Wikipedia:Peer review/Ordinances of 1311/archive1
I'm pretty happy about this, but I would appreciate suggestions for improvements before I nominate it for FA. I'd especially like to hear if there are any problems with the clarity of the language. Lampman 16:07, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
I liked the article overall, but there are things I still don't understand. Mainly I think a broader context is missing which why I have so many questions.
- The lead doesn't summarize the whole article.
- If these are the "New" Ordinances why doesn't the background speak of the old ones? The background section is a little too in depth. Some of this material would be better off giving more detail to section on the actual ordinances and the last paragraph mostly belongs under "Lord Ordainers"
- I don't understand how the Lord Ordainers came to be chosen. Did the king appoint anyone he wished or was he not given any say in the matter at all or something in the middle? The article tries to explain the politics of some members of the group but I think it is less than clear. The detailed information on select members of the group is not very cohesive. When did this group "disband"? Was this the only time a group of Lord Ordainer was appointed? Did this position have any influence on future institutions?
- Why where six Ordinances released early? And what were they? Where they Oct 5 ordinance eve revised or was that the final document?
- When the Ordinances where repealed was anything at all from them integrated into the law?
- Where there ever any other Ordinances issued?
- I don't think Commons link to what you want it to.
--BirgitteSB 21:15, 13 July 2007 (UTC)