Talk:Orford Castle/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC) I'll get to this sometime in the next week or so.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:33, 1 May 2011 (UTC)

Comment

• It says "two miles from the sea" and "half a mile away". These need conversions.
• The plan of the keep says it is "159 KB". That's quite a large increase in the page size considering the limited value of the image. I suggest it's reduced in size or some way is found to make better use of the value. Perhaps the entire image could be removed, or limited to just one floor.

Lightmouse (talk) 15:47, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

• Alternative measures added.
• A plan of a castle is usually considered essential at ACR and above, so it will need to stay in. But on the size of the original image file, is your concern that it is causing problem for your browser?

Hchc2009 (talk) 16:24, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I don't know what ACR is but don't worry, I'll leave it there.

Size isn't a browser issue. Download sizes for all articles should be appropriate. I just thought the image was quite large. I'll defer to others on this. Keep up the good work. Lightmouse (talk) 18:31, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry - my own estimates on sensible image size might not be right either! :) Definitely one for Sturmvogel to examine during the review. Hchc2009 (talk) 18:34, 2 May 2011 (UTC)

I think it is more usual to have the Bibliography after the Reference section? Is it possibe to link to more general information about a book rather than an image of the front cover? I am pretty sure that a Google search will turn up some useful websites that can be listed as external links. I did not find anything online to contradict the article, but nor was I able to verify the detailed claims as I do not have copies of the references.

Gaius Cornelius (talk) 17:05, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

   Refs should probably go before the Bibliography, but that's your call and won't affect this review. Minor point is that the entire ref in #29 and 30 is in italics and needs to be fixed.

Switched around and italics fixed.Hchc2009 (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Please provide more details on the fate of the curtain wall and outer towers. The pastscape website has some additional info that can be used.

I've added the key fact from the site that's not mentioned elsewhere in the article, namely that they were quarried - does that cover what you had in mind? Hchc2009 (talk) 18:45, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

No, I was more concerned about when and how they disappeared, although it's nice to have the quarried bit added as well.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:06, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Unless I'm misremembering, I don't think there's a fixed date for when they disappeared, although the how is clear, as they were quarried. The 1600 sketch is one date when we suspect that the walls were probably in place; by the 1840s, people are commenting that they've mostly gone, and by the modern period they've all gone. I don't think historians have placed the removal of the walls much within the 1600-1840 period, although I'd venture an OR guess that we're looking at 1680-1750 as the most likely period for the bulk of the quarrying.Hchc2009 (talk) 19:39, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, but progress in their disappearance should be noted. This is what I'm talking about: "In a 1785 print, the curtain wall is extant only on the N. side, and its course is now marked on this side by a roller trench." Although it raises the question of what's a roller trench?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:47, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah, found it. I hadn't expanded the details box, so couldn't see it! I'll add in the north wall bit. I think they've mispelled "robber trench" as "roller trench", incidentally.

OK, so what's a robber trench?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

When you quarry out a wall, you often dig down to get the foundations - the result is a robber trench, as you're "robbing" the wall of the stones through the quarrying process. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

That makes sense, just be sure to explain the term if you haven't done so already and we'll be done here.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I've added it in, but avoided using the term as I think it will read better explained - see what you think.Hchc2009 (talk) 16:28, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

1. B. Focused:

2. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

3. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

4. 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:

   Definitely need the floor plans, regardless of size considerations. Very atmospheric picture at the bottom.

5. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: