Talk:St Mary's Church, Rolleston on Dove/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Amitchell125 (talk · contribs) 09:52, 10 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to review this article.

Review comments

Lead section, infobox

Link Staffordshire; grammar school.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 07:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Introduce Charles Eamer Kempe; Cecil Greenwood Hare.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 07:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would change the map to one that shows the county (eg as in St Mary's Church, Patshull).

Done - Dumelow (talk) 07:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In the infobox, link Rolleston on Dove; Staffordshire; Archdeacon of Stoke (Archdeacon of Stoke); Rolleston: St Mary (Rolleston on Dove).

Done - Dumelow (talk) 07:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Replace England with 'UK'.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 07:35, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1 Description

The church is grade I listed... – this sentence could be amended to improve the prose, to something like ‘The church was grade I listed by Historic England on 12 March 1964.’

The problem here is that the HE page lists the current grade and the date the building was first listed, as far as I am aware it is possible that it was listed in 1964 at a lower grade and then upgraded - Dumelow (talk) 07:38, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. AM

local landowners – amend to ‘who were local landowners’?

Done - Dumelow (talk) 07:41, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would add a comma after building.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 07:41, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you make clearer whether the Mosley family are now no longer associated with the church (or even if they still exist)?

The Mosleys are still about. The VCH (published 2007) states they still retain the right to burial - Dumelow (talk) 12:11, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would mention something to that effect in the article. Amitchell125 (talk) 14:28, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, have done - Dumelow (talk) 14:34, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

2 Structure

Link deanery; archdeanery of Stoke-upon-Trent (Archdeacon of Stoke); aisle; parapets; buttresses.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It is constructed – it’s not clear what it is referring to.

Added "the church is" - Dumelow (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Add a comma after centuries.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

of the structure – 'of the church' sounds better imo.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not sure why the image is included, it’s not good enough to illustrate the text, and looks very similar to the one in the infobox. I would remove it.

Removed - Dumelow (talk) 14:42, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

3 Interior

Link pulpits; Bishop of Chicester.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

with the surname of – ‘named’?

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comma after family.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:46, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

4 Churchyard

Unlink Sir Oswald Mosley, 4th Baronet (duplicated link)

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

One of the memorials in the churchyard, to George Ridgway – does he have more than one memorial?

Good point, reworded - Dumelow (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Boys – is redundant, as mixed grammar schools are a modern idea.

Removed - Dumelow (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comma after gaining entrance, and after Lichfield.

Done - Dumelow (talk) 14:48, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

6 Gallery

Galleries are frowned upon in articles like this (see WP:GALLERY). If the images in the gallery serve a useful purpose in illustrating the text, they should appear nearer the relevant text, not in a separate gallery, perhaps with the use of Template:Multiple image.

I've removed it and moved them to appropriate section - Dumelow (talk) 14:36, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

7 References

Ref 1 (Diocese of Lichfield) is a dead link.

replaced with current version - Dumelow (talk) 08:01, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The category '13th-century church buildings in England' doesn’t match with information in the lead section.

Switched to the 12th-century cat - Dumelow (talk) 07:51, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 3 (British Listed Buildings) appears to be a self-published source, and therefore is not reliable. You need to find (an)other source(s) to replace it.

Yes, not sure why I used it instead of the actual list entry, possibly there was an error on the HE site at the tiem. Now switched - Dumelow (talk) 07:39, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 5 (Bemrose) does not provide enough information for me to be able to verify the text, and I had to do my own search. The full citation is

Allen, John Romily; Cox, John Charles; Jewitt, Llewellynn Frederick William (January 1908). "Pre-conquest cross at Rolleston, Staffs". The Reliquary and Illustrated Archaeologist. 14. London: Bemrose: 47–49. OCLC 931239052 – via Internet Archive.

Thankyou, replaced - Dumelow (talk) 08:01, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Other

The category 13th-century church buildings in England doesn’t match with information in the lead section.

Changed to 12th-century cat - Dumelow (talk) 07:40, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing about the present use of the building, available from here.

I've added a bit about current prayer practice - Dumelow (talk) 14:59, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

On hold

I'm putting the article on hold for a week until 27 November to allow time for the issues raised to be addressed. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 13:24, 12 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing Amitchell125. I've managed to find a reasonably priced copy of the 2007 volume of the Victoria County History for this area which I am hoping will fill in a few gaps. If you don't mind waiting until I receive that and add a little more to the article? I'll address the comments that I can in the meantime - Dumelow (talk) 08:24, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know, I've added a week, please let me know when you've completed all you want to do. Regards, Amitchell125 (talk) 08:31, 14 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Amitchell125, thankyou for your patience. I think I've addressed everything above (let me know if not) but I've also added quite a bit from the new source so would appreciate a check over of that content also. Many thanks - Dumelow (talk) 15:00, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Dumelow: I'll take a look, many thanks for all your work. Amitchell125 (talk) 15:13, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Passing

Everything looks fine, it's an elegant little article to read. Passing now, congratulations. Amitchell125 (talk) 16:40, 17 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]