Jump to content

Talk:Minehead

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.
Good articleMinehead has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
October 2, 2010Good article nomineeListed

South West Coast Path

The South West Coast Path starts in Minehead, and there has been a proposal made that its article should be rewritten. At present it is largely long lists of towns, villages, and places of interest. If you can help turn these lists into prose, could you join in at Talk:South West Coast Path. Thanks. Geof Sheppard 13:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

population

According to the 2001 Census it has a population of 11,699. Harry-fox (talk) 10:13, 30 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merger_proposal

I propose that Alcombe be merged into the Minehead article as it has little content (apart from a population figure & church) and as the article says "It has been absorbed into the municipality of Minehead."— Rod talk 09:48, 22 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As no one had objected after several weeks I have now completed the merge.— Rod talk 20:34, 13 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What else is needed to get this article to GA?

I've been editing this article to try to bring it closer to the guidelines at WP:UKCITIES and would be interested in what other editors think is need to get it to meet the Wikipedia:Good article criteria? Obviously we need to revise the lead to summarise the article & reference (or remove) the uncited claims, but is there anything else which would be required?— Rod talk 08:14, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Minehead/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

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

Toolbox

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)[reply]

Linkrot: one found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 02:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.— Rod talk 20:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    ...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.— Rod talk 20:38, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    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.[2], 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.— Rod talk 17:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. 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)[reply]
    Replaced.— Rod talk 06:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    There are other non-conformist chapels in Minehead, which should be mentioned.[3] 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— Rod talk 21:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    OK, on hold for seven days for above issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:17, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the review (& edits) some issues have been addressed the more general work of improving the prose may take a little longer.— Rod talk 21:23, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the fixes, I am happy to pass this as a Good Article. Congratulations. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Minehead. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:06, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 15 external links on Minehead. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:14, 20 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Minehead. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:22, 12 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Minehead. 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:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:11, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Minehead&oldid=1209078955"