Talk:Quarrington, Lincolnshire

Quarrington, Lincolnshire 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.
Review: March 15, 2016. (Reviewed version).

GA Review

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

Reviewer: MPJ-DK (talk · contribs) 03:06, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I will be picking up the review of this one - both for the Wiki Cup and the GA cup as well.

Side note, I would love some input on a Featured List candidate (Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship) and a Featured Article candidate (CMLL World Heavyweight Championship). I am not asking for Quid pro Quo, but all help is appreciated. MPJ-US 03:06, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Alright I will be picking up the review of this one - both for the Wiki Cup and the GA cup as well.

Side note, I would love some input on a Featured List candidate (Mexican National Light Heavyweight Championship) and a Featured Article candidate (CMLL World Heavyweight Championship). I am not asking for Quid pro Quo, but all help is appreciated. MPJ-US 04:25, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Toolbox

I like to get this checked out first, I have found issues using this that has led to quick fails so it's important this passes muster.

Peer review tool

Nothing that actually applies to the article. Y

Copyright violations Tool

I believe http://english.my-definitions.com/en/define/Sleaford actually copied wikipedia, it even still has the header indicators even though they don't make a difference on that site.
No legitimate issues found Y

Disambiguation links

No issues Y

External links

The following links are dead

27 – I assume this means reference 27? If so, then that link is working. I have added an archived link.
59 – Archive link provided.
78 – Archive link provided.
80 – Archive link provided.
65 – Archive link provided.
89 – Archive link provided.
99 – Archive link provided.

Connection issues
Link to metoffice.gov.uk – working fine for me
Parliament.uk – working fine for me

All resolved MPJ-US 14:51, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well Written

Lead

"Anglo-Saxon period, while mills" does not need the comma
- Done
"In the 19th century the" comma after century
- Done

Early

"material has been" I believe "have" is appropriate here
- Done
"pottery sherds", I assume that is supposed to be "shards"??
- No, sherds. Linked.
"ten mills in" should be 10 since you use 11 and 12 in the same sentence
- Done
"the 11 or 12" 11th? 12th?
- Sorry, but I can't see a problem with this sentence.

Early and later modern

"with exception of" should be "with the exception of"
- Done
"By 1872 the" should be "By 1872, the"
- Done
"In 1879 Lord Bristol" should be "In 1879, Lord Bristol"
- Done
"sold much farmland" should that be "sold much of their farmland"
- Done

Topography

"and the to north" should be "and to the north"
- Done

Economy

"the population, while" does not need the comma
- Done

Demographics

"it were divided" should be "was", singular as it refers back to "the population"
- No, it refers to the population statistics: "the population statistics for the new Sleaford parish[,] which absorbed it[,] were divided into four wards".
"Instead a church" should be "Instead, a church"
- Done

Learned a new word today. Looking good now. Y MPJ-US 14:53, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sources/verifiable

Generally looks reliable and well formed Y

Broad in coverage

Looks like it's generally hitting the various sections normally in this type of articles. Y

Neutral

It is very factual. straight forward, not prone to embellishment etc.

Stable

I don't see any evidence of edit wars in the history, granted it has an extensive history but nothing jumped out at me. Y

Illustrated / Images

Images need Alt text
Licenses check out Y

@Noswall59: - I have completed my review, really not a lot of issues found. I would say that the article is 99% right now. So I will put it on hold for 7 days to allow you to work on it. MPJ-US 20:58, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@MPJ-DK: Thank you very much for taking the time to review this article. I have addressed most of your comments through these edits, but I have queried two or three of your points (see above). Cheers, —Noswall59 (talk) 11:43, 15 March 2016 (UTC).[reply]

Yep,looks good to me @Noswall59:. Passing for GA, congratulations. MPJ-US 14:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Quarrington, Lincolnshire. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 23:23, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]