User talk:Jokulhlaup/sandbox

  WP:Rivers importance low

  WP:Lighthouses importance mid NRHP



   {{WikiProject Lighthouses|class=redir}}
   {{WikiProject Lighthouses|class=cat}}

{{WikiProject xyz|class=|importance=}}
{{WikiProject Lighthouses|class= |importance=mid}}

   {{WikiProject Rivers|class=category}} 

   {{WikiProject Rivers|class=|importance=}} 

   {{WikiProject Rivers|class=|importance=low}} 

   |needs-infobox=y

  
   {{WikiProject Rivers|class=stub|importance=low}} 
 
   {{WikiProject California|class=Stub|importance=Low}}
   {{WikiProject Rivers|class=stub|importance=low}} 

   {{WikiProject Rivers|class=start|importance=low}}  

 
   {{WikiProject Rivers|class=C|importance=low}} 

    {{WikiProject Lighthouses}}

   {{WikiProject Lighthouses|class=stub|importance=low}}

   {{WikiProject Lighthouses|class=start|importance=low}}

   {{WikiProject UK geography|class=Stub|importance=Low}}

       
   WikiProject Rivers|class=stub|importance=low
  
   WikiProject Rivers|class=stub|importance=mid
 
   WikiProject Rivers|class=start|importance=low

   WikiProject Rivers|class=start|importance=mid

   WikiProject Rivers|class=C|importance=low

   WikiProject Rivers|class=C|importance=mid

   WikiProject Lighthouses|class=stub|importance=low

   WikiProject Lighthouses|class=start|importance=low

      WikiProject England|class=c|importance=Low

   WikiProject Scotland|class=c|importance=Low

{{WikiProjectBannerShell|1=
{{WikiProject England|class=stub|importance=low}}
{{WikiProject UK geography|class=Stub|importance=Low}}
{{WikiProject Rivers|class=stub|importance=low}}




{{talk page of redirect}}

Talk:North Calder Water

  Outside the scope of WP:Rivers - Template removed

1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations.
2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.
4. The article is reasonably well-written, and is free from major grammatical errors.
5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.
6. The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

1. Is it suitably referenced, and do all major points have appropriate inline citations.
2. Does it reasonably cover the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.
3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content.
4. The article is reasonably well-written, and is free from major grammatical errors.
5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams.
6. The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

Start a discussion about improving the User:Jokulhlaup/sandbox page

Talk pages are where people discuss how to make content on Wikipedia the best that it can be. You can use this page to start a discussion with others about how to improve the "User:Jokulhlaup/sandbox" page.

Start a discussion