Talk:Chatteris/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''


 * Starting review. Pyrotec (talk) 16:28, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Initial comments
Having skim-read this article a couple of times, it appears to be at or about GA level (but see below). The scope seems adequate and it appears to be well referenced. I will therforec arry out a full asssessment, section by section, but leaving the WP:lead until last.

Supprisingly for a UKgeo article it had no weather data, i.e. temperature and rainfull, see any UKgeo Good Article. Pyrotec (talk) 17:15, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I've noticed these on quite a few US articles and the larger city Geo GAs, but not the smaller ones, i.e Coatbridge, Hebden, North Yorkshire. How are these weather/climate charts compiled? Rob (talk) 10:25, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * If you look at Geography of Greater Manchester, for instance, you will see that they have some prose and a template {Manchester weatherbox} with double braces. You could use that as a "model" and edit it to suit your needs. It looks like your nearest sources of met data is Cambridge (here: ); there is also Norwich (here: ). Pyrotec (talk) 18:32, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Righto, I've made a template for Cambridge to include here, and then added a few bits and pieces about average climate in the area, although nothing specific for Chatteris unfortunately. Rob (talk) 11:26, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice work. Pyrotec (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Detailed comments
At the moment I'm checking statements from the article and attempting to WP:verify them via the in-line citations provided. These are the "problems" so far:


 * Location and road network -
 * I'm willing to accept the Chatteris is on the A141 and A142, but there is no WP:verification for the claim that these are known as the "Isle of Ely way" and "Ireton's Way".
 * ✅ I have cited these to Google maps, I *think* that's accepted as reliable, if not, forgive me, I've never cited a map before! Jeni  ( talk ) 19:03, 6 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Government and policing -
 * "Clement Freud famously held the seat from 1973 to 1987". Cleament Freud as MP, is a fact; but famously appears to be a mere "point of view".
 * ✅ - removed 'famously' (although it was more in reference to his existing "fame" as a celebrity before he became an MP).
 * The presence of a Police Station is recorded, but having checked the reference its only open on Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday - shouldn't that be stated?
 * ✅ - Opening times noted.


 * History' -
 * Toponymy and early history -
 * Reference 7 is a 37 page report, the relevent page number(s) should be provided.
 * ✅ Page numbers provided for all citations in this report.
 * Ref 8 appears to be used to verify the statement "The town was mentioned in the Domesday Book as "Ceterig" or "Caterig"". Ref 8 states: "CHATTERIS in Domesday Book written "Cetriz" and "Cateriz"".
 * ✅ - Corrected.
 * Ref 9 is a broken link.
 * ✅ - Seemed to work for me (?)
 * The one I checked was "Enjoy England"; with ref 8 = Kelly's and ref 10= "The Ecclesiastical history of England and Normandy". As of now Kelly's = ref 10; and 11 ="The Ecclesiastical history of England and Normandy". Pyrotec (talk) 18:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref 13 and 14 are identical, appart from 14 quotes a page number, whereas 13 does not.
 * ✅ - sorted.
 * The citation for Ref 13 & 14 contains "xiii + 479 pp.; 8 illustrations". This is not needed and, possibly, suggests that they may have been copied from a search engine, rather than being a proper reference.
 * ✅ - this was originally copied from the page about Chatteris Abbey, but I have subsequently found a copy of the book in the library.


 * Later history -
 * Ref 16 is broken
 * ✅ - sorted.


 * Religion -
 * Ref 23 is broken
 * ✅ - sorted.
 * I'm not sure that Ref 24 and 25 provide any verification of what is claimed.
 * Ref 26 is broken
 * ✅ - sorted.


 * Education and community -
 * Ref 28 - I'm not convinced that this is the most appropriate link
 * ✅ - link now goes to their official website (I think it was offline before)
 * Ref 29 is broken
 * This is probably just temporarily offline. Should I link to something like instead?
 * I'm not sure that Ref 32 provides any verification of what is claimed.
 * I suspect it might be quite difficult to prove that they were featured on Look East (I have a video tape of it, but I suspect might be difficult to cite).
 * I'm not sure that Ref 33 provides verification of what is claimed.
 * ✅ - Clarified this with some CWA minutes confirming closure plan.
 * " This appears to be relevant to 2008, I'm not sure that it is current - "Due to a decreasing number of volunteers, a medieval-themed festival replaced the standard festival week in July 2008"
 * ✅ - yeah, I think that's been there some time. Removed/rewritten.


 * Economy and industry -

...to be continued. Pyrotec (talk) 18:54, 6 September 2009 (UTC)
 * ref 35 appears to be WP:SPAM - if its needed it should be in External links.
 * ✅ I think this has been removed now.


 * Ref 48 is broken.
 * ✅ Sorted


 * Ref 50 is broken.
 * ✅ Sorted


 * WP:Lead -
 * Looks reasonable.

I've also tidied up that section about the song. Rob (talk) 12:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

overall summary
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) 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:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Congratulations on the quality of the article; and thanks for promptly attending to my comments above. This article is now GA-status. Pyrotec (talk) 15:54, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
 * And thank you very much for your excellent review and suggestions. Rob (talk) 16:21, 8 September 2009 (UTC)