*Infobox Y
- The only problem I could see is the address. Some editors are sticklers for a source on the address. Personally, I don't see it as an issue, but others might.
- Lead
Y
- Looks good, no problems I can see.
- Geography and setting
Y
- Last paragraph of this section has only one source. I am guessing everything is sourced to "Scaffidi 2014, p. 5 of the PDF file." Some editors might want that on each sentence, if not, it feels like there is some unsourced portions.
-
Neutralhomer, thank you for this suggestion. This is actually the way I had formatted the article originally, as I prefer to have an inline citation at the end of each sentence. Previous copyeditors and my GA reviewer averred that I should move the inline citation to the end of the paragraph if all the content of that paragraph is from the same source. Per
WP:CITEDENSE, Wikipedia does not have a "one inline citation per sentence" or "one citation per paragraph" rule, even for featured articles. So, either method is acceptable per this guidance. Let me know if this is a deal breaker. --
West Virginian
(talk)
20:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
- Otherwise, very well-sourced, and well-written.
- History
Y
- Background
Y
- No problems I can see, well-sourced, well-written.
- Establishment
Y
- The second to last sentence in the second paragraph needs a source.
- Per the discussion of
WP:CITEDENSE above, Citation 19 covers both sentences. My GA reviewer recommended I take out repeating inline citations per the CITEDENSE guidance, so this inline citation was removed accordingly. Before addressing subsequent comments about the inline citations, I'll let you weigh in. --
West Virginian
(talk)
20:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
- Same with the first sentence of the last paragraph.
- Kudos on the Christian Streit and Winchester references.
- Thank you! I knew you would enjoy the references to Rev. Streit and Winchester, hence why I thought you'd be interested in reviewing this article! I've made modifications up to this point, and will finish the remainder when I have an opportunity to do so. In the meantime, refer to
WP:CITEDENSE, as this may answer your question about the sentences without inline citations. Thanks again
Neutralhomer! --
West Virginian
(talk)
20:26, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
- Well-sourced, well-written.
- Construction
Y
**First and second sentences of the second paragraph need a source.
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- Later history
Y
- First paragraph, last sentence, need a comma after "By 1867".
- Second paragraph, second sentence, need a comma after "In December 1884".
- Third paragraph, second sentence, need a comma after, "In 1905".
- Fourth paragraph, first sentece, need a comma after "On June 11, 1915".
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- Preservation
Y
- First paragraph, first sentence, is a bit of a run-on. Is it possible to break this into two?
- Does this work? "In 2008, a survey of historic properties in the county was undertaken by the State Historic Preservation Office of the West Virginia Division of Culture and History. Following this survey, the Hampshire County Historic Landmarks Commission and the Hampshire County Commission began an initiative to place these identified structures and districts on the National Register of Historic Places." --
West Virginian
(talk)
19:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- Pastors
Y
- If you haven't already, do check the various names to make sure there isn't an article about them here on Wikipedia.
- Nice, well-sourced table of past and current Pastors.
- Architecture
Y
- Lede section
Y
**Like with "Geography and setting", some editors might want sources on each sentence.
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- Church exterior
Y
- This is just me, but saying "Each wooden door has a small brass doorknob with a dead bolt." isn't really necessary. If there was something significant about the doorknobs or dead bolts, it might.
**Need some extra sources in the second paragraph.
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- Church interior
Y
**First, second and third paragraphs need those extra sources.
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- Community building
Y
**Same thing here.
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- Cemetery
Y
**Same here.
- Is there anyone of notable significance buried at the Hebron Church Cemetery? That might be worth mentioning.
- I was only able to find one significant burial at Hebron Church for a government official who had retired near Intermont from D.C. Once I write that Wikipedia article, I will include a mention here. Thank you for the suggestion! --
West Virginian
(talk)
19:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
- Otherwise, well-sourced, well-written.
- See also and below
Y
- One part that might be a problem is under "Bibliography", bottom source "William and Mary Quarterly (April 1898)", which has a "registration required" alert. I would ask
Wehwalt regarding this as I am not sure. Since it is just the source, not a link, I don't think it would be a problem, but I can't be for certain.
- Otherwise, no other issues.
- Photos
Y
- In the "Architecture" section, the first image does squish the text just a little in the "Church exterior" section. That might be a little tricky, so I will leave that up to you on how you wish to deal with that. You could move one up to the "Preservation" section or even "Establishment".
- In the "Cemetery" section, that image squishes the header in the "See also" section.
- Otherwise, great use of photos, both inside and out.
- Talk page
Y
- Since the church was founded in the 1700s, when West Virginia was still part of Virginia, it might be worth adding the article to
WP:VIRGINIA as well.
- Summary
Y
- Very little you need to fix. This is a very well-written and well-sourced article. Nice use of photos throughout the article. Great work! -
Neutralhomer •
Talk •
20:29, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
-
Neutralhomer, thank you for your very thorough and comprehensive review of this article! I am going to be busy over the next few days, but I promise to address your comments and concerns as soon as I can! Regarding the architectural descriptions of the church, there is only one available source, and that is the NRHP nomination form. I was unable to find other sources to corroborate the building's physical descriptions. Thanks again, as I always value your guidance and suggestions! --
West Virginian
(talk)
19:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
-
West Virginian Like I said, even if it is the same source for each sentence, some editors are sticklers for that. Me, I'm more of a stickler for spelling, sources and commas. :) -
Neutralhomer •
Talk •
19:58, 11 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
-
Neutralhomer, once again you have provided a fantastic and thorough review, and I am very grateful for your time! I've addressed all your aforementioned concerns, so please take a look at my incorporation of your suggestions and let me know if you have any further comments, questions, or concerns. Once again, thank you truly! --
West Virginian
(talk)
19:55, 12 October 2015 (UTC)
reply
|