Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Rutland/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was promoted by PresN via FACBot (talk) 22:39, 12 December 2017 (UTC).

List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Rutland

 * Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 14:03, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

This is the latest in my nominations of Sites of Special Scientific Interest, and is in the same format as FLCs such as Northamptonshire and Suffolk. I trust that this list will also be found to be of FLC standard. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:03, 1 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Support – Nope I got nothing else for you. Great job! BeatlesLedTV (talk) 16:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:58, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Another nice list and comments from previous FLC nominations have been taken into account. Just a couple of minor questions:
 * Comments from Rodw
 * In the description of Clipsham Old Quarry and Pickworth Great Wood we have "Bajocian Middle and Upper Jurassic". I would have said " Middle Bajocian and Upper Jurassic"
 * Upper is an error and I have deleted it.


 * In Eye Brook Reservoir would it be worth wikilinking wigeon, teal, mallard and pochard?
 * Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * In Shacklewell Hollow would it be worth wikilinking Alder for those not familiar with the species?
 * I am doubtful. Alder is about the genus and the source does not specify the species. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Is Anglicans online (Ref 1) the best source for the fact Rutland is a ceremonial county?
 * It is the only one I could find. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * How about this BBC story or this book (intro page)?&mdash; Rod talk 16:28, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * They are both OK but what makes them better than Anglicans online, which seems marginally closer to being an official source? Dudley Miles (talk) 16:56, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I suppose I'm thinking "user generated" for Anglicans online - but I could be wrong. Something like the London Gazette or a county council publication would be ideal.&mdash; Rod talk 17:17, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It is published by the Society of Archbishop Justus, so maybe I should have shown it as the publisher and Anglicans online as the website. Would that be better? I could not find an official source, a common problem as official sources often do not bother to spell out 'obvious' basic details. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:33, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Yep adding the publisher would work for me.&mdash; Rod talk 20:39, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:10, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Can we provide a ref for Seaton Meadows being designated "Plantlife" (is this a designation or is this who owns/manages it - might be better in description).
 * It is the manager and I have added the ref omitted in error. I think it is better to keep it in this column with the other managers. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

As usual - minor quibbles.&mdash; Rod talk 09:29, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Many Thanks for your review. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for tweaks. I can now Support this list as meeting the criteria.&mdash; Rod talk 21:44, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * and do you have any further comments? Dudley Miles (talk) 13:42, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Support my concerns addressed. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:03, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Source review passed, promoting. -- Pres N  16:23, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.