Talk:Boughton Monchelsea Place/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• Do we have a year for the completion of the house? You should say the oldest part of the house dates to 1567–75, but there was a manor before this.
  • Probably the closest thing to a completion date would be when the north and west wings were replaced - 1819. Done--DavidCane (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
• "It has been a home to a number of members of parliament for Maidstone or for Kent." Can you please list some of the most notable owners and the dates they owned it as an effective summary.
• Do we have an architectural style for this building which could be noted in the infobox? The infobox seems a bit empty. Please add the building dates at least.
  • Added the four MPs who have articles into the lead.
  • It does not really fit into a particular style of architecture; none is specifically identified in the listing details.
  • I have added the dates into the box.--DavidCane (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Park

"The estate is private property and is not usually open to the public,". Do we know the name of the current owner?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The Boughton Monchelsea Place and Stately-homes.com websites list the owners as the Kendrick family. I was in two minds as to whether this should be included in the article, but I suppose, as they advertise this on the websites, there shouldn't be a problem with it going into the article. Thanks for the review.--DavidCane (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem, thanks for addressing the points.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

This appears to meet the GA requirements. The history is quite impressive and informative. Good job. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Many Thanks. I'm pleased you enjoyed it.--DavidCane (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)