Talk:Low Fell

Low Fell 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 16, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

North East England Low‑importance

	North East England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East 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.North East EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject North East EnglandTemplate:WikiProject North East EnglandNorth East England articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Low Fell/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Grandiose (talk · contribs) 10:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC) I'll be taking the review.[reply]

Opening comments[edit]

Too much quoting going on. Most notable in "Economy" and "Education" but overly present throughout. Keep WP:Close paraphrasing in mind and rewrite the sections to remove the quotations. Generally if you use so many, the surrounding words end up very similar and this is problematic.

I have re-written the two stated sections and have made other changes throughout the article to address this Meetthefeebles (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Much better.

Hyphens are used instead of dashes in many places. Consult WP:DASH for more information.

I have used the endash instead Meetthefeebles (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've still got several in the second paragraph of "venues" in numerical ranges. Also "learned his trade" is non encyclopedic; that paragraph could do with a look at. There's also a full stop missing at the end of the first paragraph. [Edit: indeed, many of the hyphen issues remain. Use a spaced en-dash (" ndash; ") for a dash, and an unspaced one in ranges ("1885–87"). There are some wrong in the references also.]

The bus route colours fail Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Accessibility, tone them down to pastel shades if you feel the colour is important.

The colours used are, rather bizarrely, pretty much the exact colours that the buses have been painted by the wisdom of Go-North East. That is the reason for the use. Whilst I agree that they are rather garish, there is I think therefore a good reason for their use. Rather than change the colours, which I think might be a little misleading, I'd rather either leave them be or simply removed them Meetthefeebles (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the design of the table to accomodate the colours and guidelines.

Make reference #73 more like a proper reference, rather than an image caption which is how it looks at the moment to ensure verifiability.

Fixed Meetthefeebles (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe this is fixed. Cite the webpage as a webpage, for example with {{cite web}}.

Several grammatical mistakes, e.g. "on the 17 June 1826" missing a full stop; "now instead residential suburb" ;"it's blue plaque".Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 10:10, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think these have been corrected (though I may have missed the odd one) Meetthefeebles (talk) 15:22, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'm not long in from work and I have spotted a few of these myself after I responded to the original comments. Using wiki-shortcuts like {{citeweb}} is something I am notoriously bad at, so my apologies. The bus table looks much better (and I would have had no idea how to actually do this...) :) Meetthefeebles (talk) 16:33, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have gone over the article again in detail and believe that all of the outstanding issues have been addressed Meetthefeebles (talk) 17:36, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the article is in good shape. The dashes still aren't correct in many of the references: they should be spaced n-dashes (spaced on both sides). However, this isn't enough to suggest that the article fails any of the criteria, so I'm passing the article. Well done! Consider reviewing an article against the criteria. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 18:48, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Low-fell.com[edit]

I noticed that someone has linked this site to the bottom of the page. As the site is a business and adds nothing new to the reader, I have removed the link per WP:EL Meetthefeebles (talk) 16:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Low Fell. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120817054604/http://www.nexus.org.uk/who-is-nexus to http://www.nexus.org.uk/who-is-nexus

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Low Fell. 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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:42, 26 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions