Talk:Adlington Hall

Adlington Hall 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
February 2, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Cheshire Low‑importance

	Cheshire portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cheshire, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Cheshire 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.CheshireWikipedia:WikiProject CheshireTemplate:WikiProject CheshireCheshire articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture: Historic houses Low‑importance

	Architecture portal 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).

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites 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.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Bencherlite ^Talk 21:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll have a go at this one. Bencherlite ^Talk 21:38, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links all fine
I fixed one dablink when reading through earlier
Prose — Just a few questions / suggestions (who am I to meddle with MF's prose, after all?):
You've got "Grade-II" twice and "Grade-I" once; I'm not sure I've seen it hyphenated like this before, and a quick search of the EH website (and also CADW for good measure) shows an occasional "Grade X-listed" but not "Grade-X listed"; more often than not, even adjectively, it just seems to be "Grade X listed building".

Worth explaining in the lead what a Grade I listed building is?

Worth explaining later on what a Grade II* listed building is?
Stability - fine
NPOV - fine
Reliability of sources - fine, although slightly puzzled by the 2010 date for the Pevsner's Architectural Glossary until I checked and, yes, it does appear to be a posthumous work...
Broadness of coverage - looks to be fine
Images: On Commons with prima facie valid licensing; the Geograph alternatives, unusually, aren't great. Would love a photo of the organ, being an organist, but sadly...
Verifiability and naughtiness - will need a bit of time to check through the online sources to double-check for issues, but not expecting to find any problems given the contributor history...

Will finish up later on, but looking good so far. Bencherlite ^Talk 22:00, 1 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Prose II
I made a couple of minor alterations - reject if you see fit, I won't mind

I wonder whether there's a neater way of saying "has been the home of the Legh family since the early 14th century" when in fact the hall wasn't built until later - "the site of the Legh family's home since the early 14th century", perhaps? Or something like this?

Adlington Hall is a country house in Cheshire, England. The oldest part of the existing building, the Great Hall, was constructed between 1480 and 1505; the east wing was added in 1581. The Legh family has lived in the hall and in previous buildings on the same site since the early 14th century.

Verifiability and naughtiness, as expected, a read-through the online sources didn't make me nervous at any stage.

Conclusion: on hold for the traditional period to allow your response (pro or contra) to the minor prose comments above, but I'm not anticipating difficulties in passing this one shortly. Bencherlite ^Talk 00:24, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've dealt with all the points above, in one way or another.

Hyphenation. Yes I agree — no hyphens. I think I "got" this from another reviewer who said she had some experience in publishing. I have not, so I copied it. But I now agree with you (and MF).
Explanation in the lead. I've gone and confused this, adding to the last, rather short, paragraph, information about Grade II buildings in the grounds and the grounds themselves being graded II*. If I add explanation for all these, does it fit well there? And as they are defined by quotes, there would have to be citations; and I've tried to avoid citations in the lead because everything is appropriately cited later. I have in fact added details of the Grade II buildings criteria (there are no Grade II*) in the Grounds section, and for Grade II* Parks and Gardens in the Present day section. I prefer to do it this way, but if you think explanations and citations should be in the lead, I'll add them.
Pevsner and 2010. I also thought that odd but it's what the book says. I thought there might be an editor credited, but cannot find one.
Images. This is very frustrating and the availability of free use images (at least in Commons and Geograph) is particularly poor for this hall. I haven't explored Flikr because I do not really understand the copyright rules, and would not like to fall foul of the "copyright maffia" (MF's term). The organ case is spectacular. Perhaps someone sometime will be able to add a photo.
"naughtiness" ??

I welcome your further comments.--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:23, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is fine now. "Naughtiness" was meant to encompass copyvio / plagiarism / over-close paraphrase, but I saw none (and would not have expected to). I've had a look on Flickr and found nowt that has a suitable license; if this article went further, we could investigate asking Flickr users to relicense some copyrighted photographs, but interior photography may be restricted in any event, I suppose. Anyone, that's by the by. An easy GA pass; well done. Bencherlite ^Talk 14:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Adlington Hall. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:02, 26 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]