Talk:All Saints Church, Patcham

All Saints Church, Patcham 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 17, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 25, 2010.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the 12th-century All Saints Church, Patcham, largely unchanged since the 14th century, was rebuilt or restored four times in a 74-year period from 1824?

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Middle Ages Low‑importance

	Middle Ages portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Middle Ages, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the Middle Ages 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.Middle AgesWikipedia:WikiProject Middle AgesTemplate:WikiProject Middle AgesMiddle Ages articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brighton (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brighton, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.BrightonWikipedia:WikiProject BrightonTemplate:WikiProject BrightonBrighton articles

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:All Saints Church, Patcham/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: /ƒETCH COMMS / 19:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check over this soon; I don't mind if improvements may need a bit more than seven days to be made, but please don't make this review stretch past a month or so :) /ƒETCH COMMS / 19:52, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, everything's been addressed quickly and I've read through the article a few times now with nothing else popping up. I don't know anything about English churches but I'm going to pass this nomination as I do know the GA criteria :). Congrats and good work! /ƒETCH COMMS / 21:45, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose[edit]

Decalogue is a dab page.

→Fixed by relinking to Ten Commandments. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!)

Expand the lede a bit. The article is about 15,000 characters, so the MOS recommends 2–3 paragraphs. I'd say two is good because the recommendation is for 15k–30k.

→Have added another paragraph, while trying to avoid repetition. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The heading "The church today" should be just "Today" or "Current status" per WP:HEAD.

→"Current status" sounds good; amended accordingly. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For "... a survey in 1825 by Sir Stephen Glynn of the Ecclesiological Society noted that it was "decently fitted up"—[13] ..." the ref goes before the dash, per WP:REFPUN.

→Cool – never been sure about that one. Fixed, and I also linked Ecclesiological Society. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 20:05, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sourcing[edit]

Please order refs, i.e. "[10][6][20]" to "[6][10][20]".

→Think I've caught all of these now. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If possible, update ref 32 (closed churches) to this or a better page; the site seems to have been updated and the current link no longer works.

→Frustratingly, they have changed the URL yet again since December! This seems to have coincided with an October 2010 updated reissue of the report. New URL now added. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done Looks all good.

Coverage[edit]

Done Solid article.

Neutrality[edit]

Done No issues here.

Stability[edit]

Done This seems fine.

Images[edit]

Just about all of the images are stacked on the right. Could a couple be moved to the left, so it doesn't look like a photo gallery on one side and a wall of text on the other side?

→A couple more are now left-aligned. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 22:40, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Adding alt text would be helpful. It currently appears that there is no alt text for most of the images in the article.

→Alt text now added for all images. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 22:40, 16 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Done All images are freely licensed, no non-free media to worry about, so this looks good.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on All Saints Church, Patcham. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120309184904/http://www.ifclife.org.uk/about-us/our-history/ to http://www.ifclife.org.uk/about-us/our-history/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]