# Talk:Boughton Monchelsea Place

This review is transcluded from Talk:Boughton Monchelsea Place/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: ♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:47, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Lead
Do we have a year for the completion of the house? You should say the oldest part of the house dates to 1567–75, but there was a manor before this.
Probably the closest thing to a completion date would be when the north and west wings were replaced - 1819. Done--DavidCane (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
"It has been a home to a number of members of parliament for Maidstone or for Kent." Can you please list some of the most notable owners and the dates they owned it as an effective summary.
Do we have an architectural style for this building which could be noted in the infobox? The infobox seems a bit empty. Please add the building dates at least.
Added the four MPs who have articles into the lead.
It does not really fit into a particular style of architecture; none is specifically identified in the listing details.
I have added the dates into the box.--DavidCane (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
Park
"The estate is private property and is not usually open to the public,".  Do we know the name of the current owner?♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:59, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

The Boughton Monchelsea Place and Stately-homes.com websites list the owners as the Kendrick family. I was in two minds as to whether this should be included in the article, but I suppose, as they advertise this on the websites, there shouldn't be a problem with it going into the article. Thanks for the review.--DavidCane (talk) 22:35, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
No problem, thanks for addressing the points.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 
B. MoS compliance: 
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: 
B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 
Overall:
Pass or Fail: 
This appears to meet the GA requirements. The history is quite impressive and informative. Good job. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Many Thanks. I'm pleased you enjoyed it.--DavidCane (talk) 10:13, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

It has been a while since this has been reviewed, so I took a look and noticed that it relies upon the National Heritage List for England as a source. When I searched for additional sources, I found the following:

Pearson S. Boughton "Monchelsea: The Pattern of Building in a Central Kent Parish". Architectural History. 2001;44:386-393. doi:10.2307/1568768
"Lena Cowen Orlin Working the Early Modern Archive: The Search for Lady Ingram" First published: 21 March 2007 https://doi-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.1111/j.1741-4113.2007.00425.x
Lena Cowen Orlin "Locating Privacy in Tudor London" [1]
I think if a further search was conducted, more sources would be found. Should this article go to WP:GAR? Z1720 (talk) 22:17, 28 June 2025 (UTC)


### Boughton Monchelsea Place