Jump to content

Talk:Nine Stones, Winterbourne Abbas

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleNine Stones, Winterbourne Abbas is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on July 28, 2018.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 30, 2016Good article nomineeListed
April 12, 2017Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article

Confusing information

[edit]

In the Context section the article currently states that "the transition from the Early Neolithic to the Late Neolithic [...] saw a considerable change in the style of monuments erected, particularly in southern and eastern England. By 3000 BCE, the long barrows, causewayed enclosures, and cursuses that had predominated in the Early Neolithic ceased being built, and were instead replaced by circular monuments of various kinds. These include earthen henges, timber circles, and stone circles. These latter circles are found in most areas of Britain where stone is available, with the exception of the island's south-eastern corner". This is confusing as it appears to contradict itself - first saying the change occurred particularly in southern and eastern England, but later saying that stone circles (I'm assuming that's what is referred to by "these latter circles"?) aren't found in the SE. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 20:33, 27 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. However, there is a distinction here. Stone circles are absent from south-eastern England (although are found across many other parts of southern England). However, circular monuments more broadly are found throughout both southern and eastern England; thus, you do find circular monuments in south-eastern England, just not those made from stone. Midnightblueowl (talk) 16:40, 22 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


This review is transcluded from Talk:Nine Stones, Winterbourne Abbas/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 15:28, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]


How interesting; happy to offer a review. It's always surprised me just how many of these are dotted around. Swinside and Birkrigg stone circle were both very close to where I grew up, but I don't think people were really aware of them. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:28, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It must have been a lovely landscape to grow up in! Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:02, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Nine Stones circle consists of nine sarsen megaliths which are irregularly spaced, with a diameter of 9.1 metres by 7.8 metres across." I initially read this as meaning that the stones had this diameter, which is obviously not correct.
  • "eight tons" Can we have this in metric as well? Google suggests just over 7 tonnes.
    • All of the measurements mentioned in this article are based on what the reliable sources actually stated. Thus, where they used the metric system, I added metric measurements into the article; where they used imperial, I applied imperial. However, I think that your point is a very valid one, so I will use the powers of Google to ascertain what the imperial/metric measurements are when the other is not specified. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:07, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'm not fussed about it at this stage, but I think some people might prefer you to standardise to either metric or imperial throughout- i.e., all measurements being "metric (imperial)" or all being "imperial (metric)". Josh Milburn (talk) 22:06, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The circle is located at the bottom of a narrow valley, which is unusual for a monument of this type.[refs] Within Dorset, the Rempstone stone circle was however also erected within a valley.[refs]" I don't want to mess up your referencing, but perhaps this could be rephrased to something like "The circle is located at the bottom of a narrow valley.[refs] Though this is unusual for a monument of this type,[refs] the Dorset Rempstone stone circle was also erected within a valley.[refs]"
  • "Gale later stated that this allegation "has never been substantiated"." Is allegation really the right word?

A strong article and a worthy subject. I've no doubt I'll be promoting soon. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:53, 30 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.