Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Lightburst talk 04:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* ... that Ian Begg, known for his work on Scottish architecture, designed and built his own 20th century castle to live in? Source: https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/lifestyle/home-gardens/property/702783/theres-distinctive-highland-home-meets-eye-can-see/

Created by Kj cheetham (talk). Self-nominated at 12:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Ian Begg (architect); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

ALT2 looks good, however, nowhere in the article does it say that he worked on the "restoration" of castles, only that he "worked on" them. Gatoclass (talk) 15:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just tweaked the article, hopefully for the better. -Kj cheetham (talk) 16:18, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: Everything looks good now. ALT2 is more informative so let's go with that one. Well done! Gatoclass (talk) 09:28, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Ian Begg (architect)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Bruxton (talk · contribs) 17:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]


I will review this one. I remember his name from an article about a castle. Bruxton (talk) 17:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Bruxton thank you for your review! I think I've addressed all your points below so far. -Kj cheetham (talk) 20:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Grammar

Green tickY Lead - needs to be developed, and should be a summary of the article; as of now it is insufficient.
Done. Is it better now?
Green tickY Body "Ravens' Craig tower house castle in Plockton, Lochalsh was designed by Begg and built from scratch" Please find another way to say that built the house- from scratch seems colloquial.
Is "from the ground up" better?
Green tickY Body "Afterwards, when he was 22," suggest we remove the word "Afterwards"
Done.
Green tickY Body "was an adviser for National Trust for Scotland, and vice president" needs a determiner like "the" before National and "was" before vice.
Done.
Green tickY Body "complete with winery" suggest you add an "a" before winery
Done.
Green tickY Body "to aid bringing logs to main hall" suggest a determiner (the) before main hall
Done.
Green tickY Lead should remove citations from the lead per MOS:LEADCITE - FYI it is already cited in the body
Done.
Green tickY "The main hall is 5 m by 7.27 m, with the size dictated by a triangular" use conversion templates like 5 m (16 ft) and 7.27 m (23.9 ft)
Done.
Green tickY Body regarding the Ravens' Craig section. We need to say when the Tower House was completed or built.
Done.
Green tickY We should also see if we combine these single sentences into the paragraph.
Done by you I think?
Green tickY £750,000 an inflation calculator might be helpful here (equivalent to $1,370,677 in 2023) note-the year is incorrect in the conversion I randomly put 2006
The figure is from 2022, and the inflation template only works up until 2021 it seems. I have though fixed it to say £725,000 rather than £750,000, to align with the source.
Green tickY since the architect's website is dead, we should probably remove it from the infobox
Done.
Green tickY Awards section "He retired in December 2009" was already stated above in career section.
Removed.

Reviewer edits

Checked Hope you do not mind - I edited the Bio section and created two sections, and also copyedited parts.
Checked also edited the Castles and other buildings section
Checked combined a few lonely sentences in sections
All looks good to me, thank you!

Images

Green tickY they appear to be correctly licensed and relevant.
? Image Please consider adding a non-free image of the person to the infobox.
Done. It's my first time ever adding a non-free image, so I hope I've done it correctly!
I will fix it up a bit! He is a handsome fella and the image is great! Bruxton (talk) 20:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Citations

Green tickY Early life -Number 3 is accurate
Green tickY Citation 2 is not really RS but is useable as WP:ABOUTSELF - keep in mind that it cannot be used for self-serving claims.
Green tickY Career Citation 5 is correct
Green tickY Career retirement is supported by citation 2 - uncontroversial
Green tickY Castles section "Begg designed the Scandic Crown Hotel, Edinburgh in 1988–89" is supported by the citations
Green tickY Citation 19 checks out
Green tickY Citation 20 checks out
Green tickY Citation 22 checks out
Green tickY Citation 23 checks out

Thank you for the edits. I reworked the lead a bit. But I think we need to expand the article based on the obituary below.

Green tickY Seem like quite a bit of info in this source (number 23) in the citations. I archived the link and it looks like he had been married with children. I suggest a personal life section after Ravens' Craig. Move his retirement and death to that section but start with his personal life and marriage. Bruxton (talk) 01:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bruxton I've expanded the personal life section a bit and added a further reference. -Kj cheetham (talk) 17:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have performed some cleanup and organization to the article. I also added a quote from him about his house.
Green tickY My checks of citations show that the sources with the exception of the "about self" source called out above and the Legacy.com article appear to be quality and accurately support the prose. The Legacy source is attributed to the Scotsman Bruxton (talk) 19:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you again for your help with this. -Kj cheetham (talk) 19:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Status:

100% reviewed

   

Review chart

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. Yes
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. Yes
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. Yes
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). Yes
2c. it contains no original research. Yes
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Yes
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Yes
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Yes
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Yes
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Yes
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. Non-free of the person was added Green tickY
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Yes
7. Overall assessment. The article and layout are significantly improved. It was a pleasure to work with you.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.