Talk:Westholme House

Westholme House 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. Review: July 23, 2015. (Reviewed version).

This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to multiple WikiProjects.

Architecture: Historic houses Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by the Historic houses task force (assessed as Low-importance). Lincolnshire Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lincolnshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lincolnshire 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.LincolnshireWikipedia:WikiProject LincolnshireTemplate:WikiProject LincolnshireLincolnshire articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Westholme House appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 10 April 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows: Did you know... that Westholme House, a neo-Gothic mansion in Sleaford, became a library after World War II and is now part of a school? A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Westholme House.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Westholme House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SilkTork (talk · contribs) 07:56, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start reading over the next few days and then begin to make comments. I am normally a slow reviewer - if that is likely to be a problem, please let me know as soon as possible. I tend to directly do copy-editing and minor improvements as I'm reading the article rather than list them here; if there is a lot of copy-editing to be done I may suggest getting a copy-editor (on the basis that a fresh set of eyes is helpful). Anything more significant than minor improvements I will raise here. I see the reviewer's role as collaborative and collegiate, so I welcome discussion regarding interpretation of the criteria. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time}

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is clear and concise, without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Pass

• Prose clear and readable. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Image clear and appropriate. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Appropriate reference section. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Meets MoS. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:11, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Query

Fail

• Pass. This is an attractive and useful encyclopaedic guide to Westholme House in Sleaford. Clearly written, using a range of sources, and laid out neatly and helpfully following Wikipedia guidelines. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 09:14, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• I am uncertain about inclusion of a link to the YouTube video. See WP:YOUTUBE. I tagged it when reading through, then forgot to check it. I've looked at it, and it is uncertain if the uploader had permission. The copyright status of the film is also unclear. If the film is not copyrighted and/or the uploader had permission to upload it to YouTube, then linking to it would be OK. It's up to you if you want to do the research into that. In the meantime I have removed the link from the article. SilkTork ^{✔Tea time} 18:27, 23 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]