# Talk:The Priest's House, Muchelney

This review is transcluded from Talk:The Priest's House, Muchelney/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 17:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

I'll have this done by tomorrow JAGUAR  17:28, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


### Initial comments
The first paragraph of the lead should be expanded a little if possible, so that both paragraphs of the lead are of even size (per WP:LEAD)
I've moved a few words around to try to balance this.— Rod talk 18:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
"The house was built in the early 14th century by Muchelney Abbey to house the parish priest" - I'd re-word this to nearby Muchelney Abbey as at first it sounded like the Abbey built it!
Added in the lead. The Abbey (as an organisation rather than a building) did build it.— Rod talk 18:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
"Over the centuries it deteriorated and was adapted for use as a school and then rented as storage by a farmer" - I would mention that it was rented to a farmer in the late 19th century, as it sounded like it was still rented by a farmer
Done.— Rod talk 18:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
"The National Trust rent it to a tenant who provides limited access to the public" - this sentence should be merged with the last one in the history section, to create a better flow of prose. Also, it might sound better with it opening as Today the National Trust rent...?
I think I've done what you mean, changing the order of sentences a bit.— Rod talk 18:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
"The two-storey thatched hall house is made local stone with hamstone dressings" - "made of local stone"
Done.— Rod talk 18:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


#### References
Ref 4 is dead, since this is used at least four times in this article it is important to archive or replace it
Deadlink fixed.— Rod talk 18:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)


### On hold
This is a nice little article. It is well researched and the only issues I could find with it was the organisation of the lead and one dead ref that seemed important. Once they're all clarified then this should have no problem passing  JAGUAR  17:12, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments which have hopefully been addressed.— Rod talk 18:29, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, Rod! The article looks great now and meets the GA criteria, so I'll promote this now. Another Somerset GA  JAGUAR  19:59, 13 June 2015 (UTC)