Talk:Tyntesfield

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2013; 2014; 2017;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Tyntesfield 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.

Tyntesfield is part of the National Trust properties in Somerset series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 30, 2014	Good article nominee	Listed
December 6, 2015	Good topic candidate	Promoted

Current status: Good article

United Kingdom Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the United Kingdom 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.United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject United KingdomUnited Kingdom
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England 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.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Somerset Low‑importance

	Somerset portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Somerset 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.SomersetWikipedia:WikiProject SomersetTemplate:WikiProject SomersetSomerset
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Architecture: Historic houses Mid‑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
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Historic houses task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Museums Low‑importance

	museums portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Museums, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of museums 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.MuseumsWikipedia:WikiProject MuseumsTemplate:WikiProject MuseumsMuseums
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Advertisement?

I'm struggling to identify content which would warrant the addition of the Advertisement tag. I'd be grateful if User:Mean as custard could point out the specific grounds for concern, and I'll look to address them. KJP1 (talk) 09:09, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think if the "Visitor access" section was removed, then the Advertisement tag could also be removed. . . Mean as custard (talk) 10:48, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think a lot of that information is useful, although the bus routes do seem a bit extreme. I think we should remember WP:GAZETTEER. Perhaps it could just be trimmed down a bit? Martinevans123 (talk) 10:56, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mean as custard/Martinevans123 - both very helpful, and fair, points. I agree it's overkill as it currently stands, but that some of the info has some encyclopaedic value. Let me try a trim and we can see what we think. KJP1 (talk) 11:16, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mean as custard/Martinevans123 - sufficient? KJP1 (talk) 12:07, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you could have cut any more! I would have probably left a little more. But no objections. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:24, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Seems reasonable to me. . .Mean as custard (talk) 12:41, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]