Talk:St Mary's Church, Llanfair Mathafarn Eithaf/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: DustFormsWords (talk) 00:46, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm back to have another go at another of Bencherlite's church articles!

I will start by adding a framework listing the GA criteria, and then assess against each criteria. In all but the best and worst articles I expect to find at least minor ways that the article should be improved prior to getting the tick. It may take me anywhere from a couple of hours to several days to complete the initial review, depending on RL commitments. Each criterion will be marked with a red cross until I have assessed that the article meets or exceeds the criterion, at which time the cross will be changed to a green tick. When the initial review is complete I will let the nominator know via a message on his or her talk page. Thank you for your patience.

Well-written:

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

The prose quality is excellent and spelling and grammar are correct. I have one suggested improvement (below) but addressing it is not required to meet the GA criteria.

(Not required for GA) - "one bell dated 1849" - Do you mean that the bell has been dated to 1849, or that the date 1849 is stamped on the bell?

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

This article complies with the manuals of style for lead sections, layout and words to watch.
The manuals of style for lists and fiction do not apply to this article.

Verifiable with no original research:

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

All sources appear in a dedicated and appropriately described section.

(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);

All content appears to be attributed to reliable sources through inline citations.

(c) it contains no original research.

There is no evidence of original research in this article.

Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;

The article covers all topics expected of an article of this kind. I am not aware of relevant information covered by reliable sources which this article does not touch on.

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

The article does not go into inappropriate detail.

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
The article covers an uncontroversial topic, and I am unaware of any relevant viewpoints which are not mentioned in the article.
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
The article does not change swiftly and does not appear to be the subject of any unresolved dispute.
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

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

All images currently in the article are appropriately tagged and captioned.

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

Resolved - Criterion 6 requires that "the article is illustrated, if possible, by images". It does not require that there must be images, but it does require that if appropriately licensed images are readily available that they should be included. Can you assure me that you have performed good faith searches for a usable image of the church, and been unsuccessful? (If so there will be no problem changing this to a tick.)

Overview - An excellent article; it passes all GA criteria on the first try. I will accordingly promote the article to GA status. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:34, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Responses

Images - see the pre-emptive comment on the talk page. In short, of course I've looked! Bencherlite ^Talk 18:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I missed that. Thanks! Will tick for that then. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]