Wikipedia:Peer review/Llywelyn the Great/archive1

Llywelyn the Great

I have added quite a lot of material to this article and would like to get it up to Featured status. It could do with some fresh pairs of eyes at this stage. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Rhion 17:22, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Andy _t 01:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Now dealt with, I think. Please let me know if I've missed anything. Thanks. Rhion 11:41, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Copyediting suggestions

It reads very well. I've made a few minor copyedits; feel free to undo them if you disagree. If you have any questions about these edits, I'll be glad to discuss them with you.

Just a few things that stuck out to me:

"eventually effectively ruler over most of Wales." "Eventually effectively" is awkward. How about "eventually de facto ruler over most of Wales"?
"The grandson of Owain Gwynedd, who had died three years before Llywelyn's birth, he began a campaign..." I understand why you've worded it this way, but it impedes the flow of the article, since it's not clear until halfway through the sentence that "the grandson of Owain" is Llywelyn and not another person. Can you find another place to discuss Llywelyn's lineage other than this sentence?
"in 1208 took advantage of the king's action in arresting Gwenwynwyn ab Owain of Powys to annex southern Powys." It's a little unclear at first whether Llywelyn or the king annexed souther Powys. How about "in 1208 he annexed southern Powys, taking advantage of the king's decision to arrest Gwenwynwyn ab Owain"?
I'm confused by the use (or omission) of commas with titles: "Madog ap Maredudd prince of Powys" with no comma before the title, but "A year later Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury persuaded Llywelyn" with a comma before the title. I'm American, so I'd expect "Madog ap Maredudd, prince of Powys" and "A year later Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury, persuaded Llywelyn"... but I'll defer if British/Welsh usage is different.
"This is the earliest surviving written agreement between an English king and a Welsh ruler, and under its terms Llywelyn was to swear fealty and do homage to the king and in return was confirmed in possession of his conquests with the provision that cases relating to lands claimed by Llywelyn might be heard under Welsh law." This sentence is just a hair too complex; I'm splitting it in two. I'm confused by the last part: "and in return" suggests that I'm going to hear what Llywelyn got out of the deal, but "with the provision" suggests that I'm about to hear a condition limiting what Llywelyn gained. Therefore, I'm led to conclude that "cases... might be heard under Welsh law" wasn't to Llywelyn's advantage. Is that what you meant? It would seem to me that holding Llywelyn accountable to Welsh rather than (presumably) English law would be to Llywelyn's advantage, but the way it's currently phrased leaves me uncertain.
Why had "the clergy intervened to make peace between Llywelyn and Gwenwynwyn?" If you know, please consider putting it in. Reading this, I was genuinely curious.
"Ranulph, Earl of Chester rebuilt the castle at Deganwy, and Llywelyn retaliated..." Why did rebuilding the castle prompt this response? How about something like "Ranulph, Earl of Chester rebuilt the castle at Deganwy, violating Llywelyn's territorial claims or paving the way to a possible incursion across the River Conwy or some such. Llywelyn retaliated..."
"with a larger army, crossed the River Conwy" but later "Llywelyn lost all his lands east of the river Conwy." Is "river" capitalized or not?
"Bangor was burnt by a detachment of the royal army" but "Llywelyn destroyed the castles of Narberth and Wiston, burned the town of Haverfordwest." Again, I plead ignorance of British usage, but are the two forms of 'burn" both correct?

The section on Llywelyn in literature uses inconsistent formatting. I recommend converting everything to complete sentences with periods.

Great pictures! Some FA reviewers want captions to be complete sentences. Can you take advantage of this to elaborate on the heraldry or familial connections of the royal arms?

This article is well-written and interesting. It was enjoyable going through it. Good luck! Peirigill 01:03, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for some very valuable suggestions. I have incorporated them all in the article except that I can't provide any more details about the clergy making peace between Llywelyn and Gwenwynwyn. It would indeed be interesting to know more, but there is just a line in the chronicle about this without explaining what happened. Rhion 16:42, 4 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]