opening GAR |
→GA Review: promotes |
||
Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
Will have this one to you within 24 hours. At a first glance, the article looks comprehensive and well-written so the review shouldn't be long. '''☠''' [[User:Jaguar|<font color="black">'''Jag'''</font>]][[User talk:Jaguar|<font color="black">'''uar'''</font>]] '''☠''' 19:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC) |
Will have this one to you within 24 hours. At a first glance, the article looks comprehensive and well-written so the review shouldn't be long. '''☠''' [[User:Jaguar|<font color="black">'''Jag'''</font>]][[User talk:Jaguar|<font color="black">'''uar'''</font>]] '''☠''' 19:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC) |
||
'''[[Wikipedia:Good article nominations|GA]] review – see [[WP:WIAGA]] for criteria''' |
|||
#Is it '''reasonably well written'''? |
|||
#:A. Prose is "[[MOS:JARGON|clear]] and [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|concise]]", without [[Wikipedia:Copyright violations|copyvios]], or spelling and grammar errors: {{GAList/check|}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#:B. [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style|MoS]] compliance for [[WP:LEAD|lead]], [[WP:LAYOUT|layout]], [[WP:WTW|words to watch]], [[WP:WAF|fiction]], and [[Wikipedia:Manual of Style (embedded lists)|lists]]: {{GAList/check|}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#Is it '''factually accurate''' and '''[[Wikipedia:Verifiability|verifiable]]'''? |
|||
#:A. Has an [[Wikipedia:LAYOUT#Standard_appendices_and_footers|appropriate reference section]]: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#:B. Citation to reliable sources [[Wikipedia:Good article criteria/where necessary|where necessary]]: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#:C. [[Wikipedia:No original research|No original research]]: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#Is it '''broad in its coverage'''? |
|||
#:A. [[Wikipedia:Out of scope|Major aspects]]: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#:B. [[WP:LENGTH|Focused]]: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#Is it '''[[WP:NPOV|neutral]]'''? |
|||
#:Fair representation without bias: {{GAList/check|?}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#Is it '''stable'''? |
|||
#: No [[Wikipedia:Edit warring|edit wars]], etc: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#Does it '''contain [[Wikipedia:Images|images]]''' to illustrate the topic? |
|||
#:A. Images are [[Wikipedia:Copyright tags|tagged]] with their [[Wikipedia:Copyright FAQ|copyright status]], and [[Wikipedia:Non-free use rationale guideline|valid fair use rationales]] are provided for [[Wikipedia:Non-free content|non-free content]]: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#:B. Images are provided if possible and are [[WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE|relevant]] to the topic, and have [[WP:CAP|suitable captions]]: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
#'''Overall''': |
|||
#:Pass or Fail: {{GAList/check|y}} |
|||
#:: |
|||
===Initial comments=== |
|||
====Lead==== |
|||
*The lead summarises the article well and meets the GA criteria and [[WP:LEAD]]. I would have suggested to change the opening sentence so that it reads out where Woodspring Priory is located, for example {{xt|Woodspring Priory (originally Worsprynge or Worspring) is a former Augustinian priory situated in [[North Somerset]]}} or something similar to that. But the lead is fine. |
|||
====History==== |
|||
*Some parts of this section feel too trivial, however it won't affect the GAN. I noticed one for example "Major and Mrs Hill continued to own the priory until 1928" - how about something like "The Major and his wife"? |
|||
*However the history section is informative, in depth and mostly well-written so this meets the GA criteria. |
|||
====References==== |
|||
*[https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/account/subscribe?nextpage=%2Fviewer%2Fbl%2F0000511%2F19080811%2F056%2F0007&gift=false The first reference] appears to be broken |
|||
*https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/account/subscribe?nextpage=%2Fviewer%2Fbl%2F0000221%2F18970121%2F030%2F0003&gift=false Ref 18] and [https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/account/subscribe?nextpage=%2Fviewer%2Fbl%2F0000264%2F19260501%2F030%2F0005&gift=false ref 19] appear to go nowhere as well |
|||
===Close - promoted=== |
|||
Despite some sentences in the article feeling trivial and a couple of references that lead to nowhere - I think that this article already meets the GA criteria. It is broad in coverage, mostly well-written and well referenced. Because the concerns I have listed aren't really that important I feel it won't be necessary to put this on hold, so I'll promote this one! Well done on another Somerset GA! '''☠''' [[User:Jaguar|<font color="black">'''Jag'''</font>]][[User talk:Jaguar|<font color="black">'''uar'''</font>]] '''☠''' 11:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC) |
Revision as of 11:46, 23 August 2014
GA Review
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 19:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
Will have this one to you within 24 hours. At a first glance, the article looks comprehensive and well-written so the review shouldn't be long. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 19:56, 22 August 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Initial comments
Lead
- The lead summarises the article well and meets the GA criteria and WP:LEAD. I would have suggested to change the opening sentence so that it reads out where Woodspring Priory is located, for example Woodspring Priory (originally Worsprynge or Worspring) is a former Augustinian priory situated in North Somerset or something similar to that. But the lead is fine.
History
- Some parts of this section feel too trivial, however it won't affect the GAN. I noticed one for example "Major and Mrs Hill continued to own the priory until 1928" - how about something like "The Major and his wife"?
- However the history section is informative, in depth and mostly well-written so this meets the GA criteria.
References
- The first reference appears to be broken
- https://www.britishnewspaperarchive.co.uk/account/subscribe?nextpage=%2Fviewer%2Fbl%2F0000221%2F18970121%2F030%2F0003&gift=false Ref 18] and ref 19 appear to go nowhere as well
Close - promoted
Despite some sentences in the article feeling trivial and a couple of references that lead to nowhere - I think that this article already meets the GA criteria. It is broad in coverage, mostly well-written and well referenced. Because the concerns I have listed aren't really that important I feel it won't be necessary to put this on hold, so I'll promote this one! Well done on another Somerset GA! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:46, 23 August 2014 (UTC)