Talk:Eaton Hall, Cheshire/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: –– Jezhotwells (talk) 15:38, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
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
[edit]- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- References check out, reliable sources
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- 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)
- Pass/Fail:
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)