Talk:Siege of Ngatapa/GA1

Latest comment: 3 years ago by GhostRiver in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 00:20, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply


I can take a look at this! — GhostRiver 00:20, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose ( ) 1b. MoS ( ) 2a. ref layout ( ) 2b. cites WP:RS ( ) 2c. no WP:OR ( ) 2d. no WP:CV ( )
3a. broadness ( ) 3b. focus ( ) 4. neutral ( ) 5. stable ( ) 6a. free or tagged images ( ) 6b. pics relevant ( )
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked   are unassessed

Infobox and lede

edit
  • "thought was inaccessible" → "believed to be inaccessible"

Background

edit
  • "Māori" is missing the necessary diacritic in the second sentence
  • "and without a trial, in early 1866, was exiled to" → "and in early 1866 was exiled without a trial to"
  • "well armed having secured weapons from" → "well-armed with weapons secured from"
  • "Te Kooti; it offered" → "Te Kooti, offering"
  • "surrendering their arms" → "a surrender of arms"
  • "Among those killed was" → "Among those killed were"

Prelude

edit
  • Diacritics missing on "Ringatū" in the sentence beginning "They attacked Makeretu"
  • Comma after "wanted to execute some of the prisoners"

Ngatapa

edit
  • "An elongate" → "An elongated"

Siege

edit
  • Not a deal-breaker, but consider breaking this up into subheads for each stage of the siege
  • Comma after "Ropata requested some be brought up"
  • Comma after "following the engagement there"
  • Comma after "lightning raid into Poverty Bay"

Aftermath

edit
  • "subsequently executed in the subsequent pursuit" drop one of the "subsequent"s
  • "in Poverty Bay was a breach" → "in Poverty Bay were a breach" (subject/verb agreement with "actions")

References

edit
  • While WordPress isn't known for being the most reliable site, it looks like Wright included this fact on page 203 of his book Guns and Utu, so you should be able to swap [27] out for that with ease
  • Yes, I got an alert warning when I first added the citation to Word Press. I felt the use of Word Press was OK in this instance since it was expressing Wright's opinion rather than being used to verify a fact. That said, I am thinking of taking this article to FA in the near future so removing a potential issue now is for the best anyway. I happen to have that Guns and Utu book so have swapped it out. Zawed (talk) 03:04, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

General comments

edit

Only very minor prose things! Putting on hold for now, and feel free to ping if there are any questions. — GhostRiver 00:36, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply

GhostRiver, thank you for your time in reviewing the article, it is greatly appreciated. I have responded to your feedback with edits to the article and the comments above. Thanks again, Zawed (talk) 03:15, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply
Everything looks good on my end now, and I think the subheads on the Siege section look good. Happy to pass! — GhostRiver 14:34, 10 October 2021 (UTC)Reply