Talk:Sheriff Hill

WP:NEE assessment
Hello, this is looking really good. Indeed, if the introduction is expanded to summarise the whole article, this could be a Good Article candidate. I've marked it as "low" importance, largely because it's now an area of Gateshead. Feel free to disagree with me though! I would also suggest that at the moment there are too many images, which makes it look a little messy. Also, for me there seem to be two coordinate templates. Not sure if that's something wrong with my PC though... Bob talk 17:49, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello, I found out what the problem with the coordinates was - they were both in the infobox and a separate template at the bottom. 16:55, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyedit, and some suggestions
Phew, it's a long article, isn't it?! Some great research work has gone on here, especially in the earlier history sections, and this would certainly be a good article candidate. During a copyedit, I have taken out or revised one or two little bits I felt were rather opinionated, but there are quite a few more bits I feel could still do with a bit of toning down - the pubs section especially. I know this was probably written by a local person who knows which is best, but if the page is going to criticise a pub, it needs to be from a review elsewhere. There are a few similar problems in the politics section; yes, the Tories are awful, but we can't really make it sound so obvious that they'll never get elected here!

Similarly, the park section is almost entirely unreferenced; it's here that I have removed quite a lot of material about "faded tennis courts" and so forth. Do contact me if you want me to give it another look over later/if you have any questions. Bob talk 19:44, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Images
As mentioned in the GA review, I'm concerned that some of the images are licensed incorrectly and possibly shouldn't be used here at all. I've requested help at Media copyright questions, so if any contributors would like to weigh in there, that would be appreciated. -- Beloved Freak  13:57, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Some comments
As requested, I've had another read through the article. It's looking really good and is certainly a comprehensive treatment of the settlement. I have noticed some room for improvement, mostly manual of style nitpicks, as I'll list below.
 * Watch overlinking of common words and repeated blue links, especially in areas where you already have a lot of blue links - try to link only the articles that are going to provide a useful background for the reader. England probably doesn't need to be linked although some might argue otherwise for a geography article. Other examples are settlement, village... You have two links to coal mining in close proximity (albeit on different terms). Notice the repeated linking of Newcastle upon Tyne in the "Sheriff's March" section, repeated linking of Gateshead in general
 * As well as overlinking, check for links to disambiguation pages (you can use this link)
 * For units of measurement, it can be helpful to use the Convert template that will automatically add a conversion for you. Eg. "3 miles", with the template, would be displayed as "3 miles". The template also automatically adds a non-breaking space, which helps to prevent the number & unit being split across lines.
 * I'm not sure that north, south etc. should have capital letters, but I could be wrong.
 * I think it is standard to use "18th century" rather than "eighteenth century", but I couldn't find anything to back this up; the guideline at WP:CENTURY is not clear.
 * "April 1st" → "1 April" (Per WP:DATE, we don't use ordinal suffixes, and for a UK-related topic, the day should come before the month.)
 * It's not clear why you need a citation after the mention of the park in the lead. Since the lead is mostly uncited (which is appropriate) it seems strange to have a citation for such a non-controversial statement
 * "When John Wesley arrived in 1785..." - perhaps "When theologian John Wesley arrived in 1785..." just to be a bit clearer for readers not familiar with Wesley
 * "In 1809 an Act..." - consider linking Act to Acts of Parliament in the United Kingdom or maybe even Inclosure Acts if you think that's appropriate.
 * enclosure should probably be linked
 * There is quite a lot of bold text in the article, most of which is unnecessary per WP:MOSBOLD - really, only the first mention of Sheriff Hill should be in bold.
 * Sod should probably be linked as it has a slightly different meaning in the US, and may not be familiar to younger readers in the UK
 * As well as the overuse of bold text, I think italics have been overused a bit too. Generally, italics aren't used for quotations, just quotation marks. In some places you have both and in some, I think you just have italics, so these should be replaced with quote marks.
 * In the "Governance" section, you have "(at March 2011) has a population of 8,952" which strikes me as a little strange. The source is dated 2010, for a start. If the statistic came from the 2001 census, then that should be the date mentioned.
 * "Mr Mears" should just be "Mears" (or Mearns?) - we rarely use honorific prefixes like "Mr"
 * "Representation of the People Act 1945" could possibly be linked to List of Acts of the Parliament of the United Kingdom, 1940–1959. Or, just make it a red link, as it is likely to be written about at some point.
 * In "Geography", perhaps state which direction it is from Gateshead city centre, as you mention the distance
 * "striking topography" - presumably this is a quote (note my earlier comment about italics/quote marks); it needs attribution
 * the long quote at the end of the geography section needs attribution
 * The population stats in the demography section are presumably taken from 2001? Perhaps say that.
 * Try toavoid beginning a sentence with a figure (WP:ORDINAL)
 * is proligacy a typo? If it's supposed to be profligacy, could we perhaps find a more common word?
 * We have a handy template for sic (sic) that links the term for those readers who won't be familiar with it

For each of the examples above, please check the whole article as some issues persist throughout. As you'll notice, these are mostly quite superficial WP:MOS-type issues, I'm hoping these will help to improve the article and not be too vexatious! As for the content of the article, I do think it's very close now to GA. Good luck with further developing it.-- Beloved Freak  18:25, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Sodhouse
Just a query, I've come across the term before but they got their name from their turf roofs, were these different?


 * The sod used was more mud than grass, but the combination of both is considered 'sod' up this part of the world :)

Health section
Do I somehow misunderstand the source for the stats offered at the end of this section? They do not match those from the source. Gandydancer (talk) 14:29, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Removed text
I think the following is a little OT for this article, as it discusses the constituency as a whole, rather than Sheriff Hill. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 06:28, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Gateshead is one of the safest Labour parliamentary seats in the United Kingdom. Mearns' success in 2010 followed the return of Sharon Hodgson in the 2005 UK General Election after she polled over 60% of the votes whilst in 2001, Joyce Quin was returned with a majority of 53.3%.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Sheriff Hill. 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/20120319042035/http://www.bpears.org.uk/genuki/Collieries/CollsDG.html to http://www.bpears.org.uk/genuki/Collieries/CollsDG.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402234053/http://online.gateshead.gov.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-6391/Item+10+-+Local+List+of+Buildings+and+Parks+Gardens+of+Special+Interest.doc to http://online.gateshead.gov.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-6391/Item+10+-+Local+List+of+Buildings+and+Parks+Gardens+of+Special+Interest.doc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120402234053/http://online.gateshead.gov.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-6391/Item+10+-+Local+List+of+Buildings+and+Parks+Gardens+of+Special+Interest.doc to http://online.gateshead.gov.uk/docushare/dsweb/Get/Document-6391/Item+10+-+Local+List+of+Buildings+and+Parks+Gardens+of+Special+Interest.doc
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120817054604/http://www.nexus.org.uk/who-is-nexus to http://www.nexus.org.uk/who-is-nexus

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 18:03, 8 December 2017 (UTC)