# Talk:Manor House, Sleaford

This review is transcluded from Talk:Manor House, Sleaford/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hi! A very interesting article on an obviously interesting building. I've a few issues with some of the wording (point 1 of the GA Criteria). 
In order to pass on the broadness of coverage (point 3), I would say you need to address the lack of coverage on the buildings' interiors.
I'd say it already passes on 'Verifiability', 'Neutral', 'Stable' and 'images' (points 2, 4, 5 and 6).

@Sotakeit:Thank you for taking the time to review this. I believe I have addressed all of your concerns below. Regards, —Noswall59 (talk) 14:18, 30 April 2015 (UTC).
Thanks for the timely response! I should think this is more than sufficient now for GA status. Keep up the good work. Sotakeit (talk) 14:45, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
Lead:

The "Manor House, Sleaford, is a set ... in the English town of Sleaford" - No need to state 'Sleaford' twice. Remove the first reference.
Done
"Later Gothic work" - This needs to be expressley described as Gothic-Revival, neo-Gothic or even 'Gothick'.
Done (Gothic-Revival used)
"Described by Sir Nikolaus Pevsner and John Harris as "a jigsaw puzzle" - I'm sure they both didn't say this? You should only state who actually said the quote.
They were both authors of the book which I am quoting
History:

"by which service he "amassed a great fortune"" - This doesn't sound right to me. Perhaps something along the lines of "through which he "amassed a great fortune""?
Done
I would wikilink 'Clerk of the Peace'.
Done (I didn't know we had an article on that!)
"The son of Rev. Dr William Moore, vicar of Spalding, he was admitted a solicitor in 1831, was living in Sleaford by 1834, when he is recorded owning a property on North Street, and in partnership with the Sleaford solicitor William Forbes by 1841." - This is a messy sentance and not easily understood.
I've used your suggestion below, though tweaked slightly.
I suggest "The son of Rev. Dr William More, vicar of Spaling, her was admitted as a solictor in 1831. Moore was living in Sleaford by 1834, when he is recorded as owning as property on North Street and being in partnership with William Forbes by 1841."
"...in 1858, he changed his will to give her his property instead of Russell.But Sophia rejected his marriage proposal and he disinherited her the following year." - No need for seperate sentences here -*"... his property instead of Russel, but Sophia rejected..."
Done
You have wikilinked "Sleaford Navigation" twice. You have also wikilinked Cecil and Frank Rhodes twice. Remove the second linkes for all three.7
I've removed the navigation one, but the others are okay because they are only repeated in the lead. (See WP:OLINK: "a link may be repeated in infoboxes, tables, image captions, footnotes, hatnotes, and at the first occurrence after the lead")
I would reorder the first paragraph of "Later History" - I suggest: "In 1897, Elizabeth Cross rented the Manor House from Rhodes, remaining there until her death in 1923. She moved to Sleaford after the death of her husband, Rev. John Edward Cross (1821−1897), a prebendary of Lincoln."
Done
I think an explanation of hosue the building were divided would help. You only mention nos 30 and 31 in the lead, but now suddenly mention a 27-31, without much explanation. Which of these new units are part of 30 and which are part of 31?
Okay I've tried to clarify this. None of the sources say specifically when or why the buildings were divided, but Pevsner does explain how they are divided.
Architecture:

"No. 33 is mid-Georgian" needs a citation.
Done.
Again, "Gothic" here needs to be "Gothic revival" or something along those lines.
This wasn't really needed anyway, so I've removed it.
You need to describe which parts of which buildinga re "from the 16th century". You state that no. 33 is mainly Georgian and No. 31 is laregely 19th century, but where do the 16th century parts fit in?
Neither of the sources clarify this - English Heritage states "A group of buildings from Cl6 onwards" [1]
You have one line describing the interior. Surely there is more information available on this? At least a paragraph would be needed, preferably more. I'd then seperate the 'Architecure' section into two subections: 'Exterior' and 'Interior'.
There is very little on the interior. I have included some information from the EH source about one early room; it is implied that the rest are later and possibly less remarkable. The house is still in private hands, so understandably less is available about this aspect.


### Review against GA Critera
Well-written 
Verifiable with no original research 
Broad in its coverage 
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each 
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute 
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio 

Reviewer: Sotakeit (talk · contribs) 13:16, 30 April 2015 (UTC)