Wikipedia:Peer review/House of Plantagenet/archive3

House of Plantagenet

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because at one time this article became confused between a history of the familly and a more general history of England in the period. As a result it failed a FAC. Much work has been done by others in removing the general history into a former redirect page England in the Late Middle Ages and adding details of the wider familly that were largely absent from the article. That done, it seems unlikely that further progress to A-class or FA is unlikely without wider feedback.

The article currently has GA status.

Thanks, Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:14, 25 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Tomandjerry211

Needs an Infobox, if they have one for the subject Y
The section "Footnotes" should be relabeled as "Citations" Y194.106.220.86 (talk) 10:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Change to references which seems common across the history articles.Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with MoS

Don't use "the" to start off headings. Y
Don't start off headers with the title of the article Y
Spell words with either American or British English, not both. Y194.106.220.86 (talk) 10:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This article is tagged British English and unless I've missed some that is what I've usedNorfolkbigfish (talk) 11:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Problems with WP:FA?

Might want to get rid of some subsections or create some subpages since the table of contents is large. Y
Some paragraphs have no citations (like the second paragraph under the subsection "Pole"). Y Norfolkbigfish (talk) 15:12, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Some citations need page numbers (for example "Aurell 2010") Y194.106.220.86 (talk) 10:28, 13 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Removed the two in question—didn't seem to add much Norfolkbigfish (talk) 11:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

More once these are finished. -- Tomandjerry211 (talk) 20:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)

"a family originally from the former French county of Anjou, whose members held the English throne": In general, your style would be a little better if it were a little tighter. I'm not insisting on any particulars cuts, but this part for instance could be: "an originally Angevin family that held the English throne" Y
"French county of Anjou ... French counts of Anjou": the second "French" isn't necessary. Y
"The first of these counts—Geoffrey—became duke of Normandy in 1144 and his successor—Henry—added Aquitaine by virtue of his marriage to Eleanor of Aquitaine in 1152 and became king of England in 1154 by successfully pursuing a claim derived from his maternal grandfather, Henry I of England.": Break up the sentence. Y
"the Plantagenet’s rule": That doesn't seem right; I wouldn't write "the York's rule", or "the Tudor's rule". How about "the Plantagenets' rule"? (Note the straight apostrophe, per WP:MOS.) Y
"They were often forced by weakness to negotiate compromises that constrained their power as kings in return for financial and military support—such as the Magna Carta—": better would be: "They were often forced by weakness to negotiate compromises—as in the Magna Carta—that constrained their power as kings in return for financial and military support". - Dank (push to talk) 02:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC) YNorfolkbigfish (talk) 11:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks both @Dank:@Tomandjerry211: