entry in See also for The Fool (Edward Bond play). Other than that I think its ready for GAN. Joja lozzo 18:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Article is pretty good Senra, well written and sourced, well on the way to featured quality actually, it should easily pass GA. One thing which stands out is your use of "Mr", we don't generally refer to people in articles as Mr and Mrs to my knowledge. Some of the sentences if anything are oversourced, I'm not keen on many citations in the middle of sentences unless after commas, I believe it disrupts reading, and I think that some of the notes are a little unnecessary. Also, not sure why 1816 is in the title, these were the only riots? If it must be in the title I'd put it in brackets or word it as Ely and Littleport riots of 1816.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:34, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article failed a GA nomination a few years ago. I have recently addressed all outstanding tasks from that nomination. I would like to re-nominate this article as a good article. Please peer review this article with that objective in mind.
Thanks, Senra ( talk) 12:41, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
I assume you have looked at the
automated tips.
I made one pass over the introduction. Here are my comments:
I hope this is helpful - I welcome feedback on my feedback. I'll try to get to the rest as I am able in the next few days. Joja lozzo 06:08, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
Indeed it is very helpful. I am not a good lead writer but I have done my best. With your permission, I wish to seek help from another editor to write the lead? Or perhaps we should wait until you have completed the review? -- Senra ( talk) 11:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC) Note: I no longer have the sources. It will take me a while to obtain one of them via inter-library loan. As a result, I may be reluctant to make some changes until I can check the source for that change -- Senra ( talk) 11:33, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
This section is in good shape generally:
Thus I guess I can replace "To put that into perspective, ..." with "In 1815 in the House of Commons, Earl Grey said 'At the present price of 60s. the quartern loaf was 1s. and therefore at 80s. one third more, the price of the quartern loaf must be 1s. 4d.'" (sourced to Hansard) and 2012 prices added?At the present price of 60s. the quartern loaf was 1s. and therefore at 80s. one third more, the price of the quartern loaf must be 1s. 4d.
— Earl Grey, Earl Grey State of the Corn Laws (13 March 1815). http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/lords/1815/mar/13/state-of-the-corn-laws#column_137. Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). House of Commons. col. 137.{{ cite book}}
:|chapter-url=
missing title ( help)CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list ( link)
Joja lozzo 21:04, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
I've been mulling over a response on this section for a few days. I don't have access to the sources so some of this is inference. I think it will be easiest to copy it here (green text) and intersperse my comments.
There was rioting in the first months of 1816 in West Suffolk, Norfolk and Cambridgeshire;[10]
on 16 May in Bury St Edmunds and Brandon in West Suffolk; also in Hockwold, Feltwell and Norwich in Norfolk;
then on 20 May in the morning a meeting was held in Southery, Norfolk.
The group, including a Thomas Sindall,[11] marched through Denver to Downham Market, both in Norfolk, to meet with the magistrates at their weekly meeting at The Crown.[12]
The 1,500 rioters, mainly men but some women, besieged The Crown until the magistrates agreed to allow a deputation of eight rioters inside to make their pleas;
to have work and two-shillings (£6) per day.
The magistrates agreed but they had already called the yeoman cavalry from Upwell, who arrived at 5 pm. Backed by the troops, the Riot Act was then read in the market place by Reverend Dering[v] causing further tussles, which only subsided after arrests started to be made.[14]
I am not sure how to handle the imbalance of the general opening of the section and the very specific ending. This is emphasized by the section title which is very vague. I think it might help if the section were renamed to something like "Precedents" or "Preceding events in the region", something that includes time as well as geography.
These are some general ideas which I hope can guide improvement. Joja lozzo 01:05, 6 January 2013 (UTC)
I made a copy edit pass and have a couple of questions:
Joja lozzo 22:31, 13 January 2013 UTC
This section is pretty dry and not very informative. Indictments were made (for what?), testimony happened (saying what?), jury was addressed (saying what?). If the meat of these events aren't critical to the story (and I doubt they are) then I don't think the fact they happened is important to us. Does it matter on which day these events occurred? It might be better to shorten the whole section, point out the highlights and list the verdicts. I am willing to take a crack at condensing if we want to go that route.
In case we want to keep it more or less as is, I have a couple of quibbles:
Joja lozzo 00:50, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
This section is good, except the play mentioned in the last sentence is not part of the aftermath. Perhaps start a new section for "Popular culture references" or, if there's just that one sentence for popular cultural references, add an entry in See also for The Fool (Edward Bond play). Other than that I think its ready for GAN. Joja lozzo 18:07, 25 January 2013 (UTC)
Article is pretty good Senra, well written and sourced, well on the way to featured quality actually, it should easily pass GA. One thing which stands out is your use of "Mr", we don't generally refer to people in articles as Mr and Mrs to my knowledge. Some of the sentences if anything are oversourced, I'm not keen on many citations in the middle of sentences unless after commas, I believe it disrupts reading, and I think that some of the notes are a little unnecessary. Also, not sure why 1816 is in the title, these were the only riots? If it must be in the title I'd put it in brackets or word it as Ely and Littleport riots of 1816.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 18:34, 31 December 2012 (UTC)
-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 13:47, 12 January 2013 (UTC)