Talk:Hilston Park/GA1

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

Reviewer: Gilderien (talk · contribs) 21:00, 3 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll start this within 72 hours.

Initial thoughts... Well, its obviously not a quick fail, no tags, copyvios, etc. "reported to have lived here at one time"? By whom? Is there a reference for this? All the other references seem reliable, although ref 4, on page 672 does not mention the words "Hilston Park", according to Google books, though I am willing to AGF that it is a different edition. Prose is readable, GA standard but not nearly FA. Any ref for it becoming a school? Also, could you find some images of the grounds ''et. al'', and also, definitely need a citation for the fact it is an SSSI, mentioned twice with no reference.

-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 13:32, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Ref added for SSSI. Lead doesn't have to be cited, so only once.. The fire in ref 4 is mentioned here.♦ Dr. Blofeld  13:39, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Okay thanks. I'll have a look on commons for some images.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 14:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

There aren't any, I looked of course.♦ Dr. Blofeld  20:58, 8 June 2012 (UTC)


 * As did I. I'll formally evaluate the criteria tomorrow.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 21:02, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
 * One quick point I forgot to say, why is it a SSSI, and since when, etc?-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 14:21, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Ooo just found more info on the CADW page. It mentions the reason and the review was done in 1990 so presumably this is the date. Actually can you review this later this evening I've found info on the grounds which could improve this in the meantime.♦ Dr. Blofeld  14:26, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

...Okay, probably. Just give me a ping.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 14:31, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

All Done.-- Gilderien Chat&#124;List of good deeds 15:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects: and much better, good expansion regarding the grounds.
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias: No problems here.
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Thanks. Have alerted the MONMOUTHPEDIA folk to try to get somebody to take images. No more on geograph or flickr.♦ Dr. Blofeld  15:50, 10 June 2012 (UTC)