Wikipedia:Peer review/Elizabeth II/archive1

Elizabeth II edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because we want to get it up to standard to get it featured.

Thanks, Hadseys 20:52, 22 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

First paragraph is cluttered. Is the first thing a reader wants to know is the membership of the Commonwealth? Or this 'separately and equally' stuff?
'It was widely assumed that the Prince of Wales would marry and have children of his own' - why? was he very young?
'Heiress presumptive' omits her early education. (Did she go to grammar school? Was she tutored exclusively? Was she studying with Marten because she was enrolled in Eton?)
In general, ages should be mentioned more often. Was her father being sensible in not taking a 3 year old to Canada, or being perhaps overprotective of a robust 13 year old (or whatever her actual age was)?
Why did she marry Philip? It's presented as a fait accompli - one moment we're celebrating the end of WWII and the next discussing the paperwork Philip had to do. (Re-reading, I see that Philip was mentioned way back in 'Heiress presumptive'. Maybe some more on Philip could be weaved in appropriately so the reader doesn't wonder who the heck this Philip guy is.)
Elizabeth's use of technology (email) is interesting. Is there any story behind that - a lifelong interest in science & tech, or something?
More on the corgis might be interesting. At least, besides problems with Princess Diana, that's one of the few things I knew about her. --Gwern (contribs) 20:06 30 May 2010 (GMT)

Belovedfreak comments

Lead

I know Gwern mentioned the 1st paragraph being cluttered. I would say that in particular, it's very cluttered with blue links. Are all of them necessary or is there some overlinking? Country names often don't need to be linked, but you could argue that some of those countries will be unfamiliar to readers, so that may require some thought.
Per WP:LEAD, the lead needs to summarise the whole article, not just act as an introduction. At the moment, it's not doing that.

Early life

"Elizabeth was the first child of Prince Albert, Duke of York (later King George VI), and his wife, Elizabeth." It would be nice to mention Elizabeth (her mother)'s maiden name here, since she was from a notable family.
"She had a close relationship with her grandfather, George V, and was credited with aiding in his recovery from illness..." - a little bit more detail would be good here as I'm immediately left wondering how she helped him to recover.

Heiress presumptive

"there was no reason to believe then that she would ever become queen" - perhaps could be there was no reason to believe then that she was likely to become queen or something, as it stands it seems like it was a near impossibility that she would be queen. Obviously it was a possibility that Edward could have died childless, even if he hadn't abdicated.
"Elizabeth was homeschooled by her parents.." I see this has been inserted in response to the comment above, perhaps it could be dealt with in one section though? It's also mentioned in the section above. Also, "homeschooled" sounds very modern and, to be honest, American.
"Elizabeth – though only 13 years old – fell in love with Philip," - per MOS:EMDASH, don't space em dashes
The paragraphs are a bit short towards the end of this section. Try either expanding or combining them.

Second World War

"The suggestion that the two princesses be evacuated ..." - it would be interested to know who suggested this
It would be good to have a little background about the Welsh nationalism issue. Obviously, this article needs to be kept focused, so you don't want to go into too much detail, but statements like "the idea was rejected by Morrison, on the grounds that it might cause conflict between north and south Wales" are lost on the uninformed, and I (sadly) doubt many readers will be clicking through to that article.
"The idea was rejected by the King, who refused to subject his young daughter to the pressures of official tours and because two leading members of Urdd Gobaith Cymru were conscientious objectors." - this doesn't seem quite right, grammatically
Is there a relevant article for "Ovate"? Or could you explain it?

Marriage

"Elizabeth's aunt, Princess Mary, Princess Royal, allegedly refused to attend ..." - allegedly? According to whom? It's better to say who said what rather than leave "allegedly" dangling there
"her brother, the Duke of Windsor (who abdicated in 1936), was not invited due to his marital situation;" - this isn't mentioned earlier on, it just states that he abdicated, so could you specify here what his "marital situation" is?
Could you specify where Windlesham Moor & [{Clarence House]] are?

Succession

"asked her what she intended to be called as monarch" - I see the point of this but it's quite an awkward wikilink. I don't know if you can think of a better alternative
"Despite the death of the Queen's grandmother Queen Mary on 24 March 1953, the Queen's coronation went ahead..." - awkward repetition of "queen" there. Perhaps Despite the death of the Elizabeth's grandmother Queen Mary on 24 March 1953, the coronation went ahead? (I presume you don't need to specify that it's her coronation)
With the mention of the amount of people watching the coronation, I wonder if you could find anything in a reliable source about people buying televisions for the occasion? I know (anecdotally) that many households bought their first ever TVs to watch the coronation, and on some streets people all gathered in the one home that had a TV to watch the coronation. I don't know if there's anything about that, might be interesting.

Continuing evolution of the Commonwealth

"Two years later, on behalf of Canada, she revisited North America." - it might just be me, but I don't really understand that sentence. Does it mean she visited Canada?
"Elizabeth's pregnancies with Princes Andrew and Edward, in 1959 and 1963, marked the only times she did not perform the State Opening of the British Parliament during her reign" - this could do with a citation
"Australian republicanism" can be linked to Republicanism in Australia. Perhaps there could be a little expansion here?

1980s

Don't think "Bermese" needs quotation marks
"During Margaret Thatcher's tenure ... it was rumoured that Elizabeth was worried ... and was reportedly alarmed...the Queen was even said ...It was claimed that ..." - bit vague here. Where was it rumoured? Who reported?

1990s

"The year saw her daughter divorced, one son separated and another whose marriage was rocky" - this could perhaps go into a bit more detail, without getting gossipy, of course, but I notice that Sarah Ferguson isn't even mentioned here. It was quite a big deal at the time with them all getting divorced. It's kind of part of the difficult relationship between the royal family & the press
"In their grief, Diana's two sons wanted to attend church, and so their grandparents took them that morning" - is this really necessary? Doesn't seem anything particularly unusual or notable
"Pressured by her family, friends, the new British Prime Minister Tony Blair, and public reaction, the Queen agreed..." - I'm not familiar with Brandreth's biography, but has any of this come from her own admission? Or is it his perception of the situation. Do we know 100% that is was specifically because of pressure from these four areas that she eventually spoke?
"The public mood was transformed by the broadcast from hostility to respect." - it might be worth looking for other sources to either back this up even more or give a different spin. I'm not sure it gives the whole story, as plenty of people were still hostile. that's purely from my own memory though, there may be nothing in WP:RS to say that.

Golden Jubilee and beyond

"In May 2007, the Queen was reported to be "exasperated and frustrated"...Elizabeth was rumoured" - again, a little vague
"their marriage is the longest of any British monarch." - could do with a citation

References

Some sources (eg. newspapers) could do with publishers

Overall, it's looking pretty good. I'm not sure how comprehensive it is, but it looks good to me. The prose looks fine for GA, but would definitely recommend a thorough copyedit to polish it prior to an FAC. Are there any available sound recordings of her? That would be a nice addition to the article. Hope these suggestions help.--Beloved Freak 19:07, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]