Talk:William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 15:02, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

• "and the following year he joined" The year following what? No earlier year is mentioned.
• "This John married Alice Denys and had been endowed in 1453" Should "had been" be 'was'?
• "caput"?
• Could we have your standard footnote explaining what a mark is?
• "appointed seneschal of Gascony"; "Sir Philip Chetwynd had been governing Guyenne". You're going to have to explain the distinction for all but the most anoraky of readers. Later the lieutenancy of Aquitaine also appears. Good luck.
• "the importance the Duke of Suffolk's government held him in" You can't hold someone in importance. 'the esteem' perhaps, or rephrase?
• Could J. S. Roskell be linked at first mention?
• "at the end of April that year" The year hasn't previously been mentioned in the paragraph.
• Can Michael Hicks be linked at first mention.
• "who had been promoted to his peerage by King Henry I" I am loath to mess with a quote, but is there a 'V' missing?
• Footnote 3: "Prior to the 143s".
• Alt text for the infobox image?

Thanks for this Gog the Mild; I've attended (I think) to those points except regarding the seneschalcy etc, which I'll probably hit tomorrow. Hope all's well! ——SerialNumber54129 15:08, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 15:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)

Looking good. Saving the best 'til last? Not too bad thanks. Yourself? Gog the Mild (talk) 16:37, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

• Oh look who's here. Thanks Gog, you were too fast for me. I wanted to review this one in the near future, even I have some other nominations who're waiting for me. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi CPA-5. Beat you to it. It's a long article, but turned out to be pretty straight forward. I have no idea why i has waited so long. Now you will have time to have a look at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Calais/archive1. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:24, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

• I think I'd wait a little bit. I first want to get rid of the Second Fitna's source review. If that's done then we finally can promote it. Cheers. CPA-5 (talk) 19:48, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

• Thanks for the note, Gog the Mild; I've filled out infos on those offices with footnotes, here. ——SerialNumber54129 07:58, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

Fine stuff. Promoting. I look forward to seeing this at FAC. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:48, 22 August 2019 (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