Wikipedia:Peer review/Craigflower Manor and Schoolhouse/archive2

Craigflower Manor and Schoolhouse

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review since I'm tentatively looking towards a Featured Article candidacy. Issues which I'm most concerned with are comprehensiveness, style, and sourcing. Thanks, Haemo (talk) 21:13, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Hey Haemo, just some quick comments from me. I can't help with accuracy/comprehensiveness really as I'm not au fait with the subject but hopefully my comments will be of some use to you!

1. Rename "History of the site" to "Site history".
2. In the lead, I think it's worth stating what the Manor and the Schoolhouse actually are.
3. Do you really think that trees needs to be linked in the caption?
4. The co-ordinates at the top of the article are decimal which I find a little ugly. Any chance of making them into degrees, minutes and seconds?
5. "1000-odd" not particularly encyclopaedic.
6. "...1852 to 1856. [7]:47 "?
7. Order citations numerically - right now you have a [2][1] and a [10][8] and a [9][8]...
8. Do you need the "external links" co-ordinates link?

Hope some of that helps. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:24, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for the review. I've replied to the suggestions in order

1. (+) Done!
2. (+) I rewrote and expanded the lead.
3. (+) I've removed the Wikilink.
4. (--) The template seems to require that format. I'm not sure how to change it...
5. (+) I've reworded this to "around 1000"
6. (!!) I believe that's a template used to cite a specific page in a book.
7. (+) Done!
8. (--) The template (above) inserts that automatically. Should I just remove the template?

Please do not use images / graphics (to save space) Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:12, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries. --Haemo (talk) 00:16, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

SGGH

Hope I don't duplicate any points made above, I will try my best not to. I suggest:

1. the last lines of the first paragraph of the lead need a cite
2. end of the third para of the "site history" section, the cite before the dash I think it should move to after the comma after "altogether" as per the cite-after-punctuation style guidelines
3. I agree with the above, I don't think the [7]:47 thing is correct.
4. cite [12] at the end of the schoolhouse section has the same dash issue as the one I had just mentioned above
5. Not sure if the coordinates can be inserted into the article with more finesse than just being plonked in the external links section like that, but I'm not sure what MoS says.

Not many things for me to pick up on, a good article. Hope my comments help SGGH ^speak! 16:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

1. (+) Done!
2. (?) I don't know; it looks wrong. I'm not citing "altogether".
3. (--) The documentation supports it; but it's easy to change.
4. (?) See 2
5. (--) I don't know if the template supports it; just remove it? --Haemo (talk) 21:22, 20 March 2008 (UTC)