Talk:All Saints' Episcopal Church (Briarcliff Manor, New York)/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 12:04, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi, I'll take this one. Should have this to you within a day or two ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 12:04, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, thanks.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  15:25, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

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:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

 * The one and only major thing I see here is the lead; it would need expanding somewhat in order for this to meet the GA criteria. I would recommend expanding this by at least another paragraph (this could be done by shifting some content around the page). Is there any information of its architecture or more history you can put here? Some parts of the Design section could easily be put in the lead
 * done.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  18:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Link Republic of Ireland in the lead?
 * done.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  17:19, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * "In the 2000s, photographer Mark Sadan" - when specifically? Early 2000s or the whole decade?
 * I couldn't find any more specific information.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  17:19, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * "Notable rectors include Thomas Hazzard and John Adams Howell" - how were these two notable?
 * described in the article text.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  18:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * "The church is an example of the modest English Gothic parish church" - just curious, why modest? Is that church small in size?
 * Well the church is very small, but 'modest' architecturally refers to simpler details, with no extra architectural elements.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  17:19, 3 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Can the All Saints' Preschool be expanded at all? Is it located near the church for example?
 * It's extremely likely that it's hosted in one of the buildings next to the church on their property. I never found an RS for that though.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  18:33, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

On hold
Not much here but that being said this is a very small and compact article. The only real concern here is the actual size of the content, especially in the lead. But other than that the prose is looking good. If the body/lead can be expanded then this shouldn't have trouble passing the GAN. I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days, please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 16:57, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Replied to all.-- ɱ    (talk  ·  vbm)  18:34, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Close - promoted
Thanks for addressing them today. Happy to say that after the improvements made to this article (especially that of the lead section), that it now meets the GA criteria. Don't worry about the reference issue, as long as the dead link is removed then it should be fine as I'm sure that the other references in this article can compensate. Promoting ☯  Jag  uar  ☯ 21:11, 3 January 2015 (UTC)