Talk:Edinburgh Castle/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 13:44, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

I will review.

Fastest response ever! Thanks, Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 14:52, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

General

• No dablinks
• Stable. Only reverts are obvious vandalism or good faith degredation. The main editors (you and Kim Traynor) seem to be in general agreement as to how to proceed.
• Have all the actions from the earlier A class review been addressed?

External links / references

• banknoteworld.com/banknote/scotland/5%20Pounds/16801 requires a login
• www.edintattoo.co.uk/the-experience/about-the-tattoo/tattoo-fact-file gives a 404 error

Images

• File:SirWilliamDrury.jpg has a tag requiring attention on it. Should be trivial to resolve.
• File:Edinpain.JPG and File:KGIV and hat.jpg have notes requiring a US public domain tag to be added

• Fixed all 3 using {{PD-Art|PD-old-100}} Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 14:51, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• File:Edinburgh-Castle.jpg has a template error

• Fixed (there was a stray pipe). Nev1 (talk) 14:14, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

• I believe File:Edinburgh-coa.png passes the NFCC criteria, but it may be worth checking to see how old it is, as I believe government artwork created before 1963 is now PD. (See Template:PD-BritishGov)

• Not sure about how this works. The arms are those of the City of Edinburgh Council, which in its current form dates only from 1995. However, I noticed that the arms shown are different to what the Council show on their website, and I've requested a new version for use on Wiki (see here). Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 16:35, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

Okay, wouldn't worry about this. The only reason I brought it up is that if the coat of arms was unchanged since 1963, we could potentially get a free version. But it hasn't. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:05, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

Lead

• Is fortress (which redirects to fortification) an appropriate term to use in the open sentence? I would argue that while the military history behind the castle is of great importance, its role as a modern tourist attraction and landmark of Edinburgh is more well known to the layman reader. For this reason, I'd consider moving at least some of the closing sentence "As the backdrop to the annual Edinburgh Military Tattoo the castle has become a recognisable symbol of Edinburgh and of Scotland." to the first paragraph.
• "from its position atop the volcanic Castle Rock" would read easier as "situated on top of Castle Rock". I wouldn't worry about mentioning that the rock is volcanic in the opening sentence - just describing what and where the castle is should suffice.
• "St Margaret's Chapel, which dates from the early 12th century and is the oldest surviving building in Edinburgh" - per MOS:LEAD, this fact needs to be reproduced somewhere in the article body

History

Geology

• "cut through the surrounding sedimentary rock, before cooling" - don't think the comma here is necessary deleted
• "rearing up to 80 metres" - what does "rearing" mean in this context? Re-worded
• "basalt is an extremely poor aquifer." - I think this needs a brief explanation to a non-geologist as to why this is specifically a problem

Earliest habitation

• It might be worth starting this section with a brief sentence explaining that there is contention over when Castle Rock first became inhabited
• "Documentary reference to occupation of the Castle Rock can be found as early as the mid-2nd century AD". But the lead says "Human habitation of the site is dated back as far as the 9th century BC". I think this needs clarifying - though a later paragraph refers to the 1980 survey showing evidence of settlement in the Bronze or Iron Age, this doesn't specifically equate to 9th c. BC
• "William Camden's 1607 Britannia records" - explain briefly what Britannia is (eg: survey)
• "The archaeological evidence becomes more compelling in the Iron Age." - this doesn't sound particularly encyclopedic prose. Is the point here to show that it's more likely that Castle Rock became inhabited in the Iron Age rather than the Bronze Age?
• Related to above - this paragraph is cited to a single source. Can you confirm that all sentences are correctly cited to it?
• "The dig revealed" - unclear what this refers to - the 1980s archaelogical survey?
• "at Edin's Hall in the Borders" - I think Scottish Borders is preferable - though most people in Scotland know exactly what is meant by the Borders, foreign readers won't

