Talk:Battle of Tory Island

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Battle of Tory Island has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
April 10, 2008 Good article nominee Listed
MILHIST 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 lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.


Ireland Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ireland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Ireland on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the priority scale.

[edit] Good Article review

This is a very well written and informative article. I just have an issue with a couple of citations before I pass the the Good Article nomination.

  • The first paragraph in the Background section is sourced to page 25 of Pakenham's The Year of Liberty. However, that page does not have the information cited. As far as I know (my knowledge is very limited!), the information in this paragraph is correct, but it needs a different citation.
Pakenham says that Ireland was "only half digested - part colony, part nation, a source of more weakness than wealth for church and crown and a prey to each sucessive enemy of Britain" Further down the page he says that Ireland was "still predominantly Catholic, still poor and still burning with hatred for her English oppressors". I think these do source the inline citations in the article, but I will looking for more sources on this. Unfortunately my main area of knowledge is naval history, not political and I don't seem to have anything else to hand. I will keep looking however.
  • In the Invasion attempts section, the sentence The expedition was a total disaster for the French fleet, with 13 ships lost and over 2,000 men drowned. is sourced to page 19 of Pakenham's The Year of Liberty (the last page of the prologue). However, that page does not include the numbers of ships or men lost. Can you use a different source here?

I will put the GA nomination on hold for seven days so you can address these issues. Please let me know if I can clarify anything. Bláthnaid 20:24, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

I can and have provided another source here.

Thankyou for your review, let me know what you think and if you have any suggestions for additional sources for the first paragraph. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 10:30, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

I found a source on Google Books that together with Pakenham's book might be enough to source the first paragraph: The British Armed Nation, 1793-1815 by J.E. Cookson, page 52-54 [1] Bláthnaid 17:28, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
That works admirably, thankyou.--Jackyd101 (talk) 21:48, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
Great, I'll pass the GA nomination. Congratulations! Bláthnaid 14:02, 10 April 2008 (UTC)
GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail: