Talk:Ravensworth

Link rot

Link rot fixed using webreflinks tool Farrtj (talk) 19:05, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

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

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)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I am uncomfortable with the phrasing: "The castle was abandoned and began to be pulled down in the middle of the 16th century," and "The castle began to be pulled down in the middle of the 16th century," I am not disputing the fact, just the phrasing. Better would be something along the lines of: "Demolition of the castle commenced in the 16th century..." or something like that as the castle itself could not actually pull itself down.

   "As with many English villages, much of the housing stock consists of Grade II listed buildings, dating from the mid to late 17th century onwards. " Who said this? - looks like weasel words.

   "A Church of England church" is a clumsy phrase.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   The reference #24[2] doesn't mention Cuthbert Shaw or that William Lax was born in the village

   cite #51[3] actually says 5 people not ten. The ref title "check browser settings" is inappropriate.

   "As with many British villages, Ravensworth formerly had a Post Office, but it closed down some years ago." ref #44[4] actuall says: "There was previously a Post Office in the village, but this was closed down several years ago. However a recent survey of residents' opinions has shown that there is support for a Post Office (even part-time) in the village. " There is no commentary about "As with many British villages, ".

   "and the region is a real heartland for the game, with the world's oldest quoits club formed in nearby Darlington." is not supported by the cite

   "The village is within the boundaries of the annual fox hunting event, the Zetland Hunt." the source doesn't actually support the statement

   I think you had best go through this cite by cite and strip out anything that is not supported by citations. When that has been done, i shall continue the review. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   1. On hold for issues above to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:28, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

   No action has been taken on this, although the nominator was notified and they are actively editing in the subsequent week, so I am not listing at this time. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:10, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ravensworth/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

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

• Looks fine; well written, flows nicely and nothing obvious missing. Infobox is generally fine too but the link to ref.1 is a bare url and I can't seem to open it when I click on the link. This needs correcting.

History

• What makes ref.2 a reliable source? I had a root about and see that the author appears to be a historian but it might be worth adding a note to the reference to show this as it is not clear from the link provided. Also, be careful with close paraphrasing: the sentence "Originally called Ravenswath, "wath" was the Old Norse word meaning "ford" and would suggest that the Holme Beck that passes through the village was forded in Viking times." is very close to a word for word copy of the source material. Suggest a slight rewrite to avoid possible copyright infringement.

Done Farrtj (talk) 15:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Bizarre. Done. Farrtj (talk) 15:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Was the population of the village in 1086 21 persons or 21 households? The source indicates the latter. Suggest slight rewrite to reflect this?

Done. Farrtj (talk) 17:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

• Is ref.7 supposed to look as it does? It looks a bit odd and I can't check it because I have neither a title nor an author for the source.

It's a reputable source. Farrtj (talk) 15:48, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Ref.8 is another bare url: suggest either using the cite web template or even citing the text itself directly (this looks like a scanned pamphlet of some kind)

doneFarrtj (talk) 15:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• I can't get the link in ref.9 to work.
• I can't check ref.11 as it appears to be behind a paywall. As you appear to be citing a textbook, suggest removing the link (if someone really wants to check, they can use the book).

Done.Farrtj (talk) 17:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

• "Following his death, it passed to his son, a minor, William Parr, 1st Marquess of Northampton by which time it was "ruynated" (ruined), largely as a result of being quarried for local building materials, before passing to the Crown Estate in 1571 after Parr died without issue." This seems a fairly complex sentence; suggest splitting into two sentences instead?

Done.Farrtj (talk) 15:36, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Is ref.15 reliable? I seem to recall that the GENUKI sites are not considered reliable on Wikipedia, but if you can show me otherwise, then that would be fine and dandy.

removed. Found alternative sources. Farrtj (talk) 16:13, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Ref.21 is another GENUKI source, though this appears to be a transcript of a published text. Consider citing the text directly instead?
• "The cleric and historian John Dakyn was rector of the parish from 1554 until his death four years later. In 1556 he established the Kirby Ravensworth Free Grammar School (free from external control rather than free at the point of use) and an almshouse, and his benefaction continues to fund charitable causes for the parishioners." This sentence is unreferenced.

Done.Farrtj (talk) 16:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Again, I can't check ref.23 (paywall) and would like to, because "As with many English villages, much of the housing stock consists of Grade II listed buildings, dating from the mid to late 17th century onwards." certainly needs a reference as it reads as somewhat suppository.

Paywall sources are OK, especially if they are excellent resources, like the ODNB. Farrtj (talk) 15:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Unless I am reading wrong, I cannot see anything on p.208 of the book cited in ref.26 relating to Thomax Lax?

Done. Farrtj (talk) 16:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Do we have a reference for "The publisher Effingham Wilson was born in the village in 1785."?

We do now. Farrtj (talk) 15:41, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• The 20th century section is a little sparse and two thirds of it is entirely unreferenced. Did anything else happen in the previous hundred years of note? It may be that nothing has actually happened, but the detail provided earlier is a little missing by comparison here.

I really can't find anything. Perhaps nothing happened. Farrtj (talk) 16:27, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

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

• This section contains all of the appropriate info indicated by WP:UKCITIES and references are fine :)

Geography

• Do we have a reference for the sea-level statement?
• Similarly, does "It is the middle of a wide valley formed by the Teesdale glacier during the last ice age." have a reference?

removed. Farrtj (talk) 17:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• I noticed from ref.39 that there is lead, coal and stone in the area. Consider adding a note on this?

That reference is 100 years old. I don't think those resources remain, and I can;t find a source for it. Farrtj (talk) 16:40, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• "Most of the land around the village is arable farmland, but animals such as horses and cows are reared as well. Sheep graze on the more rugged sides of the valley. Crops grown include wheat, barley and oil seed rape." This sentence also needs a reference.

There is no reference for this. It's hardly a contentious statement that requires citation for GA status anyway. Farrtj (talk) 16:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Ref.43 appears to be some kind of holiday home website. I doubt that this can be considered a reliable source purely by reference to the nature of it's business.

removed Farrtj (talk) 15:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• Unless I've misread the source, the sentence "Dry stone walls are traditional to the area, and are still commonly found. Sandstone continues to be quarried on the outskirts of the village. The old Roman road of Dere Street formerly skirted the north eastern outskirts of the parish and provides much of the northern boundary of the parish." is not corroborated by ref.46 and, without proper corroboration, this looks like original research.
• The wildlife sentence is also unreferenced and needs supporting.

Cited now. Farrtj (talk) 15:33, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• The climate information looks solid, but there is a strange tag in the data table which needs to be removed.

I'm having trouble removing it. Farrtj (talk) 17:01, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

• WP:UKCITIES suggests that you consider adding the compass table, and this might be useful in light of Ravensworth's rural surrounds?

Demography

• "Approximately 20 per cent of the village are of pensioner age..." suggest slight rewrite to 'villagers'?
• "There are 10 people claiming Jobseeker's Allowance." This sentence is fine but would benefit from the context of a year, bearing in mind that this will fluctuate regularly and people find work.
• WP:UKCITIES also suggests that you include details on the current population and where the figure is taken from (this is in the infobox but not this section), the ethnic composition of the village and the religious composition.
• Consider using a statistical comparison table, also per WP:UKCITIES?

Economy
This section is missing and needs to be added. Use WP:UKCITIES for guidance on what to include.

Amenities

• Where does the information on the school cohort come from? This will need a reference.
• "As with many British villages..." Whilst this is arguably WP:Common knowledge, there is an argument that you should support this statement with a reference. It might even be easier just to take it out and leave the information about the post office closure?
• "There is a decommissioned red telephone box and a Royal Mail post box." Without a reference, this looks like original research. As does "There are regular community events held on the green, around the village and in the village hall throughout the year."

