Mellor hill fort has been listed as one of the History 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
May 22, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that although
Mellor hill fort is
Iron Age in origin, artefacts possibly as old as 10,000 years have been discovered on the site, including a 4,000 year old amber necklace? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Maiden Castle, Dorset was copied or moved into Mellor hill fort with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Just a few things I noticed, I'd rather not change them without first asking.
I'll have a further read and try and help with the structure. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 23:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Little is known about Iron Age activity in North West England as pottery is rare on the sites excavated in the region and there are few Iron; there is a lack of settlement sites and compared to the over 1,300 hill forts in England, there is a relatively low number in the north west
Should this be something like "there are few finds made of iron"? - presently it reads like there are few iron pots found. Also my understanding of the semi-colon (from here) is that it should seperate two complete causes that could each stand alone as a sentence. The second clause doesn't fit that criteria at the moment. Richerman ( talk) 00:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I've cut a bit out, it now reads
Little is known about Iron Age activity in North West England as pottery is rare on the sites excavated in the region; there is a dearth of settlement sites and compared to the over 1,300 hill forts in England, there is a relatively low number in the north west.
Does it need further tweaking? Nev1 ( talk) 00:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The first clause sounds good, how about for the second:
there is a dearth of settlement sites and, from over 1,300 hill forts found in England, there is a relatively low number in the north west. Richerman ( talk) 11:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
First, major congratulations on getting to GA status! That is very impressive. Is it ok, though, if I can't get comfortable with the consolidated nature? I'd rather it be a good article than tailored to suit my comfort levels, though. Second, I'm going to suggest some material that might be worth working in somehow. The importance of the Mellor Pot is high, so I'll start with [1] as a source of good material on that. The excavation itself is not described in the article - [2] is a very large photo-archive of everything done on the site. The University of Manchester Archaeological Unit reports are posted here [3] for the most part, but a few links are broken. I'll see if I can get the remainder of the emailed to me. Jcday ( talk) 06:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
An interesting article, and I recognise some of the text from Danebury.
Naturally I checked the topic out at Current Archaeology and came across Mellor Archeological Trust (and went to their website). After about the second reading of the article I spotted the External links section and the link to "Mellor Heritage Project", which turned out to be Mellor Archeological Trust.
Coments:
"the archaeological excavations that have been undertaken since 1998 have been funded by Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council and grants from the Heritage Lottery Fund, and have received news coverage. The site has been used as a training excavation for students and a community dig to introduce people to history, with the participation of Mellor Archaeological Trust.[9] Many of the artefacts discovered at Mellor during the excavations are on on permanent display at Stockport Museum".
Pyrotec ( talk) 20:05, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
The article has been much improved overnight, so I'm awarding GA status. Congratulations on the quality of the article. Pyrotec ( talk) 09:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Mellor hill fort. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)
Mellor hill fort has been listed as one of the History 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. | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the "
Did you know?" column on
May 22, 2009. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that although
Mellor hill fort is
Iron Age in origin, artefacts possibly as old as 10,000 years have been discovered on the site, including a 4,000 year old amber necklace? |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Text and/or other creative content from Maiden Castle, Dorset was copied or moved into Mellor hill fort with this edit. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists. |
Just a few things I noticed, I'd rather not change them without first asking.
I'll have a further read and try and help with the structure. Parrot of Doom ( talk) 23:58, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Little is known about Iron Age activity in North West England as pottery is rare on the sites excavated in the region and there are few Iron; there is a lack of settlement sites and compared to the over 1,300 hill forts in England, there is a relatively low number in the north west
Should this be something like "there are few finds made of iron"? - presently it reads like there are few iron pots found. Also my understanding of the semi-colon (from here) is that it should seperate two complete causes that could each stand alone as a sentence. The second clause doesn't fit that criteria at the moment. Richerman ( talk) 00:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
I've cut a bit out, it now reads
Little is known about Iron Age activity in North West England as pottery is rare on the sites excavated in the region; there is a dearth of settlement sites and compared to the over 1,300 hill forts in England, there is a relatively low number in the north west.
Does it need further tweaking? Nev1 ( talk) 00:28, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The first clause sounds good, how about for the second:
there is a dearth of settlement sites and, from over 1,300 hill forts found in England, there is a relatively low number in the north west. Richerman ( talk) 11:44, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
First, major congratulations on getting to GA status! That is very impressive. Is it ok, though, if I can't get comfortable with the consolidated nature? I'd rather it be a good article than tailored to suit my comfort levels, though. Second, I'm going to suggest some material that might be worth working in somehow. The importance of the Mellor Pot is high, so I'll start with [1] as a source of good material on that. The excavation itself is not described in the article - [2] is a very large photo-archive of everything done on the site. The University of Manchester Archaeological Unit reports are posted here [3] for the most part, but a few links are broken. I'll see if I can get the remainder of the emailed to me. Jcday ( talk) 06:55, 29 June 2010 (UTC)
An interesting article, and I recognise some of the text from Danebury.
Naturally I checked the topic out at Current Archaeology and came across Mellor Archeological Trust (and went to their website). After about the second reading of the article I spotted the External links section and the link to "Mellor Heritage Project", which turned out to be Mellor Archeological Trust.
Coments:
"the archaeological excavations that have been undertaken since 1998 have been funded by Stockport Metropolitan Borough Council and grants from the Heritage Lottery Fund, and have received news coverage. The site has been used as a training excavation for students and a community dig to introduce people to history, with the participation of Mellor Archaeological Trust.[9] Many of the artefacts discovered at Mellor during the excavations are on on permanent display at Stockport Museum".
Pyrotec ( talk) 20:05, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
The article has been much improved overnight, so I'm awarding GA status. Congratulations on the quality of the article. Pyrotec ( talk) 09:07, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on
Mellor hill fort. 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: 18 January 2022).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 02:32, 28 January 2016 (UTC)