Talk:Glorious Revolution in Scotland

Glorious Revolution in Scotland has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 24, 2014. (Reviewed version).

Scotland Low‑importance

	Scotland portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScotlandWikipedia:WikiProject ScotlandTemplate:WikiProject ScotlandScotland articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the subject of History on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Historyhistory articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Scottish Royalty Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Scottish Royalty (a child project of the Royalty and Nobility Work Group), an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Scottish Royalty on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you should visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Scottish RoyaltyWikipedia:WikiProject Scottish RoyaltyTemplate:WikiProject Scottish RoyaltyScottish royalty articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

A fact from Glorious Revolution in Scotland appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 1 March 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the Mary (pictured) on the Scottish throne and led to the dominance of Presbyterians in the Church of Scotland?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Glorious Revolution in Scotland.

Wikipedia

GA Review

This review is
transcluded from Talk:Glorious Revolution in Scotland/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 12:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator: SabreBD (talk)

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 12:04, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking this on.--SabreBD (talk) 12:43, 22 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

1: Well-written

a. Prose is "
clear and concise", without copyvios
, or spelling and grammar errors:

Check for

WP:LEAD

:

Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section: Done
Check for Citations (
WP:LEADCITE
): Done
Check for Introductory text: Done
- Check for Provide an accessible overview (
  MOS:INTRO
  ): Done
- Check for Relative emphasis: Done
- Check for Opening paragraph (
  MOS:BEGIN
  ): Done
  - Check for First sentence (
    WP:LEADSENTENCE
    ): Done
    - The Glorious Revolution in Scotland was part of a wider change of regime, known as the Glorious Revolution or Revolution of 1688, in the British kingdoms of the Stuart monarchy in 1688-89.
  - Check for Format of the first sentence (
    MOS:BOLDTITLE
    ): Done
  - Check for Proper names and titles: Done
  - Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (
    MOS:BOLDSYN
    ): None
  - Check for Foreign language (
    MOS:FORLANG
    ): None
  - Check for Pronunciation: None
  - Check for Contextual links (
    MOS:CONTEXTLINK
    ): Done
  - Check for Biographies: NA
  - Check for Organisms: NA
Check for Biographies of living persons: NA
Check for Alternative names (
MOS:LEADALT
): Done
- Check for Non-English titles:
- Check for Usage in first sentence:
- Check for Separate section usage:
Check for Length (
WP:LEADLENGTH
): Done
Check for Clutter (
WP:LEADCLUTTER
): None

WP:LAYOUT
:

Done

Check for

WP:LAYOUT

:

Done

Check for Body sections:
MOS:BODY
. Done
- Check for Headings and sections: Done
- Check for Section templates and summary style: Done
- Check for Paragraphs (
  MOS:PARAGRAPHS
  ): Done
Check for Standard appendices and footers (
MOS:APPENDIX
): Done
- Check for Order of sections (
  WP:ORDER
  ): Done
- Check for Works or publications: Done
- Check for See also section (
  MOS:SEEALSO
  ): Done
- Check for Notes and references (
  WP:FNNR
  ): Done
- Check for Further reading (
  WP:FURTHER
  ): Done
- Check for External links (
  WP:LAYOUTEL
  ): Done
- Check for Links to sister projects: Done
- Check for Navigation templates: Done
Check for Formatting: Done
- Check for Images (
  WP:LAYIM
  ): Done
- Check for Links: Done
- Check for Horizontal rule (
  WP:LINE
  ): Done

WP:WTW
:

Done

Check for

WP:WTW

:

Done

Check for Words that may introduce bias: Done
- Check for Puffery (
  WP:PEA
  ): Done
- Check for Contentious labels (
  WP:LABEL
  ): Done
- Check for Unsupported attributions (
  WP:WEASEL
  ): Done
- Check for Expressions of doubt (
  WP:ALLEGED
  ): Done
- Check for Editorializing (
  MOS:OPED
  ): Done
- Check for Synonyms for said (
  WP:SAY
  ): Done
Check for Expressions that lack precision: Done
- Check for Euphemisms (
  WP:EUPHEMISM
  ): Done
- Check for Clichés and idioms (
  WP:IDIOM
  ): Done
- Check for Relative time references (
  WP:REALTIME
  ): Done
- Check for Neologisms (
  WP:PEA
  ): None
Check for Offensive material (
WP:F***
): Done

Check for

WP:MOSFICT

:

Done

Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world): Done
- Check for Primary and secondary information (
  WP:PASI
  ): Done
- Check for Contextual presentation (
  MOS:PLOT
  ): Done

WP:EMBED :
Done Prose is preferred over list ( WP:PROSE ): Check for Tables ( MOS:TABLES ):

2: Verifiable with no original research

a. Has an

appropriate reference section

:

Yes

b. Citation to reliable sources where necessary: excellent (Thorough check on Google. Cross-checked with other GAs)

WP:RS
:

Done

Check for

WP:RS

:

Done

Cross-checked with other GAs:

Scotland in the Early Middle Ages, Christianity in Medieval Scotland, Architecture of Scotland

Check for the material (
WP:RSVETTING
): (contentious) Done
- Is it contentious?: Yes
- Does the ref indeed support the material?:
Check for the author (
WP:RSVETTING
): Done
- Who is the author?:
- Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
- What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
- What else has the author published?:
- Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
Check for the publication (
WP:RSVETTING
): Done
Check for Self-published sources (
WP:SPS
):

WP:MINREF
:

Done

Check for inline citations

WP:MINREF

:

Done

Check for Direct quotations: Done
Check for Likely to be challenged: Done
Check for Contentious material about living persons (
WP:BLP
): NA

c. No original research: Done

WP:NOR :
Done Check for primary sources ( WP:PRIMARY ): Done Check for synthesis ( WP:SYN ): Done Check for original images ( WP:OI ): Done

3: Broad in its coverage

a. Major aspects:

Done

Cross-checked with other GAs:

Scotland in the Early Middle Ages, Christianity in Medieval Scotland, Architecture of Scotland

Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
1. Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
2. Check for Out of scope:
Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
1. Check for All material that is notable is covered:
2. Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
3. Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
4. Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
5. Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (
  WP:OFFTOPIC
  ):

b. Focused :
Done Check for Readability issues ( WP:LENGTH ): Check for Article size ( WP:TOO LONG! ):

4: Neutral

WP:NPOV
:

Done

4. Fair representation without bias: Done

Check for POV (
WP:YESPOV
): Done
Check for naming (
WP:POVNAMING
): Done
Check for structure (
WP:STRUCTURE
): Done
Check for Due and undue weight (
WP:DUE
): Done
Check for Balancing aspects (
WP:BALASPS
): Done
Check for Giving "equal validity" (
WP:VALID
): Done
Check for Balance (
WP:YESPOV
): Done
Check for Impartial tone (
WP:IMPARTIAL
): Done
Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (
WP:SUBJECTIVE
): Done
Check for Words to watch (
WP:YESPOV
): Done
Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (
WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV
): Done
Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (
WP:PSCI
): None
Check for Religion (
WP:RNPOV
): None

5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images Done (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license) (PD)

Images:

Done

6: Images are

copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content

:

Done

Check for copyright tags (
WP:TAGS
): Done
Check for copyright status: Done
Check for non-free content (
WP:NFC
): Done
Check for valid fair use rationales (
WP:FUR
): Done

6: Images are provided if possible and are

suitable captions

:

Done

Check for image relevance (
WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE
): Done
Check for Images for the lead (
WP:LEADIMAGE
): Done
Check for suitable captions (
WP:CAPTION
): Done

As per the above checklist, there are no issues with the article and it’s a GA. Thanks, SabreBD, very much for your diligence in writing such great articles. I’m inspired a lot by your conscientiousness.

Promoting the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn ♥ 01:21, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for a prompt review. Much appreciated.--SabreBD (talk) 07:37, 24 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inclusion of Glencoe

I query the inclusion of a section relating to Glencoe; there is a separate page on that topic and it's not part of the Glorious Revolution. Can we just put a link to it?

Robinvp11 (talk) 11:13, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The glorious revolution

Why its called the glorious revolution 129.0.79.126 (talk) 01:17, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]