Jaywick has been listed as one of the
Geography and places good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 2, 2015. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Jaywick article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A fact from Jaywick appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 30 January 2015 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The style and content is rather refreshing and fun, but not very encyclopedic! Since I don't know anything much about Jaywick I don't think I could take this on, but maybe if someone could look at whats in other small town pages and make a start here...!
IceDragon64 22:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
No objections received so I have removed the tag. I have also expanded the article. Biscuittin 14:37, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
k I think is a bit off a reck I will try to fix it. 25.3.2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.92.126 ( talk) 14:49, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
The lede has "According to the Indices of deprivation 2010 part of the village is the most deprived area in England.[1]", which is almost immediately followed by: "East Jaywick was named as the most deprived area in England according to the Indices of deprivation 2010, based on multiple factors including poverty, crime, education and skill levels, unemployment and housing, as assessed in 2008.[1]" This is entirely appropriate, as the lede is supposed to summarise what follows. However, from WP:LEADCITE: "because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body…information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely… to require a source". As the two references are to the same source, supporting identical pieces of information in the article, are both necessary? The linked policy suggests not. — Old Moonraker ( talk) 13:48, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jaguar ( talk · contribs) 16:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Should have this one for you within a day or two. Thanks! ☯
Jag
uar ☯ 16:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
What a nice place! I definitely need to go here in the summer. I couldn't find anything major with this article as most of it is in decent shape. The only things I found were a few prose issues and some lack of content in the lead section, such as its location, population and other small details which could easily be added. I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days and will watch this page closely. Thanks! ☯ Jag uar ☯ 16:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing them! This is overall a very well written article and an enjoyable read. It is broad, comprehensive and everything else checks out. I might come here in the Spring/Summer as I usually am in London/East Coast. Already have been to Mersea Island a lot of times, very nice beach! Jaywick reminds me a lot of Southsea for some reason, my closest point to the sea. Anyway promoting ☯ Jag uar ☯ 19:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The article seems to imply that the area was uninhabited until the modern era. But according to my dictionary of British place names, the earliest form of the name Jaywick was recorded in 1438, meaning there must have been a settlement at that date. Zacwill ( talk) 22:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jaywick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:53, 23 November 2017 (UTC)
Jaywick has been listed as one of the
Geography and places good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: January 2, 2015. ( Reviewed version). |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Jaywick article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
A fact from Jaywick appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the
Did you know column on 30 January 2015 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
The style and content is rather refreshing and fun, but not very encyclopedic! Since I don't know anything much about Jaywick I don't think I could take this on, but maybe if someone could look at whats in other small town pages and make a start here...!
IceDragon64 22:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)
No objections received so I have removed the tag. I have also expanded the article. Biscuittin 14:37, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
k I think is a bit off a reck I will try to fix it. 25.3.2010 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.92.126 ( talk) 14:49, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
The lede has "According to the Indices of deprivation 2010 part of the village is the most deprived area in England.[1]", which is almost immediately followed by: "East Jaywick was named as the most deprived area in England according to the Indices of deprivation 2010, based on multiple factors including poverty, crime, education and skill levels, unemployment and housing, as assessed in 2008.[1]" This is entirely appropriate, as the lede is supposed to summarise what follows. However, from WP:LEADCITE: "because the lead will usually repeat information that is in the body…information in the lead section of non-controversial subjects is less likely… to require a source". As the two references are to the same source, supporting identical pieces of information in the article, are both necessary? The linked policy suggests not. — Old Moonraker ( talk) 13:48, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jaguar ( talk · contribs) 16:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
Should have this one for you within a day or two. Thanks! ☯
Jag
uar ☯ 16:50, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
What a nice place! I definitely need to go here in the summer. I couldn't find anything major with this article as most of it is in decent shape. The only things I found were a few prose issues and some lack of content in the lead section, such as its location, population and other small details which could easily be added. I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days and will watch this page closely. Thanks! ☯ Jag uar ☯ 16:54, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for addressing them! This is overall a very well written article and an enjoyable read. It is broad, comprehensive and everything else checks out. I might come here in the Spring/Summer as I usually am in London/East Coast. Already have been to Mersea Island a lot of times, very nice beach! Jaywick reminds me a lot of Southsea for some reason, my closest point to the sea. Anyway promoting ☯ Jag uar ☯ 19:37, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
The article seems to imply that the area was uninhabited until the modern era. But according to my dictionary of British place names, the earliest form of the name Jaywick was recorded in 1438, meaning there must have been a settlement at that date. Zacwill ( talk) 22:05, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Jaywick. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:53, 23 November 2017 (UTC)