Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chew Stoke/archive1

Chew Stoke
This article is about a small village but, I feel, provides fairly comprehensive information, in an understandable and illustrated format. It's largely a self nomination which went through peer review with only a few comments, which have been addressed. I would appreciate further comments about whether this merits FA status. Rod 13:09, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment This is quite a nice article, but I think it has a few problems so I will simply comment. The closest FA I could find to this is the article for Waterfall Gully, South Australia. Though it's on a different continent, the villages are a bit similar in size. Certainly take a look at the sections and compare it with this article.
 * The history section just gives a few highlights of the history of the village. This should be expanded. Perhaps some of the building histories might be incorporated here?
 * Some questions I have...when was the area first settled?
 * Since there was a temple, one would presume there were Roman settlements in the area. Where were these?
 * When was St. Andrews constructed and why is it on the outskirts of the village?
 * Did the village ever have a market?
 * Did the Industrial Revolution have any effect on the village?
 * Perhaps "Buildings" should be labeled "Points of Interest"? You might include the Bridges section here as well. I think having headings for each type of building is a bit much especially as some of the sections are quite small. Lumping them together makes more sense.
 * The inclusion of external links in the text is messy. If they are links to locations for footnotes, I would suggest that they be placed in the references list or otherwise placed in External links.
 * I should commend you on the number of wonderful images you have included! They really are marvelous. I think you can vary the size of some of these just for aesthetic interest.
 * What about transportation? Is Chew Stoke located anywhere near major roadways? How might one acces the village? What about trains?
 * Really, this is a fine beginning for this article! Good work! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 13:59, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for your helpful comments. I've added in some information in answer to your questions (eg pre history, location, age of church etc) & changed the section headings - I will also look for info about others & try to sort external links as soon as I have ore time. Rod 15:16, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I've now also had a go at the references and external links Rod 21:15, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak object. There are a few things wring in this article, but they are minor and can be easily resolved:
 * There are too many very short paragraphs, which is more of a formatting issue than anything else.
 * The ordering of details within the lead section is awkward.
 * There are too many subsection in some areas, leading to a bloated ToC
 * The picture which opens the article shifts the lead section and the ToC awkwardly rightward
 * Most of these are formatting issues, nothing serious. Overall, a very good article given the topic. RyanG e rbil10 22:25, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, AndyZ t 23:48, 9 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Object. I'm mostly worried about the section-stubs (Grade II listed buildings is the worst - that one sentence isn't even grammatically correct). A transportation section would very helpful, and the location should be renamed "Geography". It also needs another copyediting, for example:
 * about eight miles south of Bristol, England close to comma after England needed
 * close to Chew Magna unclear whether village or Bristol is close to Chew Magna
 * Council Area, and has a Parish Council meeting  again, unclear whether Chew Stoke or Council area has the meeting (if it is the latter, the and should be replaced by which)
 * It can be found What is it referring to here?
 * south west  one word
 * south of Chew Magna which is on  comma before which
 * Both 1000 and 2,307 are used; comma use should be standardized in numbers
 * Why is "Irish bridge"  in quotes?
 * Per WP:FOOTNOTE, the footnote should go directly after the punctuation mark, without a space.
 * The age of many of the buildings, including the church, school and several houses, reflecting the long history of the village. fragment
 * Part of the current buildings... were built in 1858 either "parts" or "was"
 * An obelisk on Breach Hill Lane, which dates from the early to mid 19th century and is said to be waterwork marker. Another fragment

I've had another go at copyediting the article taking into account the issues you've raised & changed the formatting. Are there other objections I need to take into account? Rod 10:29, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Object- the article needs to show how the subject is related to the every day world!--Timorrison 19:49, 10 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I wasn't aware this was part of the FA criteria, however I'd like to assure you this is the everday world for the 1000 or so people who live in the village and the many visitors. Rod 07:49, 11 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Support! I like this a lot. However, my support is conditional: everything in the article should be referenced. In some sections the referencing is very good, but other sections have no referencing at all: the bell makers section, recent history, and local political arrangements. If this stuff is cited, then consider my vote to be support. One more question (if the info isn't available to you, then don't worry about it): what was in the time capsule, why was it buried there (I mean, any particular reason beyond the obvious), and when is it due to be opened? Everyking 10:30, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
 * A little more stuff: is Pagans Hill named after the ancient temple? I assume so, but I couldn't find that in the article (might have missed it). Also, the recent history section is dismally short&mdash;isn't there a local paper that might have recorded a few more events that have occurred in the last few decades? Everyking 10:36, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I have added citations for the sections you mention & added to the recent history section. Rod 17:11, 11 May 2006 (UTC)