Talk:Fort Senneville

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fort Senneville article.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

	Fort Senneville 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.
	An entry from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on March 18, 2007.
Article milestones Date Process Result March 19, 2007 Good article nominee Listed December 2, 2007 Good article reassessment Kept Current Status: Good article

This article is within the scope of multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details

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. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. Additional information and associated task forces: This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call. 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. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. Additional information and associated task forces: Associated task forces (nations and regions): French military history task force Associated task forces (periods and conflicts): Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500–c. 1792) Canada Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale. Quebec Portal This article is part of the Quebec WikiProject (Discuss/Join). This article is within the scope of WikiProject Montreal, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Montreal articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. GA This article has been rated as GA-class on the quality scale. Low This article has been rated as low-importance on the importance scale.

[edit] GA-review

Another nice addition by the author covering all the requirements well - but again a tad pre-mature. I may promote it myself in a few days but will hold off for now. I changed a couple of things most notably avoiding disambiguation pages and adding some categories (all articles should be categorized to some extent). I do have one point to make regarding the structure and context of the article. I don't think it is quite enought to say that it was one of a series of forts built especially since there is no general article on the subject. Consider expanding or adding at least a sentence which more generally describes the forts such as when and why built. It doesn't have to be much but context needs to be strengthened.

It might sound trivial but in Site Today section you use the word "site" too often. It grates my sensitive soul.

Also when you nominate an article you should put the appropriate tag in the Talk page.Peter Rehse 02:57, 16 March 2007

I have removed three out of the six incidences where "site" appears in the final section, and once out of the lead. As for context, I added that the outlying forts were 30 in all, and that Fort Senneville was one of four substantial castle-like forts in the network. I would like to have a main article for the forts in general, but I will have to write about Fort Longeueil and Fort de la Montagne first. --Grimhelm 22:33, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Reads fine to me. Let's see if there is any response after the DYK listing (English cannon anyone?) but in my view it is definately promotable.Peter Rehse 02:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] English vs French names

Irrelevent to the GA issue now but I am curious is there such a rule about English names for English articles (vis a vis the recent edit). If this was so then consistency is another consideration since in this article we still have both including for the same name. My feeling is that either is ok but the name should be spelled the same throughout the article. The excellent Battle of the Plains of Abraham article uses French names. I consider that part of their charm and prefer it.

Whatever the case - this article should be checked for consistency.Peter Rehse 10:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

• It seems to be from Wikipedia:Naming conventions (use English). However, under "Disputed issues", it mentions that there is no consensus if the English and native names are identical but for diacritics. Since Montréal is the second largest Francophone city, and we are talking about a topic related to New France, there should be no issue over using the French spelling (provided we bypass redirects). --Grimhelm 14:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

Good to know - thanks.Peter Rehse 00:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA Sweeps Review: Pass

As part of the WikiProject Good Articles, we're doing sweeps to go over all of the current GAs and see if they still meet the requirements of the GA criteria. I'm specifically going over all of the "World History-Americas" articles. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a good article. I made a few minor edits, please go over them and make sure that I didn't incorrectly change something. If you have any questions, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have edited the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 08:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)