stringtranslate.com

Talk:Corleck Head

Notes

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 20:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Looks like an interesting topic; I'll take a look this week. Hog Farm Talk 20:10, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take another look once these are addressed. Hog Farm Talk 01:57, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks v much; working through. Ceoil (talk) 22:42, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ceoil: - I'd forgotten about this review. Please let me know when you're ready for me to continue. Hog Farm Talk 15:27, 13 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Ceoil, @Hog Farm, I just noticed this was still open and thought you might like a reminder ping. -- asilvering (talk) 18:13, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Asilvering, @Hog Farm...I've been tardy here but will ping Hog in next few days for a final look. Ceoil (talk) 23:21, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm. sorry for the tardy response, real life disasters unfortunately, but I think all of your points have been met in last few days. I would be very please if you could reengage again, whether positively or with more suggestions/observations. Ceoil (talk) 00:55, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil - I don't think I'll be able to get to this for at least another few days. I still don't have a consistent internet connection after moving. Problems with getting service switched over. Hog Farm Talk 03:44, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There is no rush Hog and thanks. I usually only edit at weekends anyway, when you have time is grand, there is no panic with this one. Time would be fine as I do need head space (pardon the pun) to finish up on Doolittle before taking this, and its companion article, the Tandragee Idol, further. I do understand the pressure and multiple wiki obligations you have, and how it might bear down, weeks or months time is fine, and to note how appreciative I am for the detailed review thus far; very very helpful. Ceoil (talk) 07:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ceoil: - this is still on my radar; I've just been much busier than I expected and it took longer to get the internet issue resolved than I expected. This is towards the top of the priority list for me, but I just need to be able to get a block of time to look at this. Hog Farm Talk 05:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Grand, and no hurry or problem. Ceoil (talk) 05:09, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing:

I'll look back over the article once these are addressed. Hog Farm Talk 00:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing:

Required spot-checks:

Added a 2nd ref to Waddell (2023), p. 321, which taking from Rynne says "...round eyes..simple mouth and wedge shaped noses." Ceoil (talk) 20:52, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I've got time for this evening. Hog Farm Talk 01:44, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is no rush and thanks once again, all good points. Ceoil (talk) 21:05, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the continued delay:

To finish up the spot-checking stuff, would you be willing to provide the quotes from sources if possible for three or so passages that should be straight-forward to quote support for? That might be easiest as I don't have access to most of the sources. Hog Farm Talk 00:52, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that sounds good to me. Im traveling at the moment, so dont have the books, bud do have all the journal pdfs. Ceoil (talk) 13:07, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Let's go with:

Hog, no response from Smyth, so have removed the statement. Given this, I would appreciate it if you could widen your source integrity sample further. Ceoil (talk) 20:59, 11 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

with hair depicted, was allowed to fall to pieces and is only known from a minute sketch." Have changed ref back to this. Ceoil (talk) 20:25, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These are from the books, not the journals so it's okay if it's awhile before you can get to this. I'll be very very busy for at least next week. Hog Farm Talk 00:18, 27 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies...missed you q...was my birthday and was in a pub. Done. Ceoil (talk) 23:17, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hog Farm you should probably fail this. It’s been like 8 months and still no consensus. 48JCL (talk) 13:49, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Have swapped to "Eighteenth century", as am having difficulty re-finding late 1790s, though am certain ts true. Ceoil (talk) 23:33, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, I'm not sure a fail is in order - the length of the review is more down to the reviewer than the responses. That said, I don't really care so much: Hog's suggestions have been really beneficial and have improved the article significantly, which is really all that matters. Ceoil (talk) 23:06, 26 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]