Talk:History of Gibraltar/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Mark Arsten (talk · contribs) 00:08, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I finished my read-through. Impressive work, Gibraltar's history must have been hard to distill into an article of this length. It looks pretty good, not a lot of concerns. I have a few minor comments, I'll try to get them all posted this weekend.

Thanks, appreciate it. Prioryman (talk) 20:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraphs

  • I suggest the lead be condensed to four paragraphs.
  • You might want to look into condensing paragraphs in "Barbary pirate raids", as well.

Sourcing

  • I see that you rely heavily on Jackson, but I don't think that's problematic. You might consider using more page ranges though instead of consecutive single-page cites. Just a suggestion.
  • I'm not sure, what would be gained by doing that? Prioryman (talk) 00:51, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • No concrete benefit, but there will be an overall smaller (but less precise) reference section. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:01, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • This book might have some useful information for the early history, and this book might be helpful for later history. Just suggestions though.
  • Thanks for pointing those out, I'll see if I can obtain them. Prioryman (talk) 20:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you should add retrieval dates for the web sources.
  • Also, try to be consistent about providing locations for publishers.
  • I have done so, other than for Oxford and Cambridge University Presses - I've been told in the past that that's unnecessary as they are located in those cities. Prioryman (talk) 20:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consider adding OCLC numbers for references without ISBNs.
  • The script I use is giving me a "bad ISBN checksum" warning for "987-0-7509-3331-5". Might want to double-check that.
  • Thanks, there was one digit too many - fixed. Prioryman (talk) 20:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, you should standardize whether you use dashes with the ISBNs or not. Mark Arsten (talk) 20:00, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've been getting the ISBNs off Google Books and WorldCat - what you see is what I got! I wouldn't want to mess around with the ISBNs and risk breaking them... Prioryman (talk) 20:53, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • Merely a aesthetic issue, but you might consider one large image instead of two small ones.
  • I assume you mean the painting and the map? I rather like the painting, but I thought the map was a necessity; as people have pointed out to me on several occasions, Gibraltar is a rather small place, and not everyone knows where it is or its geographical relationship to the other places mentioned in the article. Prioryman (talk) 08:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Muslim rule

  • "Abu al-Hasan refortified Gibraltar "with strong walls as a halo surrounds a crescent moon" in anticipation of renewed war" Who is being quoted here?

Castilian and Spanish rule

  • " It had some minor economic value with wine and tunny-fishing industries" What is "tunny-fishing"? Is there a good place to link that to?
  • See Tunny. It can mean several different species so I can't disambiguate it further.

War of Spanish Succession

  • " Various territorial exchanges were agreed, among them the cession of the town, fortifications and port of Gibraltar (but not its hinterland) to Britain "for ever, without any exception or impediment whatsoever."" It's not clear which citation supports this quote.
  • Both of the citations at the end of the paragraph, from sources which discuss the terms of the treaty. Prioryman (talk) 08:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "War of the Spanish Succession (1701–1714)" I think the MOS recommends "1701–14". Mark Arsten (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I think you're right. Changed this. Prioryman (talk) 23:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Second World War

  • "Three Spaniards being run as spies and saboteurs by the German Abwehr were caught in Gibraltar in 1942–43 and hanged." I'd prefer to avoid the easter egg link here if you can. Maybe spell out a little more about Capital punishment in Gibraltar. Also, is "being run as spies" how you say it? It sounds strange to me but I very well may be wrong.
  • Yes, it's the correct term. You "run" a spy or an agent. Prioryman (talk) 08:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The British Government feared that Spain would also enter the war and it was decided to evacuate the entire civilian population of Gibraltar in May 1940,[140] mostly to the United Kingdom but also to Madeira and Jamaica, with some making their own way to Tangier and Spain." Kind of a long sentence, might want to break it up.
  • "Hitler eventually abandoned Felix to pursue other priorities such as the invasion of Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union.[146]" Should this be "invasions"? Mark Arsten (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Post-war Gibraltar

  • "the frontier was closed completely and Gibraltar's communications links with the outside world were cut" (also in lead) I'm a bit confused here, did they really have no way to communicate with the outside world?
  • The telephone cables went through Spain but were cut when the blockade was implemented. Gibraltar today has invested heavily in satellite communications and set up microwave links with Morocco on the other side of the Strait to prevent this situation ever recurring. Prioryman (talk) 08:17, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Modern Gibraltar

  • "By 2007 Peter Caruana, the Chief Minister, was able to boast that Gibraltar's economic success had made it "one of the most affluent communities in the entire world."[163]" So, is this just Caruana's opinion, or something well attested to by independent sources, as well? Perhaps add a mention of international ranking in development index or something.
  • There are some rankings out there, but I'll have to do a bit more digging to work out which one is best to use. I think it comes out at perhaps the 20th highest territory in the world by per capita GDP, or something like that. Prioryman (talk) 08:51, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, might want to add the current population, since there are some population numbers earlier in the article.
  • "land reclaimed from the sea now accounts for a tenth of Gibraltar's land area" Just a thought, but it would be wonderful if we could get a map showing this like a few of those on the Land reclamation article.
  • Check for consistency with date commas, I see "By 2011, Gibraltar was attracting up to 12 million visits a year" and then "By 2007 Peter Caruana". Mark Arsten (talk) 19:12, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Barbary pirate raids

  • You might consider re-titling part of this section, since it departs from the Barbary threat.
  • Fair point, I've added "and wars with other European powers" to the section title. Prioryman (talk) 23:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Spanish king Philip IV" I can never recall if "king" should be capitalized here. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • It shouldn't; the word "king" is being used here as an adjective, not a title. Thus "King Philip IV said..." versus "the Spanish king Philip IV". Prioryman (talk) 23:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for the explanation, hopefully I can remember that :) Mark Arsten (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gibraltar as a colony

  • "Gibraltar instituted the practice, which still continues today, of relying on large numbers of imported Spanish workers" Could we avoid the use of "today" here? Mark Arsten (talk) 21:19, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've taken out that clause altogether; it's not really needed. Prioryman (talk) 23:12, 18 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Links

  • EL look fine, one dab (Tunny) added during the review. I think the Tunny link might be Ok, but future reviewers may not agree with me, so use your best judgment. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't disambiguate any further since the source doesn't say what species was fished. It's a generic term covering multiple species, so it may well be that they did in fact fish multiple species. Prioryman (talk) 19:03, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks

  • 2, 167, 170, 171, and 172 spotchecked, so issues found. Mark Arsten (talk) 18:45, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oops, that was an unfortunate typo :) No issues found, that's it. I'm satisfied that this has reached the GA standards and I'll pass it now. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:26, 19 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:History_of_Gibraltar/GA1&oldid=539091707"