Talk:Adam de Stratton/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:53, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Needs some context and explanations of things non-medievalists won't understand
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Specific concerns

citation needed tag in the lead (which strikes me as a drive by, since the body of the article has the information sourced)

I agree, this seems redundant, I just removed it.

If you go to FAC, suggest adding capsule descriptions for some of the technical terms such as Exchequer, ursury, pluralist, etc.

I don't think that will happen, for now I've simply wikilinked them.

Mention in the lead that he was a clergyman, as well as making it clearer in the early career section. Most folks won't know that "clerk" can mean "clergy"

I haven't been able to find any information on any ecclesiastical career, so these benefices seem to be simply gifts in return for service. But even though nothing is known of his education, he must have somehow qualified as a clergyman. I've put in brief mentions in the lead and the main text.

We really need an article on the Riccardi...

True, but that will have to wait for another time. There's even a book on them: Bankers to the Crown: The Riccardi of Lucca and Edward I by Richard W. Kaeuper (ISBN 0691052042).

Need to explain the significance of the cutting the seal off. Most folks won't understand why it's an offence.

I've added an explanation.

Need to explain "temporal possessions" (hint ... temporalities)

I've put in the wikilink.

I've added the {{persondat}} template for you.

Thanks!

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:12, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for a thorough review, hopefully the changes are to your satisfaction, if not let me know! Lampman (talk) 14:40, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]