Early Middle Ages

• "The castle does not re-appear in contemporary historical records from the time of Ptolemy until around AD 600" - worth mentioning (either here or in the previous section) when exactly the time of Ptolemy was (ie: 2nd century AD)
• "Then, in the Brythonic epic Y Gododdin" - epic what? Suggest "In the Brythonic epic poem Y Cogoddin" Done
• "reign of Indulf (ruled 954–962)." - I think "ruled" is redundant Distinction between regnal dates and vital dates, changed to "r." throughout
• The picture here File:Yr.Hen.Ogledd.550.650.Koch.jpg needs a caption to explain its relevance to this section
• A brief explanation of what a midden is would be useful Done

High Middle Ages

• "Fordun places his widow" - it's not immediately obvious this is talking about Fordun claiming where St Margaret was - might be worth rewording or clarifying slightly Clarified
• "administrative reforms" (wikilinking to Davidian Revolution) - I'd suggest explicitly mentioning the "Davidian Revolution" eg : "though his administrative reforms (known to contemporary scholars as the Davidian Revolution)" Suggested wording applied
• "although two 12th-century stone buildings are known" - slightly confusing wording, how about "although there is evidence of two stone buildings from the 12th century" Clarified
• "By the end of the 12th century, Edinburgh Castle was established as the main depository of the national archives" - is "national archives" here the National Archives of Scotland? Not really, changed to 'official state papers'

Wars of Scottish Independence

• Can we add the year the throne became vacant (ie: 1286) here?
• "Edward had much of the relics, records and treasure removed from the castle to England" - I don't think you can remove something to somewhere else. Suggest "moved" instead of "removed"
• "A large garrison was installed, 325 strong in 1300" - "strong" isn't particularly encyclopedic, could this be reworded? The sentence may also benefit being split into two - the second one specfically talking about de Houghton and Walter
• "After the death of Edward I" ... through to "prevent re-occupation by the English" - can you confirm the single source cites all of the prose here?
• Last sentence in the second paragraph is unsourced
• "Edward III of England determined to carry on Edward I's project" - I don't understand what this bit means. What "project" specifically?

David's Tower and the 15th century

• "The so-called "Black Dinner" which followed saw the two boys summarily beheaded on trumped-up charges , in the presence of the ten-year-old King James II (ruled 1437–1460)" I think this needs rewording. We know who the "two boys" are from the previous sentence. Were they really beheaded in front of James II - I suspect they were just tried!
• "Douglas' supporters subsequently laid siege to the castle, causing some damage" - don't need "some", if we don't know the specific damage occurred, it can just read "causing damage"
• "In 1464, the access to the castle ... out of the castle" - not really part of the GA criteria but I tend to avoid using the same noun in the same sentence if I can. The second "castle" could be replaced with "grounds"
• "James III was shut up" - implies he was merely told to keep quiet, how about "James III was locked up"
• "he negotiated a settlement with his brother" - who is his brother?
• "The first record of an armoury for the manufacture of guns occurs" - should be past tense to be consistent with the rest of the paragraph, ie: "occurred"
• "a set of cannon described by a Venetian writer as powerful and beautiful weapons which were captured by the English at Flodden in 1513" - whom specifically? Is this a direct quotation?

• replacing with another expression of admiration for Borthwick's workmanship. Not a direct quotation but paraphrased in cited source. Kim Traynor | Talk 21:34, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

• "and by 1541 the castle had a stock of 413 hagbuts" - "hagbuts" can read "them" - we know what it's referring to from the previous sentence
• "Meanwhile, the royal family began to stay more frequently " - shouldn't "royal family" be in upper case? I can't remember

• There is an old convention of giving "Royal" an initial capital, but I suppose it depends on how much of a monarchist one feels; here it would appear inconsistent with the many other occurrences of "royal". Kim Traynor | Talk 21:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

• "Royal Mile" doesn't need quotes. This is the first mention of the term in the article prose, and a little explanation of how it got the name would be useful

16th century and the Lang Siege

• "although little work appears to have been carried out" - according to whom / what exactly?

• Is this not covered by the source reference? Conclusion arrived at by a former chief inspector of Ancient Monuments.

In cases like this, I prefer that it's attributed to an opinion, as somebody's view of what "little work" is may be different to somebody else's. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:03, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

• I hope the way it is now expressed gets round the problem of it being an opinion.:) Kim Traynor | Talk 13:18, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

• "Upon James' death 25 years later," - "James'" can be "his"
• "Mary's own reign, however, was already drawing to a close." - this makes it sound a little like a dramatic work. Stick to straight facts - I'd probably leave this sentence out.
• "Moray appointed Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange as Keeper of the Castle" - when exactly?
• "Kirkcaldy of Grange" is referred to as simply "Grange" in the remainder of the paragraph
• "By 17 May these were ready, and the bombardment began" - confused by what this refers to exactly
• "The following day Grange came out" - I'd change "came out" to something else, it's too informal (and means something completely different in modern language!)
• "When it was made clear that he would not be allowed to go free Grange resolved" - I think a comma is needed between "free" and "Grange"
• "surrendering to the English rather than to the Regent Morton" - overlink, this redirects to James Douglas, 4th Earl of Morton which is mentioned earlier
• As a general point, the pictures of key figures in the castle's history should have their captions expanded to briefly explain how they're important. For example, File:Jean Clouet 004.jpg could read "Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange was appointed Keeper of the Castle in 1567 (?)"

Nova Scotia and Civil War

• "although the battery's position: obscuring" - I don't think we need the colon

Garrison fortress: Jacobites and prisoners

• "during the mopping up of the King's enemies after the Restoration" - is "mopping up" the right term to use here?
• Last sentence in this section is unreferenced

Description

Portcullis Gate and Argyle Tower

• "in the belief that the 9th Earl of Argyll" - Early of Argyll is already wikilinked earlier

Military buildings

• "the garrison moved to Redford Barracks" - Redford Barracks is already wikilinked

Mons Meg

• The units used should be consistent in the order they appear. Since this is talking about a historical cannon, I would use imperial first, then metric.
• "near the River Forth, some 2 miles (3.2 km) distant" - "away" sounds better than "distant"

Half Moon Battery and David's Tower

• Regent Morton overlinked again
• As above, keep measurements consistent, using imperial first for historical building features
• "The tower was rediscovered in 1912," - how did this happen, were they excavating other features?

Queen Anne Building

• "Scottish National War Memorial" - wikilink first usage of this term

Scottish National War Memorial

• "The memorial is maintained by a charitable trust known as the Scottish National War Memorial" - are you sure the trust is the same name as the memorial itself?

Present use

• Would it be worth mentioning which bits are owned by the army, specifically that the guardroom is part-shared (according to the source)?

• That's a rather tall order, as I don't think we'd find a source delineating the army's precise ownership of or responsibility for parts of the castle. I suspect the lines of demarcation between them and Historic Scotland are quite flexible. Kim Traynor | Talk 11:44, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

No, all I meant was just take the information off page 2 off the source provided here Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:04, 9 October 2013 (UTC)

• "Edinburgh Castle remains the most popular paid visitor attraction in Scotland, with over 1.3 million visitors in 2011" - according to the source it's over 1.2 million
• Redford Barracks overlinked again
• Does public duties need to be wikilinked here? It's a common term

Symbol of Edinburgh

• The first part of this paragraph appears to be unsourced

GA Checklist

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

All the issues above are minor, in my view, and easy to resolve, so I am putting the review On Hold. Most of the comments are relating to making better image captions or to clarify something that is linked so the reader isn't obliged to click on it to further their understanding. Some parts of the article are very well written and although I have checked the article carefully, I am having difficulty finding anything else to comment on and criticize. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 17:41, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

It looks like we are nearly complete. There are two tags outstanding on the article, after which the review can be passed. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Actually, since there's only two, I should be able to make an effort to locate sources. I've done that, and I believe all of the GA criteria are now met, so I'm happy to say the review has now passed. Well done. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 16:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

That's good news. Many thanks for all your help and support. Kim Traynor | Talk 16:35, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Fantastic! I was just about to start work on this but I see its all done! Thanks Ritchie for your speedy and thorough reviewing. Jonathan Oldenbuck (talk) 15:14, 11 October 2013 (UTC)