Ravensworth was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Link rot fixed using webreflinks tool Farrtj ( talk) 19:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jezhotwells ( talk · contribs) 21:44, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Please place your comments here, under mine in the review and indent appropriately. Thanks.
Disambiguations: none found.
Linkrot: one found and fixed. [1] Jezhotwells ( talk) 21:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Meetthefeebles ( talk · contribs) 17:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
I'll review over the weekend. Will have a good read through and leave a detailed review tomorrow... Meetthefeebles ( talk) 17:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay, let's get started...
Disambiguation links: One found (
woodchip). Suggest
woodchips instead.
Links: I'll come back to these when I look at the references.
Image Check: All seem to be from Geograph, which is fine, and licensed accordingly.
I'll be reviewing against the GA Criteria. Although not strictly part of those criteria, excellent guidance on settlements is provided by WP:UKCITIES. This offers guidance on structure and content which is very much relevant to c.3 of the GA Criteria (breadth) and will therefore form a large part of the review.
Opening Comments
Structure looks good at first glance. Reads quite nicely. Illustrations are appropriate and add to the article. The article doesn't look especially long, which is not especially surprising on a village with less than 300 inhabitants.
I'll work through each section and add comments as I go...
Lead
History
Overall, this is a very nicely written section (I can't see any glaring typographical errors) but there are issues of referencing and a few unsupported statements which require attention.
Government
Geography
Demography
Economy
This section is missing and needs to be added. Use
WP:UKCITIES for guidance on what to include.
Amenities
Transport
Ravensworth Nurseries
Famous Sportsmen
Other comments
Reference
Overall Comments
Per WP:WIAGA Criteria
1. Well-written:
Reviewer comments
2. Verifiable with no original research:
Reviewer comments
3.Broad in its coverage:
Reviewer comments
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Reviewer comments
5.Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Reviewer comments
6.Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio
Reviewer comments
Final comments
This is a very nicely written and engaging article on a lovely little village, but at this stage I do not feel that the article meets the GA criteria; notably c.2 and c.3. There are quite a few things to consider and I do feel that a week might not be enough time, but I'll put the article on hold and give the nominator a chance to respond.
Meetthefeebles (
talk)
14:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Having spoken via our respective talkpages to the nominator, it is agreed that the review should be concluded as per the present condition of the article:
Overall summary
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
1. Is it reasonably well written?
2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
There remains a few issues relating the reference format, reliability of some sources and one or two statements which would benefit from a reference (highlighted in comments above)
3.Is it broad in its coverage?
There are some sections which are either omitted or which are included but could be much more fulsome in their content (again, highlighted above).
4.Is it neutral?
Broadly fine but there are a couple of pieces which read a little 'adverty', such as the information on the nursery.
5. Is it stable?
No evidence of any edit-warring.
6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
These are all fine.
Overall:
Closing comments The article is certainly improving, but I do feel that there remains work to be done before this reaches GA– most notably in respect of breadth of coverage and some referencing issues. Once the nominator is able to find enough free time to address the issues raised above, I would expect the article to be very close to the standard required and would advise renominating then. Good luck! Meetthefeebles ( talk) 19:56, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ravensworth. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ravensworth. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Ravensworth. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
Ravensworth was a Geography and places good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Former good article nominee |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Link rot fixed using webreflinks tool Farrtj ( talk) 19:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Jezhotwells ( talk · contribs) 21:44, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status. Please place your comments here, under mine in the review and indent appropriately. Thanks.
Disambiguations: none found.
Linkrot: one found and fixed. [1] Jezhotwells ( talk) 21:52, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Meetthefeebles ( talk · contribs) 17:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
I'll review over the weekend. Will have a good read through and leave a detailed review tomorrow... Meetthefeebles ( talk) 17:49, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
Okay, let's get started...
Disambiguation links: One found (
woodchip). Suggest
woodchips instead.
Links: I'll come back to these when I look at the references.
Image Check: All seem to be from Geograph, which is fine, and licensed accordingly.
I'll be reviewing against the GA Criteria. Although not strictly part of those criteria, excellent guidance on settlements is provided by WP:UKCITIES. This offers guidance on structure and content which is very much relevant to c.3 of the GA Criteria (breadth) and will therefore form a large part of the review.
Opening Comments
Structure looks good at first glance. Reads quite nicely. Illustrations are appropriate and add to the article. The article doesn't look especially long, which is not especially surprising on a village with less than 300 inhabitants.
I'll work through each section and add comments as I go...
Lead
History
Overall, this is a very nicely written section (I can't see any glaring typographical errors) but there are issues of referencing and a few unsupported statements which require attention.
Government
Geography
Demography
Economy
This section is missing and needs to be added. Use
WP:UKCITIES for guidance on what to include.
Amenities
Transport
Ravensworth Nurseries
Famous Sportsmen
Other comments
Reference
Overall Comments
Per WP:WIAGA Criteria
1. Well-written:
Reviewer comments
2. Verifiable with no original research:
Reviewer comments
3.Broad in its coverage:
Reviewer comments
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Reviewer comments
5.Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Reviewer comments
6.Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio
Reviewer comments
Final comments
This is a very nicely written and engaging article on a lovely little village, but at this stage I do not feel that the article meets the GA criteria; notably c.2 and c.3. There are quite a few things to consider and I do feel that a week might not be enough time, but I'll put the article on hold and give the nominator a chance to respond.
Meetthefeebles (
talk)
14:27, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
Having spoken via our respective talkpages to the nominator, it is agreed that the review should be concluded as per the present condition of the article:
Overall summary
GA review – see
WP:WIAGA for criteria
1. Is it reasonably well written?
2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
There remains a few issues relating the reference format, reliability of some sources and one or two statements which would benefit from a reference (highlighted in comments above)
3.Is it broad in its coverage?
There are some sections which are either omitted or which are included but could be much more fulsome in their content (again, highlighted above).
4.Is it neutral?
Broadly fine but there are a couple of pieces which read a little 'adverty', such as the information on the nursery.
5. Is it stable?
No evidence of any edit-warring.
6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
These are all fine.
Overall:
Closing comments The article is certainly improving, but I do feel that there remains work to be done before this reaches GA– most notably in respect of breadth of coverage and some referencing issues. Once the nominator is able to find enough free time to address the issues raised above, I would expect the article to be very close to the standard required and would advise renominating then. Good luck! Meetthefeebles ( talk) 19:56, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ravensworth. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 00:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
Ravensworth. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 09:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Ravensworth. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)