Talk:Nethermost Pike

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Nethermost Pike 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.
WikiProject British and Irish hills (Rated GA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject British and Irish hills, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the hills and mountains of Great Britain and Ireland 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 
WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lancashire and Cumbria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Lancashire and Cumbria 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GA Status[edit]

The article has passed Sections 1), 4), 5) and 6). Work is needed on Sections 2) and 3).

Overall, the assessment is On Hold.

1) Style

Article is well written

2) Accuracy

Flora and Fauna sub-section

  • Downy Willow is a non-existent link.

3) Coverage

  • Write a new section, "Tourism" - What are the tourist numbers to Nethermost Pike ? What are the population centres ? Has tourism damaged Nethermost Pike or has it brought in revenue for the local people ?

4) Neutrality

Article is neutral in tone

5) Stability

Article is stable without major edit wars

6) Photos

Free public domain photos are used. Good use of photos. No Fair Use photos.

The corrections, as specified above, must be done by 17 December 2007. Contact me when they have been and I shall re-assess.

Tovojolo (talk) 23:58, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


GA Status Fail[edit]

I note that the work, that was required to achieve GA Status, was not done. I, therefore, have no alternative but to declare that the article has now been assessed as a FAIL

Tovojolo (talk) 00:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Well only a year later, I have got round to making the suggested changes; very sorry Tovojolo for not being quicker!! I have added all the information about tourism and Nethermost Pike. Not much that is specific as this is about a single mountain out of over 200, which together have obviously impacted the tourism of the area. Will nominate again for good article status soon. Suicidalhamster (talk) 14:46, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
Agree with your opinion on tourism; Nethermost Pike on its own isn't significant enough to merit much discussion on the subject; what there is would more rightly belong to the Helvellyn article, or the Lake District as a whole. Most walkers bypass the summit. More to (my) point, having been past Hard Tarn today, I found it neither hard to find (in a navigational sense, although the trudge up to the ridge from it was hard on my unfit self physically), nor appearing at all deep, partially because the mentioned clear water made the bottom look shallow. Riedquat (talk) 00:28, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
I'm also rather sceptical about the effect of paths mention - although they stick out like a sore thumb, in total percentge of land usage they're pretty small, even taking just the ridge area into consideration (and far more visually offensive are the so-called "repaired paths" that really scar Helvellyn and surrounding peaks). Riedquat (talk) 00:32, 31 May 2009 (UTC)