Talk:Loch Arkaig treasure

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Loch Arkaig treasure 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 February 1, 2007.
February 21, 2007 Good article nominee Listed

	Loch Arkaig treasure is within the scope of WikiProject Scotland, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Scotland and Scotland-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.	Scotland Portal
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.
Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.
WikiProject Scotland To-do: edit  Peer review — general community input. Featured Portal Candidates — our ultimate short-term goal is to achieve Featured status for the portal. Featured Portal Candidate — 23 April 2007; result, Featured Portal Status awarded, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

The pope in question was dear old Benedict XIV. Any reason not to identify him? --Wetman 19:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA review

1. The first paragraph reads "said still to be hidden at Loch Arkaig in Lochaber." Said by whom? 2. I know Cumberland's repression was brutal, but perhaps we still need a reference for it? 3. The sentence on the embezzlement charge could do with a reference. DrKiernan 15:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

May have sorted this. I've referenced all three statements.--Doc^g 19:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I have passed this article. My suggestions:

1. Break up the large lead into sections. It's a tad too lengthy.
2. Find some other external links. This is sort of optional, but it's a closer step to FA.

bibliomaniac15 05:10, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I've split the lead. There really are no more external links to cite. This article is about as developed as the limited verifiable information will allow - I doubt it is capable of making FA for that reason.--Doc^g 17:16, 15 March 2007 (UTC)