Talk:Siege of Reading

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 20:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

I'll have a look at this. Give me a couple of days. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:43, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: Cheers for picking this one up. Just a note that at the moment I'm not planning to take this one beyond GA: I don't have access to either of the books which deal with it specifically (which are both listed in the Further reading section.) Harrias ^talk 11:04, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Okey-dokey. Ouch! Barrès-Baker at over £50!

Yeah. Both books are available in Reading Central Library, but the cost of getting there would be roughly equivalent! Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• "File:Map of Redding by John Speed, 1611.jpg" needs a US PD tag.

Made a mess of this, but got it now I think. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Yep.

• "File:Robert Devereux, 3rd Earl of Essex.jpg" needs a UK PD tag; and its source is dead.

Switched image for the same one from another source (NPG). Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Fine.

• Ditchfield: page numbers? And the title should be in title case.

The page numbers are those provided by the source: I have added the url which should make this clearer. As for the title: I have followed the source, does our MOS require us to change it to our own version? Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes. (Occasionally older titles are all upper case. Or even stranger. All need to be changed.)

Done. Harrias ^talk 07:25, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

• Johnson: title case please.

As above; I've followed the source. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

I understand, but it still needs to meet the MoS.

Done. Harrias ^talk 07:25, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

• "Feilding held to the conditions of the truce" I realise that this is the lead, but as a reader doesn't know what the conditions were that Feilding was holding to, they are liable to be confused. Perhaps 'Feilding held to the truce'?

Yeah, even if it isn't confusing, it just uses more words than needed. Trimmed. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• Background: Maybe a couple of sentences setting the scene re which war this was etc. You can probably cut and paste from somewhere.

Adapted what I used in Capture of Wakefield and elsewhere. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Fine.

• "between the two military strongholds" Optional: "the" → 'these'.

Yeah, that's better, changed. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• "the town had only minimal defences" Delete "only"?

Removed. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• "For the construction of the defences, Aston forced civilians from the town to work alongside his soldiers, and was described by Basil Morgan, his biographer in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, as "bullying his soldiers and the citizenry alike". Optional: I can live with this at GA, but it could be better phrased.
• "Although the proposals were far less than previously made by parliament" Far less what?

Added "demanding". Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• "the Parliamentarians had setup their artillery" "setup" → 'set up'.

Changed. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

• "had thereafter had to fight as a volunteer" What status did a "volunteer" have during the Civil War? Was he still an officer?

Honestly? I don't know. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Ah well. Hopefully the gist is clear.

Would you like me to archive your web links?

Sure, why not. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Done.

Your usual excellent job. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:03, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

• @Gog the Mild: Thanks for the review. Have responded to each point above. Harrias ^talk 09:27, 14 January 2020 (UTC)

Another fine article. Happy to promote. FAC will just have to wait until you win the lottery. (Unless your local library can get the books on inter-library loan.) Gog the Mild (talk) 10:29, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

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