2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
Some information in climate needs reference clarity
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
Generally fine, with the exception of that mentioned above
Images don't fully represent the parish - the only 2 images are of listed buildings and should form part of the appropriate section
7. Overall assessment.
Not yet broad enough - summary below
Review Comment
Infobox
Why is population not filled in Done
Added population stat in infobox - completely forgot about that!
Image doesn't represent/portray the parish appropriately; is there a better image, then this can be moved to the landmarks section? Semi-done
There aren't many images of Winslade available on Commons. I couldn't find a picutre of the church anywhere, so I changed the infobox image to some modern houses which are included in the parish. Moved the image of Hackwood House into the landmarks section
1) The reference states there are 224 people in total as of the 2011 census, of which 188 originate from England, but 188 is not the total Done
2) Maybe move the population figure into another sentence and remove the census info as this is mentioned further on in the article Done
Corrected the population total to 224. I've moved the population sentence to the end of the paragraph. I would prefer to keep the census info as I couldn't find anywhere else to merge it, if that's OK
History
Need to address inappropriate use of commas after the word "and" Semi-done
I prefer to use the Oxford comma, but sometimes get mixed up. I think the comma before the "and" in the first sentence of the history section is correct as it mentions more than three terms, but I've removed it elsewhere
"Wynesflode, (14th century)" - comma not needed before brackets as other names don't have one Done
Removed stray comma before the bracket ("Wynesflode, (14th century)")
Maybe its history as a manor needs its own sub-section in History, or some introduction before jumping straight into ownership changes Done
I was forced to split the paragraph about the manor's history as it comprises most of the history section. I can't split in into a subsection nor can I expand it without creating more jargon. Hope this is OK
"In 1275 Winslade was held of John de St John for half a knight's fee by Alan de Hagheman, who purchased the manor a year later."
1) Can this be reworded, as it's not too clear exactly what it means.. such as "was held of"? Also maybe a comma after the year is needed Done
2) Mentions events in the year 1271 which seems out of place when the sentence before ends on 1555 and the sentence after starts again at 1555 Done
Corrected typo (was held by John) and added comma after the year in that sentence. I've rephrased the sentences regarding the introduction and William selling it in 1555, hopefully it's all clearer now
"who was fined four shillings as lord" - could use an inflation converter template so the reader can see what this equates to in modern value Done
I don't know if the inflation converter covers shillings and doubt it's possible to convert four shillings from the 1500s into modern money. I had a look at converter site and the earliest it goes back to is 1751
The 2nd paragraph I feel would flow better being a continuation of the first sentence in the first paragraph, with the manor/land info being a sub-section of history and reordered/partly rewritten so as to be easier to follow Done
I have moved the second paragraph of history after the first sentence in the first paragraph, and kept the manor history paragraph separate
What about modern history post 1908? Great that there is a decent amount of ancient history, but nothing over the last century? Semi-done
Unfortunately I can't find any history after 1908, as the article on British History Online was published in that year. It's safe to say that this is a sleepy little hamlet with not much change in the last hundred years! There are no modern developments or infrastructure. I agree that it is narrow, but it does cover everything that can be covered
Is there absolutely nothing that has been reported or changed in the last century? Maybe you could look at expanding the demographics section as suggested with population changes, car usage, employment etc and see if from that you could form a paragraph or two about the type of people there now. This could then be added on to the lead (with further info in demographics) but at least give some contemporary info/stats.
I've added some info about a small chapel which I didn't know existed, though it closed in 1930. I'm afraid I still can't find any history newer than that, as this hamlet doesn't hold any parish council meetings nor does it have a sense of community. I've added some employment statistics and car usage in the demographics section, but I'll keep looking. JAGUAR21:56, 24 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Generally well written (prose), but doesn't really tell me that much beyond the manor/land and its owners which whilst noteworthy, seems a bit narrow. No contemporary history from the last 109 years is mentioned. Some reordering/sectioning may be appropriate.
