Wikipedia:Peer review/St Buryan/archive1

I've listed this article for peer review because…

I have wanted for some time to bring this article up to featured article status. It was until recently listed as a good article but was downgraded by another editor requesting further referencing. I have addressed these concerns, and added extra material to the text. I realise that the article is probably not FA status yet, but would like some feedback on what else could be done to achieve this before nominating it for FA. At the very least I feel that it should be re-entered as a good article.
I feel that St Buryan would be a suitable FA candidate in terms of subject matter, not dissimilar to Chew Valley which is an existing geography FA about a similar sized location.

All constructive comments gratefully received,

Thanks, Mammal4 (talk) 21:54, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 06:00, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very good overall. I think it would stand a good chance at FA. A couple of points

The last sentance in the lead: Today St Buryan is an important local centre housing many important amenities. does not read well with important twice.
In Mozilla there are four edit links appearing in the the middle of the text. It might be possible to change the way the images are layed out to avoid this.

--Salix alba (talk) 13:57, 14 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]