# Talk:Castle Rising Castle

I've gone through and expanded the article; it should all now be referenced with up-to-date sources etc. It will, however, probably benefit from a copyedit! Hchc2009 (talk) 17:43, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Castle Rising (castle)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 10:30, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
I don't know why but I've always loved the name of this place, and I haven't even visited it. Will aim to review by the weekend at least... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:30, 4 December 2013 (UTC)
Toolbox check

No dab links
ELs seem okay
Prose -- copyediting as usual so pls check I haven't misunderstood anything; outstanding points/queries:

"Historians Beric Morley and David Gurney believe this to be "one of the finest of all Norman keeps", and its military utility and political symbolism have been extensively discussed by historians." -- just a suggestion but any chance of one of the "historians" being replaced by "academics" or something else, to avoid repetition? Y fixed Duffit5 (talk) 18:15, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
"an upwardly mobile Anglo-Norman noble" is one of the most quaintly anachronistic expressions I've read on WP but it's a great form of shorthand so feel free to leave it and we'll see if reviewers at ACR/FAC object... ;-)
I was tempted to go for "nouveau riche" or "a noble on the make"...! He was definitely on the up-and-up socially... :) Hchc2009 (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Two "would have been"s in quick succession -- can we reword one as "may have been" or "is believed to have been" or some such? Y fixed Duffit5 (talk) 18:15, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Does "anti-Semitism" generally include a capital? I'd have thought not but may be wrong...
It can be either, I think; the article on the wiki proposes it can be done either way. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Up to 14th Century, more later... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

Resuming, "impressive", as in "impressive, timber-framed, brick kitchen", sounds a bit opinionated to me -- can we simply say "large" or something like that?
The original source has it as "striking" - it seems to imply something more than just large. I'll have a quick think. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
I've gone for "imposing", which sounds less POV than "striking", but reasonably close to the original source. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:40, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Sounds like a good choice. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:43, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
"a new set of buildings were" -- I'd generally expect it to be "was" to agree with the singular "set", but in BritEng I think you treat nouns denoting groups as plural, yeah?
I do, but my grammar is idiosyncratic even by Brit standards. Happy to be corrected! Hchc2009 (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
"one of the murals tower along the walls" -- doesn't sound right grammatically, has one of us missed something?
Sloppily worded; have deleted the superfluous "murals". Hchc2009 (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
"the rights to the castle changed hands privately several times" -- intrigued, does "privately" mean "secretly"?
No... in this case it is meaning "by private arrangement", as opposed to royal charter. I've trimmed back, as the distinction doesn't added much to the narrative. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:07, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Structure/comprehensiveness/referencing -- seem perfectly adequate to me as an admitted non-expert on fortification articles (although I know the basics about this one from my book on English castles, which memorably describes the keep as "a hulking brute").
Supporting materials -- infobox looks okay; I'd have thought that the following images needed a tag re. country of origin (Britain presumably) as well as the US:

File:Castle Rising Castle chapel in Victorian period.jpg
File:Castle rising by BYRNE, WILLIAM - GMII.jpg
File:Plan of Castle Rising Castle.jpg
File:Castle Rising, plan.png
Agree - will do so shortly. Hchc2009 (talk) 16:09, 13 December 2013 (UTC)
Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:51, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Image tags should now all be updated. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:34, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Okay, passing as GA -- look fwd to seeing at ACR and/or FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:43, 14 December 2013 (UTC)

I've changed the info box image for one that shows a greater expanse of the Castle, is in focus and in which greater detail can be viewed in this much larger and higher resolution image. The reason given for reversion was that the original shows greater detail - this is self-evidently not the case; and then on further revision that a higher resolution image is not necessary as the image is not viewed at higher resolution presumably as its represented as a thumbnail on the page. This seems contradictory. In other areas of Wiki higher resolution images are valued in keeping with the Wiki creative commons approach. I'd be happy with a couple of independent views. Thanks.WyrdLight (talk) 20:57, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
PS: you can actually see the 'forebuilding' in the updated image as noted in the image title.

Yes, I agree that the new image is better quality; it is sharper, has better perspective, covers more of the building and having a higher resolution gives a more interesting viewing experience. -- de Facto (talk). 21:17, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
I'd stick with the original - you can't pick out the architectural details so easily in the one being proposed by the Wyrdlight company. Hchc2009 (talk) 21:53, 23 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks Hchc2009 - have you compared the images side by side? In the original image the architectural detail softens and becomes indistinct when one attempts to look at the castle more closely. This doesn't support the article effectively.
File:CastleRising-WyrdLight-Wiki.jpg
File:Castle Rising Castle - geograph.org.uk - 660628.jpg
Thanks & by the way my support of Wiki is arranged with Wiki editorial recommendation to deal with copyright permission issues. WyrdLight (talk) 10:35, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
By the way I've a high resolution image taken from the same perspective - not as an effective view point, but it also reminds me the current image was taken from the ground - so there are converging verticals. Standing on the earth works around the castle does mean its easy to take an image that doesn't have this 'defect'. WyrdLight (talk) 10:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

I rather like both images: they're both arresting. The newer image is a pretty iconic view, and one very similar is used on the cover of Allen Brown's English Castles. Richard Nevell (talk) 10:59, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
I buy that argument, on the logic that we'd be following external sources etc. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:31, 25 March 2017 (UTC)
Thanks - the hope is always to support the article / subject matter. WyrdLight (talk) 10:26, 25 March 2017 (UTC)