Talk:Architecture of Scotland in the prehistoric era
(Redirected from Talk:Architecture of Scotland in the Prehistoric era)
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Dr. Blofeld in topic GA Review
 | Architecture of Scotland in the prehistoric era has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Architecture of Scotland in the Prehistoric era/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 17:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- "As wood was a much more commonly available material in this region, these were often linked to timber monuments of which only remnants remain." can you reword? "often linked" seems a bit odd in this context.
Done It was a bit confusing and dealt with better in the next few sentences, so I just removed it.--SabreBD (talk) 10:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- "There are at least 100 broch sites in Scotland." Some examples?
- Done--SabreBD (talk) 10:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
- "There is evidence for about 1,000 Iron Age hillforts in Scotland, most located below the Clyde-Forth line". -Some of the most notable examples?
- Done--SabreBD (talk) 10:23, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:48, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- A. Prose quality:
- B. MoS compliance:
- A. Prose quality:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Good job.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Title
editAn excellent article as always! One query - should the title be Prehistoric or prehistoric? Currently the text uses lowercase, the title uppercase. Andrew Gray (talk) 13:38, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
- Its a fair point. To be honest I followed the trend of capitalising Medieval and other recognised periods. However, I note that prehistoric is not capitalised on a number of Wikipedia articles. I will take another look at the guidelines.--SabreBD (talk) 17:02, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
- Many of the others seem to have both capitalised (eg Early Modern Era), which might be why Prehistoric seems odd? Andrew Gray (talk) 19:01, 26 October 2013 (UTC)