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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
This one ties in quite nicely with the Unitarian Chapel that I recently created an article for, where Coleridge preached, apparently walking into Taunton from this cottage. Review to follow. Harriastalk 08:56, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Images
All add value to the article and fit well within the article layout.
I'm a little unsure about the copyright tag on File:Cottage Moore.jpg: with an unknown photographer in 1890, it is possible that 70 years wouldn't be long enough. For example, if they were 20 when they took the photo, and lived to be 80, it would be less than 70 years since their death. Perhaps the {{PD-UK-unknown}} tag would be more appropriate?
I've changed the tag as suggested.— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Lead
I'm not keen on the single sentence first paragraph: would it be possibly to add a bit more into this to balance the two paragraphs slightly better?
I've moved one sentance about the building from the 2nd to 1st paras— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
"In 1797 the poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge rented the cottage and while he lived there wrote many of his better known works, and was visited by William Wordsworth and other early members of the Romantic movement." The two occurences of "and" in this sentence make it a little clunky, it might be better split into two sentences?
Split into three sentences.— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
"..and eventually brought it.." This should be "bought" not "brought".
I tend to view the lead as being independent of the body of the article, and so personally, I find the first sentence of the History section beginning "It was constructed.." as a bit odd. I would prefer it to start something like: "The cottage was constructed.." But as far as I'm aware this is just a personal preference, and not reflected in the MOS. Further into that sentence, is it missing "as" between century and two?
"While writing Kubla Khan; or, A Vision in a Dream: A Fragment, was said to have been interrupted by the arrival of a "Person from Porlock"." I think more explanation is needed in the article about this if it is to be included. Following the link to Person from Porlock helped me to understand it, but the article should be able to standalone to a greater extent.
Added a bit of explanation - is this enough?— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Looks good, although it appears to be missing a word after "Fragment"
In the lead it mentions that Coleridge rented the flat, but this isn't made clear in the History section.
"..had gained public support including from the archbichops.." Rather than "from the", "that of" might work better?
Changed as suggested.— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
The David S. Miall source has lots of figures of individual amounts raised, I guess there is no source that gives the total amount they paid for the cottage in 1908?
I've not been able to find total sums.— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
National Trust ownership
Consider linking Lord Coleridge to William Coleridge, 5th Baron Coleridge, and possibly add a footnote to explain his relationship to Samuel Taylor Coleridge.
Link adfded - I've just said decendent as it is a pretty distant relationship.— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
"The oldest parts of the cottage were now presented.." – "were now" seems an odd construction: possibly change to either just "were", or "are now".
"..well is now operational.." Again, remove "now" which is redundant to "once more".
Done
General
Would it be worth adding anything extra from the listed building entry on the architecture of the buildings at all?
There is a bit about the windows but unclear when these changed (possibly 1890s) so I don't think there is a great deal more to add - the key interest is the literary association rather than any architectural merit.— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Ref #10 needs an access date. Harriastalk 10:02, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Date added but my understanding as this is a journal publication with volume & part numbers & will not change this is not needed (however I suppose the web page copying it may do).— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Hmmm, I wasn't aware of that. Surely following that logic, newspaper articles accessed online (ie through BNA) shouldn't need access dates either? Harriastalk 19:02, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for all comments.— Rodtalk 10:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Nice work on tidying the article up, it's looking much better now. Martinevans123 (talk·contribs) added a paragraph in the History section about references to the cottage which has two issues; firstly, I'm not keen on the single sentence paragraph, and secondly, the format used for the poem titles differs from that in the previous paragraph (in fact looking at it, Kubla Khan is in a different format to the previous titles too,) and includes a hyphen that should be an endash. Otherwise, I think we're just about there. Harriastalk 19:02, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Yes, very sorry for just throwing that in, in the midst of your GA Review. (Although I generally have even less respect for GA than I do for me own editing skills ... which is not high, I can assure you). Sorry also for any format and style sins. I just thought this material was kind of essential in any article about the cottage. I'm sure a more appropriate source could be found than that English Heritage listing. I only really came here to try and establish a date for the wall plaque, which I think should be in the caption and/or in the text. Martinevans123 (talk) 19:19, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
No criticism of your adding stuff in Martinevans123, that is the point of Wikipedia! Harriastalk 19:24, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
I've tried to italicise the poem titles consistently, but can't pick up the hyphen v endash error (I've never understood this pedantry of the type of line so I've not bothered to learn the difference - or even better find a tool to do it for me). I will look for a date for the wall plaque.— Rodtalk 19:45, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply
Well, other than my rather nit-picky comments, this is another solid piece of work, and I'm happy to pass it as a GA! Harriastalk 22:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)Reply