Geography/demographics
Three sentences could be merged into two or even one: "The landscape is dominated..." through to "...barley and turnips" Done
Merged three sentences in the geography section
"Winslade receives winds with a southerly component, higher humidity and lower cloud bases than further inland settlements" - reference? I don't see this directly stated on the reference given for the paragraph Done
I thought about copying some parts from the climate of Basingstoke, given that Winslade is only one mile away from it. I've removed the part about the winds. I can't seem to remember how to find it as I haven't updated these climate sections since 2011 (the data is from 2010). JAGUAR17:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"In summer a temperature of 30 °C (86 °F) can occasionally be attained, particularly in more sheltered spots." - where is this mentioned? I can't see it on the MET office reference. Done
"The average maximum temperature in July is 21 °C" - should this not read 21.9 given the minimum says 12.5? (don't round one up/down and not the other) Done
Concerned about the Listed Buildings & Landmarks hidden table/section; is all this necessary? The section is called "Notable Landmarks" but those listed don't demonstrate notability (not every listed building needs a mention). The most notable/interesting have probably already been mentioned which is sufficient. Done
I thought that a collapsed list of listed buildings would give the reader more insight. But I do see your point; only the ones mentioned had significance coverage on the British Listed Buildings website, so I have removed the list. JAGUAR17:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
"the majority of which are located in Hackwood Park" - majority of the 42 total or the 3 Grade II listed? I assume the 42 total, but maybe this line could come before mentioning the Grade II listed so it's absolutely clear (and forms a proper sentence) Done
The majority of the 42, including the three Grade II* listed, are in Hackwood Park. I've tried rephrasing and rearranging this to make it clearer. JAGUAR17:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Reference #5 just points to Google Maps - this should at least point to the specific area that it is referencing; it doesn't even link to google maps, but rather just the wiki article which is inadaquate Done
Interesting article that puts alot of focus on its many listed buildings and manor/land ownership, but in my view does this excessively, to the point that the article feels less about the parish itself and more a glorified list of listed buildings and manor ownership. Primary concerns on criteria #3 as noted.
I am left wondering what the parish is like in contemporary times (such as what amenities/facilities are available, how it is run, the type of people that live here and how they live their lives). I appreciate it's an article about a very lowly populated civil parish, but at present I don't feel it's broad enough and would benefit from further expansion. Over half the references support information on the many listed buildings, so could be misviewed as being a well referenced article (although in saying that, the referencing is otherwise fine).
I'll give a week from the date of review for improvements to be made and expansion to take place, though if there is clear evidence of improvements once this time lapses or a message showing willingness to improve, then i'll be prepared to extend the time. Bungle(talk • contribs)20:42, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jaguar: Well done on working through the improvement suggestions swiftly and efficienty. I'll let you find some info on local schools to add in, but otherwise I think after that I can pass it as GA (as I appreciate very small hamlets/villages won't always necessarily have alot going on)! Obviously if you find other relevant info down the line then i'm sure you'd give it a mention. Bungle(talk • contribs)19:51, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Bungle: thank you for taking the time to review this, I really appreciate it! Winslade is sort of a special case in the fact that it is a hamlet, but it also has its own civil parish and church. Usually hamlets wouldn't meet the notability criteria for having their own articles, but I was lucky to find enough history and sources on its listed buildings to expand it. This was also my second article I ever created, way back in June 2010. I didn't really think of that until now! Anyway, I've added a bit about its nearest schools (primary school, secondary school, and college). Please let me know if there's anything else you feel is missing. Thanks again! I'll take a look at Binsted's GAN tomorrow morning. JAGUAR22:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jaguar: I am happy with the changes that you have made and that it meets the GA criteria and addresses the core parts of my review feedback, so congratulations :) You did well as I managed to make alot of suggestions for an article of a modest size. I have passed as GA. Bungle(talk • contribs)22:24, 25 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
