Talk:Ludlow Castle

Ludlow 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. Review: December 29, 2014. (Reviewed version).

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ludlow Castle article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Military history: Fortifications / Technology / British / European / Medieval / Early Modern This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Associated task forces: /  Fortifications task force Military science, technology, and theory task force British military history task force European military history task force Medieval warfare task force (c. 500 – c. 1500) Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800) Architecture Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. UK geography Mid‑importance This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Historic sites Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. England Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Shropshire Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Shropshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Shropshire 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.ShropshireWikipedia:WikiProject ShropshireTemplate:WikiProject ShropshireShropshire articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list for Ludlow Castle: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2009-12-08 Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Expand : detail needed on layout, construction. more detail on history Verify : add citations

It Is a great place with wonderful scenery.It has fantastic views that strectch pasted Ludlow itself. GO AND VISIT IT NOW!!!

Aside from not understanding what "strectch pasted" is meant to mean, this isn't the place for a tourism advert. The last two paragraphs of the article need serious work. The next to last para is weak and begs embellishment, the last para requires legitimate references for its claims and the final sentence is meaningless. I'm commenting these out. Can someone please fix these? Canonblack 16:58, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm looking to do some further work to expand this article over the coming months. Before starting though, I'd like to propose a change to the citation style. The current style uses long references, e.g. "Coplestone-Crow "The End of the Anarchy to the de Genevilles" Ludlow Castle pp. 35–36". I wish to propose using the harnvb template short citation system throughout, backed up by the "cite web" template as appropriate; the previous example would appear as "Coplestone-Crow 2000, pp. 35-36" under this approach, for example, linked to the relevant item in the bibliography. I personally think that short citations for articles with lots of citations, particularly from edited volumes, are easier to read and to edit. Such a change requires prior consensus on this talk page, as per MOS:CITE, of course (Nev, just to alert you in particular, as your considerable expansion of the article in 2012 established the current style!).

NB: if the consensus was to stay with the current style, I would look to carry out the expansion work anyway, using the current citation style. Hchc2009 (talk) 06:08, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It was only ever half finished anyway! The current system isn't my usual style; my own preference would be for the shorter references, but that's partly because it's always been the style I've defaulted to. It was formatted to fit into the broad arc of Ealdgyth's articles, such as Josce de Dinan. I have absolutely no objection to changing the citation style or sticking with the current one, but I've pinged Ealdgyth in this comment so she knows about the change. Nev1 (talk) 12:14, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem for me - I actually didn't have this article watchlisted. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:35, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly a go on this, and thanks for asking. Johnbod (talk) 14:17, 18 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I've now got some of the older articles as well, so will make a start on the expansion next. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:00, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

...I've gone through and expanded the article a bit, and added maps etc. It will need a decent copyedit etc. I suspect. Hchc2009 (talk) 11:20, 5 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA toolbox
Copyvio detector Authorship External links
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions

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

Reviewer: Zawed (talk · contribs) 00:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one. Review to follow, it will probably take a few days given the length of the article. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 00:50, 7 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

• Haven't picked up any issues at this stage.

11th century

• The second sentence of the 2nd paragraph: repetition of Walter. I suggest replacing the second occurrence with "his".

12th century

• "...probably either around the siege of 1139...": I think it would read better if "around" was replaced with "at the time of"

13th century

• "Walter de Lacy returned to Ireland...": Walter's first visit to Ireland hasn't been mentioned so you may want to replace "returned".
• link Peter de Geneva and since it is the first mention of him, Prince Edward. I think you have linked him later.

Other stuff

• one dablink: Presbytery
• duplinks: Arthur, Prince of Wales
• images: extremely well illustrated, image tags all check out OK to me.

Still have to do from 15th century onwards. Zawed (talk) 08:08, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

NB: all done. I went for "around the time of the siege" in the end, as "at the time of" might make it sound too precise. I couldn't find an existing article for Peter de Geneva, but may be missing an obvious one! Hchc2009 (talk) 18:23, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing review:

15th century

• link King Henry IV
• "Henry kept the young heir to Ludlow, Edmund Mortimer, under house arrest..."; may want to say "another Edmund" to avoid confusion with (presumably) his father. Also "kept" is used twice in this sentence, suggest the first usage be changed to "placed"?

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• typos here: "much of the in the 1450s."

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• First sentence of 5th para a bit long and covers off different subject matter; suggest splitting at the first comma.

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The ref for the tile image (54) may be better expressed as a note?

• I think that in this case it is properly a ref, as it is stating where the information in the caption came from / can be confirmed, rather than adding additional commentary. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

16th century

• link Henry VIII

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "Sir Henry extended...": this sentence could be started with "He", since Henry already introduced in previous sentence.

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• What is "Mortimer's Tower"? Is it the Guardrobe Tower built in the 14th century (1st para of that section)?

• I've given a bit more clarification. Hchc2009 (talk) 08:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

17th century

• Doing a quick ce on the first sentence of this section, I noticed what looks like text, but no wiki markup, for a note at the end of the first para.

• I'd put this in as a silent note for future editors; the oddity over the date is the kind of thing that someone will otherwise try and helpfully fix, assuming it's a mistake! Hchc2009 (talk) 08:59, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "...being sent to Hereford...": should "being" be "and were"?

18th century

• "is in the very Pefection of Decay": may want to add a [sic] if this is an accurate quote.

• Fixed. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "Nonetheless, although some rooms remained usable for many years afterwards, possibly as late as the 1760s and 1770s, when drawings show the entrance block to the inner bailey to still be intact, and visitors remarked on the good condition of the round chapel.": Some grammatical issues in this sentence, perhaps "although" should be deleted?

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "...public walks around the castle, dug into the cliffs around the castle...": repetition here, suggest "...dug into the surrounding cliffs..."

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• laid what with gravel?

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

19th century

• "...outright for £1,560", "was worth £50 a year", "admission costing six pence": perhaps notes to cover the conversions?

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

20th century

• The first half of the 3rd para feels like it needs to be earlier in this section for smoother chronology.

• I struggled with this one originally. I couldn't find a way of getting the first part up in the section without then leaving a very thin paragraph hanging there in that position later on, which also looked odd. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "who rented out the flats.": which rented.

• Done. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inner bailey

• "Within the inner bailey, a separate area, called the innermost bailey,...": is this the "inmost bailey" of the "Architecture" section?

• Fixed. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:04, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

References

• All references have corresponding entries in the bibliographic section where appropriate.

OK, all done here. Will check back in a few days for your responses. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 03:33, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the really useful review. All the changes should have been done now, or responses left above. Hchc2009 (talk) 09:18, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your changes and comments look good to me, Hchc2009. Passing as GA. As always, awesome work! Zawed (talk) 01:14, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Ludlow Castle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140826042917/http://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php to http://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:56, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]