Talk:Fuller Houses

Fuller Houses has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 17, 2015. (Reviewed version).

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Rhode Island Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Rhode Island portal This article is supported by WikiProject Rhode Island (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

this place is... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.109.47.203 (talk) 17:17, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still around. I just expanded the page. Covered basically everything public save the land and deed records which I rather not get into on Wikipedia. A shame there was not a better survey. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:18, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Fuller Houses/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 02:00, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written:

With a few minor grammatical corrections, including those mentioned in the "Comments" section below, the article now complies with the MOS policies for grammar, prose, layout and structure. Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 20:27, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation

Verifiable with no original research:

The article cites several reputable published sources, in its bibliography. I see no signs of original research. Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 20:25, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose)

(c) it contains no original research

Broad in its coverage:

The article seems to cover all relevant aspects of the topic for which reliable encyclopedic information was available. Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 02:21, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

The article discusses its topic in a non-biased, properly-toned manner. Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 02:19, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

A look at its revision history shows that the article has not been the subject of any edit warring or disputes since its creation. Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 02:02, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Both images used in the article serve a relevant illustrative purpose, and both are validly licensed. They are from the Wikimedia Commons, so fair use is not an issue here. Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 02:06, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

Comments

In the section "Design", it states at one point: "The two-family houses have a their gable-ends facing the street." The middle part of that sentence seems to be missing. Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 02:22, 10 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wilhelmina Will Fixed. I also strengthened some of the prose and to better clarify the surveyed unit. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:21, 16 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! That makes all the difference! :) Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 20:24, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Following a thorough check of the article, minor grammatical corrections, and the addressing of the issues mentioned above, I feel the article now satisfies the GA criteria for inclusion. Congratulations! Grinding, grinding, grinding... what are we finding, finding, finding... (talk) 20:29, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]