Talk:St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde

St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde 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
May 4, 2011	Peer review	Reviewed
May 26, 2011	Good article nominee	Listed

Current status: Good article

Christianity Low‑importance

	Christianity portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Anglicanism Low‑importance

	St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde is part of WikiProject Anglicanism, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.AnglicanismWikipedia:WikiProject AnglicanismTemplate:WikiProject AnglicanismAnglicanism articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lancashire and Cumbria Mid‑importance

	North West England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria 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.Lancashire and CumbriaWikipedia:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaTemplate:WikiProject Lancashire and CumbriaLancashire and Cumbria articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Architecture 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.

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

Latest comment: 13 years ago5 comments1 person in discussion

This review is transcluded from Talk:St Chad's Church, Poulton-le-Fylde/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 10:01, 22 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 10:01, 22 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Initial comments

I've had a quick read of the article, but have not yet checked any of the citations, etc; and, on that basis, the article appears to be at or about GA-standard. I'm, now going to work my way through the article section by section by leaving the WP:Lead until last. Pyrotec (talk) 13:46, 26 May 2011 (UTC) At this point I will only be highlighting "problems", if any although I may fix any trivial ones as I work my way through the article.Reply

I found no "problems", so the rest of this subsection is blank. Pyrotec (talk) 14:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Overall summary

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

A comprehensive, well-referenced, well-illustrated article.

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Well illustrated, with most of the photographs provided by the nominator.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

I'm awarding this article GA-status. Congratulations on producing a fine article. Pyrotec (talk) 14:49, 26 May 2011 (UTC)Reply

Add topic