Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George V of the United Kingdom
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The article was promoted 03:52, 21 April 2007.
Support. Self nominated. Peer-reviewed good article. DrKiernan 07:55, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- At first glance it promises to be an interesting read. Looks well-referenced, image licenses are okay (maybe you could alternate between putting the images along the left and right margins, although it's purely a personal preference). For now, I've just read the lead (could you find a reference to the dull life?), which seems okay (maybe it could do with a little expansion - like listing some other highlights of his reign, apart from forming the House of Windsor, if any), although I'd put the birth name in bold also. Oh, why are the image descriptions throughout the article centered under the images rather than left-justified? This seems uncommon to me. I'll be hoping to read the article in whole in the next days. Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 09:24, 10 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support on the count that all seems to be well, thanks for the adjustments. Just one minor thing that bothered me somewhat (although it's not at all important), in the Duke of York section, fourth paragraph, the first sentence has claimed that George twice close to each other, could this be modified? Overall, an excellent article, well done! Cheers, Ouro (blah blah) 06:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- A few things:
- I'd remove "However, their remaining facial features were quite different up close" and the link to the image, unless this statement comes from a source.
- If you have a source that says they look alike, but not one that says they had distinct facial features, you have to say they look alike and leave it at that. Doesn't matter how obvious it is—it's OR if you don't have a source. --Spangineerws (háblame) 11:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "Queen Victoria created George" (seems like a better word could be used than "created", but if that's the standard way to do it, that's fine)
- "created" is the verb used to describe the bestowing of a peerage. DrKiernan 07:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- "[i.e. shoot]" (don't think this is necessary; if anything change to "hunt" and drop the i.e.)
- "hunt" isn't strictly correct. He did hunt certainly but he was most famous for shooting, i.e. standing still and firing a gun at something, as opposed to going out in the field and tracking a prey. DrKiernan 07:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- When did May become Mary? Should probably be explained better.
- This is explained at the beginning of the George V of the United Kingdom#King and Emporer section. DrKiernan 07:35, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't see an explanation, I just see "George had never liked May's habit of signing official documents and letters as "Victoria Mary" and insisted she drop one of the names. Neither thought she should be called Queen Victoria, and so she became Queen Mary." Why did May sign official documents as Victoria Mary in the first place? If May was a just a nickname (as suggested in the "Marriage" section), why even refer to her that way? Just mention the nickname and call her Mary for the rest of the article, if that's her name. --Spangineerws (háblame) 11:53, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Overall, looks good—largely well-written and well-formatted. I know nothing of the subject, so I can't judge its comprehensiveness. Address these suggestions and I'll support. --Spangineerws (háblame) 04:24, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Great article.-- Zleitzen(talk) 23:52, 11 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Support I peer-reviewed this article a while ago; it was good back then and it is even better now. It is well-written, well-sourced, and as far as I can tell, comprehensive (though I am no expert). Nice job on creating this set of biographies! Perhaps you should think about creating a featured topic out of these articles that you are writing. Awadewit 06:58, 12 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.