Wikipedia:Peer review/Hulton Abbey/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I've brought this article up from stub level , with a view to at least nominating it for GA status. I'd appreciate suggestions for improvement on content and wording in particular, but any pointers would be great!
Thanks, Sotakeit (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2016 (UTC)
What a great topic. Happy to take a look through.
- Some free images from Geograph- here, here and here. I'm guessing these are the right place?
- "Throughout its life" Is "life" the right word?
- "however due to its poor condition it is considered Heritage at Risk" Included on the Heritage at Risk list, perhaps?
- "Normacot and Bucknall" Are these settlements? Links would be good- don't be scared of redlinks.
- "advowsons" Not a term in my vocabulary! A link or explanation would be good.
- I've tagged a digambiguation link which needs fixing.
- The fact about the fine being reduced is repeated twice in quick succession
- Why put the income/fine in scarequotes?
- You could cite Lewis's research directly.
- There are lots of hits on Google Scholar, as is quite predictable. If you're having trouble accessing stuff, I may be able to help, and WP:RX may be able to help you with those I can't get.
That's all that's jumping out at me. You may want to talk to Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) or Peter I. Vardy (talk · contribs), who specialise in English medieval history and listed buildings respectively. I commend you for taking on the topic! Josh Milburn (talk) 18:29, 1 March 2016 (UTC)
- @Sotakeit: In case you missed this. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:05, 16 March 2016 (UTC)