Talk:Walton and Ivythorn Hills
 | Walton and Ivythorn Hills has been listed as one of the Geography and places 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. | ||||||||||||
 | Walton and Ivythorn Hills is part of the National Trust properties in Somerset series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||
| Current status: Good article | |||||||||||||
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Walton and Ivythorn Hills/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
I'll finish this soon JAGUAR 22:38, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This is a nice and well referenced article.
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. References to sources:
- B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. References to sources:
- 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Initial comments
[edit]- "in the English County of Somerset" - county doesn't need to be capitalised
- Changed to lower case.— Rod talk 19:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- "The site is owned and managed by the National Trust" - I'd recommend rewording this sentence so it begins with Notified in 1953, the site is now owned and managed by the National Trust? Removing the "notified" bit after "in the English county of Somerset" would improve prose flow
- Changed as per your suggestion.— Rod talk 19:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- The lead slightly misses out on summarising the article as there is nothing on the history section - just at least a couple of sentences explaining a bit on the history of the area ought to do it
- The manor house, windmill and snatorium were mentioned. I've added a date for NT ownership, a bit about the quarry and hippie camp.— Rod talk 19:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- "Within the grounds is a dovecote which was probably built around 1578" - 1578 sounds very precise, is "probably built around 1578" valid?
- source (from Historic England)] says "Probably 1578 for Sir John Sydenham", so I'm just reporting the RS.— Rod talk 19:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Inconsistencies with "Grade II" in the History section - one reads as "Grade II* listed" and the other reads "Grade II" without the asterisk
- Ivythorne Manor is Grade II* whereas the windmill is Grade II.— Rod talk 19:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
References
[edit]On hold
[edit]Admittedly a very short review, but they were all of the issues I could find with it. The article is compact, well written and well-researched, so there were little points to make. If all of the above can be addressed then this should have no problem passing. 
JAGUAR 18:26, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thans for your comments which I have attempted to address.— Rod talk 19:22, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for addressing them! I got confused with the difference between "Grade II" and "Grade II*" which doesn't look good on me considering Bentworth will be at FAC soon. Anyway, this looks like it meets the GA criteria, so another Somerset GA JAGUAR 17:01, 9 July 2015 (UTC)