Talk:Heraldic visitation

Heraldic visitation was one of the History good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
October 11, 2006	Good article nominee	Listed
October 21, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
May 29, 2008	Good article reassessment	Kept
April 9, 2015	Good article reassessment	Delisted
Current status: Delisted good article

Heraldry and vexillology

	Heraldry portal Heraldic visitation is within the scope of the Heraldry and vexillology WikiProject, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of heraldry and vexillology. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.Heraldry and vexillologyWikipedia:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyTemplate:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillologyheraldry and vexillology articles
	This was a selected article on the Heraldry and Vexillology Portal for August 2007.

Comments for Improvement

I think it's an interesting and well written article, but I'm missing an exploration of the political background: why was it important for the crown to control the use of arms and the claims of gentility? Also it could benefit from a list of literature in addition to the notes, and perhaps also a picture, for instance the one that's on Garter Principal King of Arms? Eixo 22:44, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA failed

For the following reasons :

Lacking in references.
~~Too many red links.~~ Done
There is some evidence ... and what are they? Done
Please rephrase this line The process did not begin in earnest, though, until the sixteenth century. Done
~~Needs at least a picture.~~ Done
Give more details about the cease to use arms if used illegally and give examples if any are availables.
~~In what are the Scottish visitations different from the English ones.~~ Done

Lincher 00:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How many references would be needed to make this a good article? For the length of the article, the inline citations seem reasonable.--dave-- 03:26, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA PASSED

This article has met the objections given it previously. Red

GA Sweeps

This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article, but there are issues that might be looked at for the future. Specifically, citation is barely enough for GA and should be more liberally used in the article to demonstrate that the topic has been properly covered by the references given. In addition, the lead is very short and does not provide effective context. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, Jackyd101 (talk) 14:51, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA status

This article is below par. The content itself seems relatively broad, but the referencing and layout just isn't up to scratch. There are whole sections without any citations at all, not to mention unreferenced innumerable claims in the better parts of the article. I've posted in the Heraldry wikigroup to see if someone wants to take this on, but I may be forced to remove the GA status, which would be a shame. Any one have the time/expertise/inclination to take this on? Sotakeit (talk) 08:51, 18 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Heraldic visitation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110725141914/http://carmarthenshirehistorian.org/twiki/pub/Historian/HistorianVol20/vol20.pdf to http://carmarthenshirehistorian.org/twiki/pub/Historian/HistorianVol20/vol20.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 18:00, 2 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]