I'm looking for any useful suggestions and criticism regarding the article.

Based on some quick comparisons, I've come to think that the article might suitable for Good Article status; feedback on this would be appreciated.

Stca74 18:58, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEAD. Make sure it summarizes the most important facets of the article and topic. More references would always be better, see if you can't find a few more. See how they approach the subject and what they consider important about it. It says the palace is no longer extant, perhaps the transition into the details could tell a little more about how any information is known about it at all. Is it from archealogical digs or from study of written records of the time? (After looking again I see that mentioned a bit later, but more specific information earlier in the article would help.) Is the article comprehensive? Are there any other important facets to the topic? - Taxman ^Talk 21:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Good input, thanks. Implemented changes that have been strikken out above. As for comprehensiveness, many connecting topics could be added or expanded here, as always. Examples include court rituals and administrative routines at the palace as well as more details on the architectural styles and facilities at the buildings. However, my view is that the previous should go into an expanded article on ritsuryo government, while the latter belong better to a much expanded article on shinden zukuri architecture. Thus I feel the proper coverage for the palace-specific article is here, and that related topics are better covered elsewhere Comments and suggestions are welcome. Stca74 18:31, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, most of the information on those should be covered elsewhere, but a summary of them and how the palace fits into that would be well placed here. That would provide useful context for the reader of this article. Follow summary style and don't give too much per your comments, but enough for the reader to usefully understand the palace's place in the broader context of it's use, architectural style, etc. Also the lead paragraphs could still stand to be a bit more substantial. 2 or so sentences more each. - Taxman ^Talk 20:17, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Much later than I thought, but now I feel the several expansions made over the past few weeks address the comments above. Stca74 14:44, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 22:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done as applicable; see the link above for details. Stca74 19:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A quick suggestion to help in proofreading is to copy and paste from the article (not the edit window) into word-processing software such as Microsoft Word. Its spell-checking features can help you catch double errors such as "preciding over the excatly ... ." Also pay attention to spaces near marks of punctuation. Regarding names of former capitals of Japan, there's a discussion here. It seems to be coming to a conclusion. While you're editing your article, you might want to anticipate the outcome of that discussion, and of course you're welcome to participate in it. Fg2 10:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Proofread. As for the proposal on spelling of historical capitals with hyphen, I second that and the article has been updated. Stca74 16:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Overall, I think this is well-written, but there are areas you could tighten your prose a little bit more. Here are examples just from the lead:

Thanks. Good comments. See below for progress. Stca74 10:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• • I would change "The Heian Palace refers to the original imperial palace " to "The Heian Palace was the original imperial palace"
  • "very large rectangular walled enclosure" -don't need the very
  • "Within this larger enclosure was situated" -> "Inside this enclosure was the "
  • "almost no trace of it remains to be found in modern Kyoto" -> almost no trace of it remains.

 Done

• The article needs more inline citations. Every paragraph should have at least one citation

 Not done: Some added, though. This author is personally against too heavy use of inline citations and prefers to use them only when the material is challenged or likely to be challenged (WP:CITE) or when a particular citation is likely to be otherwise useful to the reader. When condensing a few standard references like in this article, many paragraphs should not need separate footnotes pointing to the same few sources. Stca74 10:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Measurements need to be listed in both standard and metric format. see WP:CONVERT

 Done (Careful with "standard" when writing to Europeans... :-)

• "As the Chōdō-in, also the Buraku-in had " should read, "Like the Chōdō-in, the Buraku-in had"
• remove red links

 Done

• need more wikilinks within the article

 Done Added from lead to Daidairi and Dairi

• "However, starting already in the ninth century," -> "Beginning in the ninth century, however,

 Done Partially as suggested

• "fire in 960, another building became the regular residence of the emperors: the smaller Seiryōden " -> "fire in 960, the regular residence of the emperors moved to the smaller Seiryoden
• "Seiryōden gradually became more and more used for meetings as well," -> "Gradually, Seiryoden began to be used for meetings,""

 Done

• were the ones with proper location with regard to the symmetry of the Dairi " -- I'm not sure what this means

 Done Explained differently.

• "The Dairi also housed in the Unmeiden hall (温明殿, Unmeiden hall?) one of the Imperial Regalia of Japan, the sacred mirror.[3]"-> "Located in the Dairi's Unmedien Hall was the sacred mirror, one of the Imperial Regalia of Japan"
• History section, first sentence is long and clunky. Please reword or separate into multiple sentences.

 Done

• "The centre of gravity of the Palace complex " - I don't think "centre of gravity" is the appropriate phrase to use here.

 Not done Thought about it but quite like the phrase in the context. At least could not come up with a better one. But othes feel free to rephrase.

• At the same time the Greater Palace began to be guarded less and less, until safety at night time on the palace grounds outside of the Dairi was not guaranteed." - clunky sentence
• " Daigokuden was reconstructed after fires in 876, 1068 and in 1156 despite the limited use it had" -> "despite its limited use"
• "Also the Dairi was repeatedly destroyed by fires from 960 on, but was rebuilt and used " -> "Beginning in 960, the Dairi was repeatedly destroyed by fires but was rebuilt and used"
• "While the Dairi was being rebuilt following fires," -> "During the rebuilding"
• "Thus the residences of the maternal grandparents of the emperors in the north-eastern part of the city started to take over the residential function of the Palace itself already before the end of the Heian period. " -> clunky sentence

 Done

• References should be before External links

 Not done In fact, according to WP:GTL the ordering of these sections is not fixed, and in this particular case I feel the external links are more natural before the footnotes.

Karanacs 03:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]