Talk:Minehead/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 02:41, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Linkrot: one found and tagged. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * ...the town had its own Port Officer similar to Bristol. a little clumsy, perhaps: "...the town had its own Port Officer similar to the position at Bristol."
 * Done
 * ' 'By the beginning of the 18th century, trade between Minehead and Ireland, South Wales, Bristol and Bridgwater with forty vessels based in the harbour for trade and herring fishing.'' ems to be missing a verb here.
 * Done
 * Trade continued with Ireland but Minehead vessels started to trade further afield in Virginia and the West Indies, but these dwindled by the 19th century.  Rephrase for clarity and grammar.
 * Done
 * The pier was demolished during World War II as it obstructed the view from the gun battery on the quay head.[6] The lifeboat house was established in 1901 suggest re-ordering these sentences to keep the chronology.
 * Done
 * In World War II evacuees were billeted in Minehead and the pier was demolished, as part of the coastal defence preparations, which stopped steamers calling at the harbour until it was cleared in 1951. might be better to omit the earlier mention of this in this section, to avoid repetition.
 * I've combined the 2nd mention about the pier demolition with the first one.&mdash; Rod talk 20:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * ...were officially opened in 2001 by Sir John Harman. Who is he, someone of importance?
 * John Harman removed & webcite ref replaced as it was broken enough though it didn't show up in the checks.&mdash; Rod talk 20:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Quite a few stray sentences, especially in the Sport and Religion sections.
 * Overall the prose is not really very strong. I think it probably passes muster as reasonably well written.  I made a few copy-edits., but this article could do with a thorough brush up.  Try reading it out aloud, to spot the sometimes clumsy phrasing.
 * This may take a little longer
 * User:Malleus Fatuorum has kindly applied a copy editors eye.&mdash; Rod talk 17:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * One dead link found as per above. Jezhotwells (talk) 02:46, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Replaced.&mdash; Rod talk 06:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * There are other non-conformist chapels in Minehead, which should be mentioned. Sport: there is a leisure pool and a bowls club as well. The Tour of Britain has started here. I haven't posted the web links as some of them are blacklisted, but you should be able to find sourcing.
 * Done
 * Minehead F.C. were founded in 1889 and are the main local side needs spelling out that they are a football side. Is there a rugby club?
 * Done&mdash; Rod talk 21:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) 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):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * OK, on hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review (& edits) some issues have been addressed the more general work of improving the prose may take a little longer.&mdash; Rod talk 21:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the fixes, I am happy to pass this as a Good Article. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, on hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review (& edits) some issues have been addressed the more general work of improving the prose may take a little longer.&mdash; Rod talk 21:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the fixes, I am happy to pass this as a Good Article. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)