Talk:Hull Castle

Latest comment: 8 years ago by Sainsf in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
This review is transcluded from Talk:Hull Castle/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:08, 22 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Will review. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 07:08, 22 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Well-written as always, a few comments: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 11:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

16th century
  • Can Channel be wikilinked?
  • Duplicate links (linked twice): blockhouse, the Crown
  • Sir Richard Long and Michael Stanhope No need to call them by their full names, you introduced them in the previous section.

The rest of the article reds quite well. Excellent prose, complying with the MOS. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 11:42, 22 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

  • Channel and dup links fixed. Full names are being used when they appear in a new section.
  • Um, in most other articles I have seen editors mentioning people only once by their full names (the first mention) and then consistently use their surnames. Moreover, here you mention them in the section immediately after the one where they were first named, so it can look redundant. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:43, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Alright, not a major issue to halt promotion. Good job, promoted. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 11:03, 24 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

Author/Editor formatting

edit

Is there any reason for the different formatting of authors/editors? The References section uses first/last format while the Bibliography section uses last/first formatting. I would have expected both to use the same format. Keith D (talk) 22:41, 22 June 2016 (UTC)Reply

The on-line references are just done in a different sequence I think. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:32, 23 June 2016 (UTC)Reply