Talk:Edward Gibbons

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

GA Review

This review is
transcluded from Talk:Edward Gibbons/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

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


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".
  • "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)[reply]

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)[reply]