Talk:Eaton Hall, Cheshire/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: No dabs found

Linkrot: No linkrot. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:42, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Good, I made one minor copyedit.[1]

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   References check out, reliable sources

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Correctly tagged and licensed.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This article is in good shape. I believe that it could do with the use of an infobox, e.g. {{Infobox building}}. I am happy to pass this as a Good Article. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, copy edit and comment. I did consider using an infobox, but which one? The article hardly mentions the present house, and there was a progression of earlier houses, each of which was more notable than the current one. This is an unusual situation for a Cheshire "stately home", in that the house hardly figures; the article is more about the gardens and the surrounding estate and estate buildings. Hence IMO, in this case, an infobox would probably be more of a hindrance than a help. I should welcome comments on this from others.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:22, 11 July 2010 (UTC)