Talk:Muckrach Castle

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 17:54, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Happy to review this one. AM

Review comments

Lead section / infobox

• Muchrach or Muckerach Castle – Muchrach and Muckerach Castle should also be in bold.
  • Done.
• Link Highland (Highland (council area)) in both the lead and the infobox.
  • Done.
• Any reason for the coordinates to be included both inline and at the top of the article?
  • Removed from top of the article.
• The caption in the infobox, and the description of the type as a castle, are both not needed here.
  • Done. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

16th to 19th century

• Ian Begg should be introduced in this section, not in the following one.
  • Done.
• Consider amending in the forest-area, masonry was less well understood or trusted, and to something like ‘in the forest-area masonry was not as well understood or trusted and’.
  • Done.
• I would leave out all of the daughter of McGregor of Strathavon story, it’s not particularly connected with the topic.
  • Done, though moved the ref to a Further Reading section.
• Unroofed – was the roof removed, or did it simply lack a roof by this time?
  • I don't know; there's just one line in the book saying it was unroofed in 1739.
• thought to have been – who thought this?
  • Clarified.
• By 1876-1878... – this sentence comes from a primary source. As secondary sources are preferable (see WP:RSPRIMARY), is one available?
  • I'm not aware of a secondary source for this statement. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

20th to 21st century

• led by architect Ian Begg – ‘led by Begg’.
  • Done.
• a "roofless shell" – appears to have already been stated in the previous section and so need not be repeated here.
  • Removed.
• Link OS (Ordnance Survey), which should not be abbreviated; corbelling (Corbel)
  • Done.
• no trace – it should be clearer here about what was not found.
  • Clarified.
• Why finally?
  • Word removed.
• This was prompted by an Inverness County Council Planning Officer reminding the owners of their obligations when having a listed building. The owners died before the restoration was completed, but their son took over as the client. - is imo excessive detail, and so is not needed.
  • Second sentance removed.
• Avoid relatively recently (MOS:RELTIME).
  • Reworded.
• It was only in the third year into the project that – 'During the third year of the restoration’ sounds better imo.
  • Agreed.
• is now offered as a – sounds strange, as it contains now (MOS:RELTIME) as well as offers.
  • Reworded.
• Christmas at the Castle should have the British title, and should be in italics.
  • Done. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Location

• Convert three miles; also one mile.
  • Done.
• Link River Dulnain.
  • Done. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Description

• The image of the castle is redundant (as it looks very like the one in the infobox).
  • Removed.
• a relatively small structure – is too vague.
  • Clarified a bit.
• Part of the first paragraph is uncited.
  • Now cited.
• later – needs clarification.
  • Reworded.
• first floor – is ambiguous (US and British meanings differ).
  • I'd used British meaning given the article, and I'd hoped the final paragraph talking about ground, first, then second floor made it clear. I'm open to suggestions how to make it more clear though.

Y The caption accompanying the plan now clarifies the terms. AM

• Link coat of arms; monogram; conservatory (presumably Sunroom).
  • Done.
• it shows – what does it refer to here?
  • Clarified as the panel.
• The image of the plaque is unrelated to the text, unless it has some significance, it should be removed.
  • Included as this is the "ornamented panel" discussed in the text.

Understood. AM

• I have put MacGibbon and Ross’s plan of the castle on WikiCommons here, it may be of use.
• The illustration of the castle from the same source is now here[1] if you want to include it in the article.
  • Thank you for both of those, I will try to include them. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:30, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

References

• The references section has not been formatted in a consistent way. I am happy to sort this out for you if you want – it’s easier for me to do it than to explain everything that needs to be done.
  • Please do ahead, thank you. Y Done. AM
    • Thank you! I'll take a look to see what I can attempt to make use of myself going forward for other articles.
• What makes you think muckrachcastle.co.uk, TheCinemaholic or castleuk.net are reliable sources?
  • muckrachcastle.co.uk is a primary source, but should be reliable for describing the current accomodation arrangements as it's produced by the owners. Less so for describing the history, so I've removed that reference. The TheCinemaholic is only used to say it was used as a filming location, and that specific page was written by an associate editor of that site. The site sounded fairly reliable to me. However, would https://findthatlocation.com/blog/christmas-in-the-highlands-filming-locations and/or https://tvshowsace.com/2020/12/23/lifetime-christmas-at-castle/ be helpful to add or replace it with? castleuk.net I'm less sure about, but was only used to say Muckrach Castle is quite close to Castle Roy, and I thought it was a better reference that just using something like Google Maps.
  • P.S. For TheCinemaholic, I also found Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 353#The Cinemaholic. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Understood. AM

• There is a link to Ref 15 (Fleming) here which you might consider using.
  • I've intentionally not included that as that's what the DOI link points to anyway, I'm happy to explicitly include it if need be though. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:02, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Understood.AM

External links

• There is no need for the official website here (as it is included in the infobox).
  • Removed.
• her.highland.gov.uk is redundant text.
  • Removed.
• in – ‘from the’ sounds better imo.
  • Agreed.
• The Canmore entry is used for Ref 9 and so should not be included here as well.
  • Removed. -Kj cheetham (talk) 12:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

On hold

I'm putting the article on hold for a week until 3 March to allow time for the issues raised to be addressed. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 22:39, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Amitchell125 Thank you for this. I'll address the points in the coming days, and will ping you again once I'm done. As a heads-up, I'll be away for a few days from 29 February. -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:52, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Lead

@Kj cheetham: All looks fine apart from a couple of points, which I have marked as N. Also, the lead is looks on the small side, and could perhaps be doubled in size, so all the sections in the main part of the article are properly represented. Apologies for not spotting that earlier. Amitchell125 (talk) 13:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Amitchell125: I think I've now addressed all the points, including expanding the lead. I also added a comment in the main text about it's listed building status, which was otherwise only mentioned in the lead and infobox. Thank you again for your time on this. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

All now looks fine, passing now. Congratulations! Amitchell125 (talk) 20:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton talk 17:59, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

Muckrach Castle after it was restored.

• ... that Ian Begg restored Muckrach Castle (pictured) after over 200 years without a roof? Source: Clow, Robert, ed. (2000). Restoring Scotland's Castles. pp. 42–53. ISBN 978-0900673269
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Overlook (Alexander McQueen collection)

Improved to Good Article status by Kj cheetham (talk). Self-nominated at 20:35, 26 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Muckrach Castle; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

Image: Image is freely licensed, used in the article, and clear at 100px.
Freely licensed: Used in article: Clear at 100px:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: Article improved to GA. Passes earwig (9.9% copyvio unlikely), no close paraphrasing was found, and the hook is interesting, cited inline, and verified. Image appropriately licensed. QPQ done (Editor has less than 20 DYK nominations, so no requirement for 2x QPQ per emergency backlog mode). GTG. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Not sure if it's too late to add the picture from the infobox to this...? -Kj cheetham (talk) 22:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Not at all. Ping me when you revise the hook with the image, I'll take another look (it looks good for use from what I've checked). Pseud 14 (talk) 18:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Pseud 14 How's that? Thanks! -Kj cheetham (talk) 23:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)

Looks great to me. OK on the image. Pseud 14 (talk) 23:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC)