Jump to content

Talk:Tintinhull Garden

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleTintinhull Garden 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.
Good topic starTintinhull Garden 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 20, 2015Good article nomineeListed
December 6, 2015Good topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

GA Review

[edit]
This review is transcluded from Talk:Tintinhull Garden/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Kharkiv07 (talk · contribs) 04:14, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be starting this soon. Kharkiv07Talk 04:14, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute Review Comment
1. Well-written:
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
2b. 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).
2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Since the picture in the infobox doesn't show the entire garden and house as shown in the title of the box, it should have a caption to determine exactly what it is.
7. Overall assessment.

Nicely done. Nothing particularly stands out, besides the caption and that's minor enough. Kharkiv07Talk 05:03, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

National Trust pilot

[edit]

Hello! During late June, July and some of August, I'm working on a paid project sponsored by the National Trust to review and enhance coverage of NT sites. You can find the pilot edits here, as well as a statement and contact details for the National Trust. I am leaving this message when I make a first edit to a page; please do get in touch if you have any concerns. Lajmmoore (talk) 18:46, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]