Wikipedia:Peer review/Mendip Hills/archive1

Mendip Hills[edit]

This article has been rated GA for a long time & has had more information added since. I would welcome any comments which could help improve it in the hope of reaching FA status, and feel that the text, images and general structure would benefit from further editing.— Rod ^talk 10:18, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would certainly support the article's rating being upgraded. It has been improved significantly over the last few months. --Cheesy Mike 09:57, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 20:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response Thank you for the automated review. Apart from putting " " between numbers & units + removing a "The" from a section head (which I have since done) I believe all the suggestions are already met. Specifically:

I believe the lead does comply with the recommendations at WP:LEAD
Months and days of the week are not linked and centuries are
The image top right (of Cheddar Gorge) is PD
Instead of an infobox the article has a Geobox for protected areas which provides more information than the similar infobox but in a machine readable form (This is new & the automated process may not yet "recognise" this)
I can't find any "redundancies" or vague terms
Footnotes are located immediately after punctuation marks
I have copyedited to the best of my ability.

Any further comments would be welcome & I'll do my best to take them on board.— Rod ^talk 22:22, 19 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback. I've added the geobox to my list of infoboxes (which now includes a grand total of three keywords..); I made it a point on my to-do list to increase my list of infoboxes but I keep forgetting to look through WP:IB. The image was missed due to (more detail) as I had the code search for image:, which I'm changing right now. The footnote spacing thing must've been an error, as when I checked it now it no longer appears. The lead was miscounted for because one of the paragraphs started with 200 (its not bad style or anything, I just set it up to search for uppercase letters). When I have time (probably this weekend), I'll give the article a more thorough (manual) look. Thanks, AZ _t 00:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In the first paragraph, "roughly analogous" is a bit unclear in terms of word choice
The second paragraph (hover over underlined stuff w/ cursor):

200 km² of the Mendips are an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty, a designation which gives the area the same level of protection as a national park. The Mendip Hills AONB Service and visitor centre is at the Charterhouse Centre near Blagdon. The Mendips are home to a wide range of outdoor sports and leisure activities.

The third paragraph:

The hills are largely carboniferous limestone which is actively quarried at several sites. This particular geology also makes it a national centre for caving and cave diving. In addition to climbing and abseiling, the area is a centre for Hillwalking and those interested in natural history.

Several explanation for the name Typo
The dot locator for the map is appearing outside of the map on my screen.
The prose in the top half of the article is a lot stronger than that of the bottom half, so try to focus more attention on the last few sections:

The particular geology, with large areas of limestone worn away by water makes it a national centre for caving, although some of the caves have been known about since the establishment of the Mendip lead mining industry in Roman times, many have only been discovered or explored in the 20th century.[22] The caves which are easily accessible to the public are at Cheddar Gorge and Caves and Wookey Hole, but the vast majority of the caves require specialist equipment and knowledge. The active Mendip Caving Group organises trips and continues to discover new caverns.

More errors fall in the next paragraphs, like " The first successful cave dive in Britain, was achieved" (comma unnecessary).
Typo in footnote #14.
Some more general notes, some of the 1-senetence paragraphs should be merged or expanded, since such short paragraphs are generally looked down upon.
Image:Mendipsociety.jpg requires fair use souce information and rationale. AZ _t 23:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response Andy thank you for all these comments which I've edited along with some of the more general suggestions you've made about short sentances & comma misuse. I've removed the logo of the Mendip Society to avoid potential fair use issues. Any further comments would be useful as I'd like to put this up as a FA candidate soon.— Rod ^talk 12:06, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Had a quick look at the article and spotted a few things. Hopefully I will have time for a closer look in the next couple of days.

Karst is linked to in the introduction however does not seem to be mentioned in the Geology section. If its important enough for the lead it should be elaborated on later, in my opinion.
A part of the area, totalling approximately 200 km² are an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) - From the Lead: This doesn't read very well.
At the end of the second Lead paragraph sports and leisure are mentioned. The third paragraph goes back to geology (which is first introduced in the first paragraph) and then back to sports and leisure activities. Is there a more logical way of organising this information?
The Ecology section has 4 paragraphs without any references, it would be great to see atleast one per paragraph (even if it is the same one!).
Echoing AndyZ's comments the Mendips in the arts section has 4 rather short paragraphs which should be merged/expanded.

Hope this helps with the article. - Suicidalhamster 02:24, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Response - thanks yes they are helpful coments & I've made changes to try to address them.— Rod ^talk 11:01, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]