Wikipedia:Peer review/List of English monarchs/archive2

List of English monarchs

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

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for December 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to try and get it elevated to FL status and want see what sort of things are needed to improve it. Cheers.

Thanks, Sotakeit (talk) 15:42, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Casliber

Would be great to get this Featured - some more on who decided the kings should start at Egbert (when did this become convention) and is there any dissent from this. also might be worth adding why the Saxon Edwards are not counted in the I-IIX numbering of Edwards..Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 05:17, 15 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

My Review

Overall the writing of the article is pretty good. The items in the tables of the list have citations and cosmetically everything is in order. However it is accepted practice on WP to make sure that every detail has a cited source to back it up. Not necessarily a citation on each sentence. However sources to back up what is in any given paragraph should be cited in that paragraph. For example I could write.

So and so such and such about X. X Bla blah blah.[2][3]

Just so long as the citations are nearby that's good enough for me.

There are some paragraphs in between the tables which write about each house of England which have no inline citations. Now from having read many of the articles I know that is in those paragraphs is true. All that needs to be done is the citations moved copied to the proper locations within the article. Once this is done I could rate this article as class A. --Hfarmer (talk) 07:57, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
- There should be a single place with the start and end dates of a reign. For example under Henry VIII it says "21 April 1509–1547". I'd rather it say "21 April

1509–28 January 1547", which is more complete.

- In the Acts of Union section, it should say flat-out that the list is continued at List of British monarchs. Reywas92 ^Talk 22:06, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm a bit concerned by the use of anachronistic images, though unfortunately those are often our only choices. In some cases there are better alternatives though, like this one on Stephen. It's probably a bit too small to go as the main pic in the article, but it should be ok here. Lampman (talk) 19:51, 7 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]