Talk:Robert fitzRoger/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 16:32, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• Any reason why his children aren't listed in the infobox?
  • I have no idea - the person who added the infobox didn't bother, I guess. -- Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
• Should Eure be linked?
  • Actually - that "lord of ..." clause was inserted here without a source ... and I just removed it. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
• "FitzRoger founded the monastery of Langley, Norfolk in 1195." Optional, but in UK English that would be FitzRoger founded the monastery of Langley in Norfolk in 1195.'
  • Fixed. Another helpful addition from someone else. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
• Could we have an in line explanation of Michaelmas at first mention in the main article. Bracketed if you prefer.
  • I added an explanatory footnote - as the short version was still way long. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
• Link sheriff.
• Link Premonstratensian canons.
• Link Langley.
  • I linked to the abbey instead. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
• "Orford Castle". Add 'in Suffolk'.
• Link Newburn.
• Link Whalton.
• "one knight's fee". Explanation please.
  • Linked. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 17:19, 19 February 2022 (UTC)

• • I think I got all of the above. Ealdgyth (talk) 17:55, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

• "was an Anglo-Norman nobleman" I can't find this in the main article.
  • This one is going to have to be "the sky is blue" type of thing. He held lands and offices in Anglo-Norman England and he wasn't clergy - so the fact that he held office makes him ipso-facto a nobleman in this time. "He was considered a baron" is pretty much the big clue there. Ealdgyth (talk) 19:35, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah. I just want you to use the phrase "Anglo-Norman" in the main article. (Or remove it from the lead.) We both know it is a given, but the rules say that if you put it in the summary - the lead - you should put at least the same information in the article.

It's there now. Ealdgyth (talk) 20:04, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed