Edge Rewrite
// HTMLRewriter · presentation

This page was redesigned at the edge.

Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.

// request.cf · coarse context

A page that knows where it met you.

Only coarse request metadata is shown. This demo does not display or persist visitor IP addresses.

Country
US
Cloudflare location
CMH
Connection
HTTP/2
Language
Not provided

Ray ID: a22e0e069fb977be

Jump to content

Talk:Brough Castle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Add topic
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Latest comment: 14 years ago by Hchc2009 in topic GA Review
Good articleBrough Castle has been listed as one of the Warfare 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
May 2, 2012Good article nomineeListed

Expansion...

[edit]

I've gone through and given the article a bit of a scrub, added a floor plan etc. Probably introduced a few typos as well in the process... Hchc2009 (talk) 15:34, 5 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Brough Castle/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) 23:50, 24 April 2012 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
  • The castle was finally restored in the late 17th century Um, it wasn't finally restored, and it wasn't the late 17th century. Re-phrase.
  1. B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  • three disambig links:
    • Cobble
    • River Eden
    • Wark Castle
  1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
  • Where you have a URL, no need an accessdate
  1. C. No original research:
  2. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  3. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  4. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  5. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    All pictures have appropriate rationales
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  6. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Hopefully all done now - thanks for the review! Hchc2009 (talk) 18:26, 2 May 2012 (UTC)Reply