Talk:Masonic Hall, Taunton/GA1

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 17:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)

, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 17:31, 22 February 2015 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

, I have completed a thorough and comprehensive review and re-review of this article, and I find that it meets all criteria for Good Article status. I do have a few comments and questions that need to be addressed prior to passage to GA status. Please let me know if you have any questions in the meantime. -- Caponer (talk) 17:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Lede
 * Per Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede of this article stands alone as a concise overview. It defines the building, establishes context for the building, explains why the building is notable, and summarizes the most important points of the building's history. The lede could stand to have a sentence or two regarding its architecture from that section below.
 * Added a little about the architecture. Harrias talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The image of Masonic Hall, Taunton is licensed CC BY-SA 3.0 and is therefore free to use here.
 * The template is beautifully formatted, and its content is sourced in the prose and in the references below.
 * The sentence should be reworded "Opened in 1822, St George's Chapel served Taunton's growing Catholic community for over 35 years,"
 * Done. Harrias talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * This lede is well-written, utilizes content from references which are internally-cited below, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

History
 * The first sentence of the section should be reworded as such: "Prior to the Reformation, Taunton had three Catholic churches: the Church of St Peter and St Paul, which was part of Taunton Priory, and was destroyed during the Dissolution; and the Churches of St Mary Magdalene and St James, which both became Anglican."
 * Done. Harrias talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * In the sentence regarding the record, the rector should be mentioned by title and not referenced as he.
 * Done. Harrias talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * In the first paragraph of the Masonic Hall subsection, do we know why the church was purchased by a Freemason lodge when the previous subsection illustrated the growing need for a Catholic place of worship? I assume a larger and more suitable church was built elsewhere, but if so, this should be specified here.
 * This is mentioned in the last paragraph of the previous section; that a new St George's Church was built. Is that unclear because of the similar names? Harrias talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * In the final paragraph of the History section, it's mentioned that the nine lodges are currently using the facility. Is there an as of date for this?
 * Added a footnote about this. Harrias talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Otherwise, this section is well-written, utilizes content from references which are internally-cited below, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.

Architecture
 * Does the building have a definable architectural style? It looks to be Neoclassical. Can this be corroborated by one of your sources, or a source elsewhere?
 * Given that the Ionic pilasters are the main architectural note, and they are clearly neoclassical, that's fair to say, but without a specific reference, I'm unsure whether to add it. Harrias talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Otherwise, this section is well-written, utilizes content from references which are internally-cited below, and I have no other comments or questions for this section.
 * Thanks for your clear review, always a pleasure! Harrias</b> talk 17:02, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
 * , thank you for your responses to my above mentioned questions and comments. Upon my re-review of the article, I find that you have addressed all my concerns, and that your article more than meets the criteria for Good Article status. I hereby pass it and thank you for all your hard work! -- Caponer (talk) 20:53, 1 March 2015 (UTC)