Transport

• This entire section is unreferenced and needs support.
• "thus giving it excellent road links." This is borderline WP:PEACOCK.

Ravensworth Nurseries

• The principal issue I have here is that this section reads a bit like an advert. Part of me thinks that if the nursery is sufficiently notable it should perhaps have it's own article. If not, I would strongly suggest condensing the information and including it in an economy section as it would appear that this is the largest local employer.

Famous Sportsmen

• What is here is fine, but are there any other notable residents who could perhaps 'filled-out' this section? You mentioned a few in the history section and these could perhaps be added here? If one is available, a picture of Botham or his house might also add to this section?

Other comments

• I was a little surprised to find no section on culture/landmarks. I am guessing that there are a lot of listed buildings and places of historical interest in Ravensworth and a section on these might also be useful?

Reference

• Notwithstanding specific issues highlight above, my main comment here would be that the references are very inconsistent. Using the cite web template would be very beneficial; it would help protect against link-rot, add consistency to the list, prevent citing bare-urls etc.
• Taking ref.78 as an example, the cite web template would make it look like this: Taylor, Alistair (25 November 2011). "Botham son's ex in missing dog quiz". The Sun. Retrieved 10 November 2012.

Overall Comments

Per WP:WIAGA Criteria

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

Reviewer comments

• Prose is fluent and engaging. Some small errors and suggestions but nothing major. No issues with lists, WP:LEAD or any other obvious WP:MOS issues.
  
  

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);

(c) it contains no original research

Reviewer comments

• There are some issues of possible WP:OR (comments above). Referencing is inconsistent throughout and recommendations for improvement have been made. Several sources are possibly unreliable and fall foul of WP:V. There are several areas which lack reliable sources.
  
  

3.Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)

Reviewer comments

• The scope is reasonably broad but there needs to be an economy section added (though much of the required info is scattered throughout the article). Some sections can be improved upon perhaps and a culture section could be considered.
  
  

4.Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Reviewer comments

• No real problems here though one or two possible peacock terms and the nursery section is a little 'advert-y'
  
  

5.Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Reviewer comments

• No evidence of edit wars.
  
  

6.Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions

Reviewer comments

• Images are suitably licensed and certainly add to the article. One or two possible suggestions for additional images made above.
  
  

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)

I have the page on my watchlist and note the amendments being made. Rather than risking confusion by re-commenting when work is still ongoing, I'll allow Farrtj (talk) to continue and will take another look when they are complete... Meetthefeebles (talk) 23:34, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Okay, this one has been ongoing for a week or so now. I can see that amendments have been made but some of the larger and important changes, such as the adding of economic data to that new section, are not yet complete. Do you think we are likely to have this info in the near future? I am conscious that articles should only really be placed on hold for a week or so and that timespan is now up... Meetthefeebles (talk) 12:06, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Closing Review

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?

A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:

• Comment

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?

A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:

• Comment

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?

Fair representation without bias:

• Comment

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 edit wars, etc:

• Comment

No evidence of any edit-warring.

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

• Comment

These are all fine.

Overall:

Pass or Fail:

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)

External links modified

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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20120608231153/http://www.whashton.net:80/WEA_doc.htm to http://www.whashton.net/WEA_doc.htm

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).

• 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 00:39, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

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:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120316224625/http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/FitzHugh1321.htm to http://www.cracroftspeerage.co.uk/online/content/FitzHugh1321.htm#FITZHUGH_1321_2

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: 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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:06, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

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:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120131220612/http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/dept/coins/exhibitions/CoinOfTheMoment/HenryIIIgold/ to http://www.fitzmuseum.cam.ac.uk/dept/coins/exhibitions/CoinOfTheMoment/HenryIIIgold/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110522140446/http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/features/columnists/mikeamos/johnnorth/3784713.Flying_the_flag/ to http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/features/columnists/mikeamos/johnnorth/3784713.Flying_the_flag/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120401191717/http://www.earthtools.org/ to http://www.earthtools.org/

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) 01:32, 8 December 2017 (UTC)