Talk:Edward Gibbons/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 11:28, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments

• "and he later received degrees from the Cambridge University and Oxford University" perhaps you meant to say "from the Universities of Cambridge and Oxford".
  • Indeed! Done
• "at King's College, Cambridge as " comma after Cam.
  • Done
• "Clocke?. " don't need that double punc.
  • Done
• "former is particularly moving" seems like someone's opinion.
  • Clarified
• "1603 London plague outburst which " link. And shouldn't it be "to which"?
  • "To which" seems better; linked to bubonic plague as I don't think a more specific article exists for that time
• "more famous Orlando" is "more famous" needed? Encyclopedic even?
  • Changed to "better-known", if that's better? I would say yes, since Edward is minor figure compared to Orlando
• "c. 1540–1595" if it's only the 1540 which is circa, this should be c. 1540 – 1595.
  • I believe both are uncertain
    • Just checked, and your version makes more sense
• If this is BritEng (with strong ties I would imagine that makes sense), baptised is with an s, not a z. Check throughout.
  • Standardized, I believe
• "from Cambridge University and" the University of Cambridge.
  • Done
• Likewise for "the other place".
  • Done
• "1591/1592" previously just used two digits on the second year in consecutive year range like this. Check throughout.
  • Standardized
• "couple would have six" had?
  • Done
• "quarter shillings split" link specifically not to a generic article about "shilling".
  • linked to Shilling (British coin), instead
• "notorious" puts some POV on it, any reason why "known" isn't more encyclopedic in tone?
  • Good point, changed to your suggestion
• "are virtually unknown," by "virtually" do you mean "almost completely"?
  • Indeed, changed to "largely"
• "characterizes" ENGVAR.
  • Fixed
• "The works seem considerably routine, described" I would remove Wikipedia telling us how the works seem and stick with "The works are described..."
  • Clarified
• Could we get row scopes in the table too, for the name of the work?
  • Good point, done now
• Fix the last row (No other works...) so it doesn't sort, or remove it.
  • Fixed sorting
• "194r-199v" en-dash.
  • Fixed
• Harvard errors showing in the hidden categories, have you put a publication year for each use of the {{sfn}} template, for instance?
  • Indeed, seems to be a Rayner ref; fixed now

That's all I have for now. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:53, 3 September 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks for this The Rambling Man. I believe I've addressed everything, but am happy to take another look should you find more issues. Aza24 (talk) 23:21, 3 September 2021 (UTC)