Wikipedia:Peer review/Royal Prerogative in the United Kingdom/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
- This peer review discussion has been closed.
Rewrote this article: better lede, with images to brighten up an otherwise text-based article; converted the list of powers to encyclopedic prose; converted citations to new style and improved further reading sections; and referenced {{fact}}-ed statements. Hoping to get it to beyond GA; comments solicited. Thanks, AGK 21:09, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments: I've made a start, but not yet got far. There are particular problems in the History section both in prose and sourcing, also other matters.
- One disambiguation link (check with box in upper right-hand corner)
- Presentational point: blockquotes should not be enclosed in boxes, which separate the quotes from the text and damage continuity.
- Lead
- Second sentence: "Much of the executive powers of British government, possessed by and vested in a monarch with regard to the governance of their state, have historically and today are carried out under the mandate of the royal prerogative." Clumsy wording, dodgy grammar. What exactly is "possessed by and vested in a monarch"? I can't work out the meaning of the last part of the sentence.
- Third paragraph: "Today" is too limiting; should be something like "In the present age..."
- Same para, again dodgy grammar in "When outlining the Queen's involvement in these and another areas, it is clear that she has a sizeable constitutional presence..." Also his sentence is too long and winding, needs to be split in two.
- Definition
- It is normal to refer to quotations in the literary present, thus "Dicey writes" not "Dicey wrote" (consistent with your wording in the last paragraph of this section).
- "but some prefer" is too casual. Some constitutional lawyers?
- History
- ""the recrudescence of feudal turbulence in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries" requires a citation.
- "During the 16th century this "turbulence" began to recede, and the monarch became truly independent." This seems like a curious reading of history - where does it come from?
- Likewise the assertion "his position as head of the church gave him the right to declare he was divinely appointed" is curious. "Gave him the right?" Again, where does this come from?
- "The rise of Parliament in this period, however, was problematic." Problematic for whom, and in what sense?
- Two successive sentences begin "At the same time..."
- "By regularly asking the law officers of the crown and judiciary for legal advice and consent, William Holdsworth infers..." According to this wording, William Holdsworth regularly asked law officers...etc. Needs rewording.
- "It was recognised..." Passive voice.
- Date required for the "Glorious Revolution". Don't rely on the link.
I'll return to the review as soon as I can. Perhaps you would address the above meantime. Brianboulton (talk) 22:47, 13 May 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. I will follow up your copyedit presently. I wonder if you have any comments on the article more generally, rather than recommendations for small or typographical improvements? AGK 22:59, 13 May 2010 (UTC)