Talk:Snowdon/GA1
GA Review[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk · contribs) 16:36, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: none found.
Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:47, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria[edit]
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
The unique environment of Snowdon, particularly its rare plants, have led to its designation as a national nature reserve. Can this sentence be consolidated into the Flora section? It is rather awkward on its own.
Done. --Stemonitis (talk) 20:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
In addition to plants that are widespread in Snowdonia, Snowdon is home to some plants rarely found elsewhere in Britain. Can we rephrase this – it reads rather clumsily.Lead: and has been described as "probably the busiest mountain in Britain". This doesn't appear in the main body of the article, see WP:LEAD. Neither does It is located in Snowdonia National Park (Parc Cenedlaethol Eryri) in Gwynedd- Done. --Stemonitis (talk) 20:56, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Well referenced to RS, no OR, spotchecks confirm accuracy of citations.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
I think we need a location section, with distances from other major points. Also the environment section should cover animal life as well as flora.- I must admit, I'm struggling here. I've been looking all over the place for both these elements and coming up blank. There are plenty of sources for the distances to or from Llanberis, Beddgelert, Rhyd Ddu, etc., but none for the mountain itself. The only sources I can find for distances from the summit is the toposcope installed there. I don't know if that's considered verifiable (anyone can go there, and there are images available; it's certainly easier to verify than some obscure texts I've seen cited on Wikipedia). For the fauna, it's even worse; most sources contain only the statement that Chrysolina cerealis is endemic to Snowdon, which is untrue (as documented at that article; they make the same claims about Lloydia, ignoring its wide Alpine and Arctic distributions). Although it is higher than anywhere else, the steepness of the upper reaches of Snowdon means that there is little vegetation, and so no interesting animals there. The lower reaches are entirely typical of upland regions of Britain, in my experience, which may be why no-one seems to have written about Snowdon's fauna specifically in any detail. --Stemonitis (talk) 08:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
- OK, I appreciate that you have tried. This might stop it getting FA status if you nominayed there. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
- I must admit, I'm struggling here. I've been looking all over the place for both these elements and coming up blank. There are plenty of sources for the distances to or from Llanberis, Beddgelert, Rhyd Ddu, etc., but none for the mountain itself. The only sources I can find for distances from the summit is the toposcope installed there. I don't know if that's considered verifiable (anyone can go there, and there are images available; it's certainly easier to verify than some obscure texts I've seen cited on Wikipedia). For the fauna, it's even worse; most sources contain only the statement that Chrysolina cerealis is endemic to Snowdon, which is untrue (as documented at that article; they make the same claims about Lloydia, ignoring its wide Alpine and Arctic distributions). Although it is higher than anywhere else, the steepness of the upper reaches of Snowdon means that there is little vegetation, and so no interesting animals there. The lower reaches are entirely typical of upland regions of Britain, in my experience, which may be why no-one seems to have written about Snowdon's fauna specifically in any detail. --Stemonitis (talk) 08:50, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- NPOV
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- stable
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- Images licensed and captioned. I move one (Lloydia serotina) to avoid sandwiching of text. Consider other adjustments as at some resolutions there are further examples.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- On hold for seven days for these issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
- OK, listing as GA status. Jezhotwells (talk) 17:26, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
- On hold for seven days for these issues to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:11, 6 December 2011 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.