Talk:Ian Begg (architect)/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: Bruxton (talk · contribs) 17:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I will review this one. I remember his name from an article about a castle. Bruxton (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Bruxton thank you for your review! I think I've addressed all your points below so far. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Grammar

Y Lead - needs to be developed, and should be a summary of the article; as of now it is insufficient.

Done. Is it better now?

Y Body "Ravens' Craig tower house castle in Plockton, Lochalsh was designed by Begg and built from scratch" Please find another way to say that built the house- from scratch seems colloquial.

Is "from the ground up" better?

Y Body "Afterwards, when he was 22," suggest we remove the word "Afterwards"

Done.

Y Body "was an adviser for National Trust for Scotland, and vice president" needs a determiner like "the" before National and "was" before vice.

Done.

Y Body "complete with winery" suggest you add an "a" before winery

Done.

Y Body "to aid bringing logs to main hall" suggest a determiner (the) before main hall

Done.

Y Lead should remove citations from the lead per MOS:LEADCITE - FYI it is already cited in the body

Done.

Y "The main hall is 5 m by 7.27 m, with the size dictated by a triangular" use conversion templates like 5 m (16 ft) and 7.27 m (23.9 ft)

Done.

Y Body regarding the Ravens' Craig section. We need to say when the Tower House was completed or built.

Done.

Y We should also see if we combine these single sentences into the paragraph.

Done by you I think?

Y £750,000 an inflation calculator might be helpful here (equivalent to $1,370,677 in 2023) note-the year is incorrect in the conversion I randomly put 2006

The figure is from 2022, and the inflation template only works up until 2021 it seems. I have though fixed it to say £725,000 rather than £750,000, to align with the source.

Y since the architect's website is dead, we should probably remove it from the infobox

Done.

Y Awards section "He retired in December 2009" was already stated above in career section.

Removed.

Reviewer edits

Hope you do not mind - I edited the Bio section and created two sections, and also copyedited parts.

also edited the Castles and other buildings section

combined a few lonely sentences in sections

All looks good to me, thank you!

Images

Y they appear to be correctly licensed and relevant.

? Image Please consider adding a non-free image of the person to the infobox.

Done. It's my first time ever adding a non-free image, so I hope I've done it correctly!

I will fix it up a bit! He is a handsome fella and the image is great! Bruxton (talk) 20:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Citations

Y Early life -Number 3 is accurate

Y Citation 2 is not really RS but is useable as WP:ABOUTSELF - keep in mind that it cannot be used for self-serving claims.

Y Career Citation 5 is correct

Y Career retirement is supported by citation 2 - uncontroversial

Y Castles section "Begg designed the Scandic Crown Hotel, Edinburgh in 1988–89" is supported by the citations

Y Citation 19 checks out

Y Citation 20 checks out

Y Citation 22 checks out

Y Citation 23 checks out

Thank you for the edits. I reworked the lead a bit. But I think we need to expand the article based on the obituary below.

Y Seem like quite a bit of info in this source (number 23) in the citations. I archived the link and it looks like he had been married with children. I suggest a personal life section after Ravens' Craig. Move his retirement and death to that section but start with his personal life and marriage. Bruxton (talk) 01:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Bruxton I've expanded the personal life section a bit and added a further reference. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I have performed some cleanup and organization to the article. I also added a quote from him about his house.

Y My checks of citations show that the sources with the exception of the "about self" source called out above and the Legacy.com article appear to be quality and accurately support the prose. The Legacy source is attributed to the Scotsman Bruxton (talk) 19:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you again for your help with this. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Status:

100% reviewed

   

Review chart

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Yes
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Yes
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Yes
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Yes
	2c. it contains no original research.	Yes
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Yes
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yes
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Yes
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Yes
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Non-free of the person was added Y
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Yes
	7. Overall assessment.	The article and layout are significantly improved. It was a pleasure to work with you.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.