Talk:Richard Coote, 1st Earl of Bellomont/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Frickeg (talk) 09:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

A fascinating biography; just a few points.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   With regards to Bellomont's trans-Atlantic career, the article appears to use British date format (Day Month Year) but American spellings ("honor", "maneuvering"). I'd assume that since Bellomont was an Englishman who spent only part of his career in the New World, the British spellings would be more appropriate. Also, as far as I can tell, "lieutenant governor" should be capitalised. (The reason I haven't fixed these myself is that I'm no expert on this period of history and I wanted to check if these were deliberate. I'm certainly more than happy to go through and find the Americanisms should you decide on that option.) There are also two different plurals of Abenaki (Abenakis and Abenaki).
   There are also a few run-on sentences; the first sentence under the heading "Life" (detailing his parentage) is a particularly troublesome example, with the mass of commas towards the end providing some confusion. I also question "Life" as an appropriate header for that section, since "Early life" or "Early career" would seem more appropriate.
   Overall this is nicely written, however, and everything is pretty minor – I'm only holding on the Americanisms, really.

   I think I've taken care of these issues; you might want to look for changing Americanisms I missed (I know what most of the differences are, but it seems like everytime some reviews an article I write in BritEng I learn something new). Magic♪piano 13:23, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

   Isn't language a wonderful thing? (I still remember the shock from learning that Australia was the only country where -ise endings are standard.) I've been through and haven't found any Americanisms you've missed. Frickeg (talk) 14:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Two very minor points here: firstly, is the Kidd situation really so significant to a study of Bellomont that it needs its own paragraph in the lead? And secondly, he was an MP from 1688 to 1695, but became Baron Coote in 1683 and Earl of Bellomont in 1689. Would not these peerages have disqualified him from sitting in the Commons? Was there a process he had to go through for an exemption?

   Nothing in the limited sources on his parliamentary career explains. I wonder (not being a peerage expert) if the fact that his titles are in the Irish peerage would play a role?

   As far as the Kidd piracy business is concerned, it is the context under which I think most Americans are going to encounter his name, and he does play a prominent role in it. Magic♪piano 12:33, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   This is a particularly strong point of the article.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This is very, very close to GA; the only reason it's on hold is the Americanisms referred to earlier. These are not strictly under the requirements of 1(b), but it seems easier to get this out of the way now rather than have to worry about it later.

I'm passing this - it's a very strong article. Frickeg (talk) 14:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC)