Template:Did you know nominations/St Mary's Church, Longfleet

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by PumpkinSky talk 00:23, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

St Mary's Church, Longfleet

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the northwest tower and spire of St Mary's Church, Longfleet (pictured), form one of Poole's most important landmarks?

Created/expanded by Bermicourt (talk). Self nom at 20:41, 11 September 2012 (UTC)

In progress Anne (talk) 19:51, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Date and length fine. Photo licensed. Hook correctly formatted and cited. However, the text from ref #4 Flickr cannot be used as a source. In addition, ref #1 is the home page of the church and does not have the quotations from paragraph 1 or much of the material from paragraph 2. You should make separate refs for separate pages of the website. My primary concern is the close similarity of some of the phrasing in the article to the sources. The best example is: "The parish boundaries were altered in 1946 when the parish of Oakdale St George was established out of Longfleet." This is identical to the National Archives site. I've started you off with a few copy edits. Anne (talk) 21:00, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Note: nominator had not been notified of review issues; I have just done so on Bermicourt's talk page. BlueMoonset (talk) 04:20, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the guidance. I have reworked the referencing to make it more precise and adjusted the wording as suggested. I have left the flickr reference in for now, but will try and find a better source for that sentence eventually. How does it now look? --Bermicourt (talk) 11:34, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Reviewer needed to continue review based on earlier comments and subsequent edits. BlueMoonset (talk) 03:28, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

good article on a lively church. The hook is no big surprise, a high tower a landmark, but ok. Suggestions for the article: what do you think of starting with a compact lead, then history, then church life today? (The lead should be a summary of referenced info from the body, no refs there.) In the refs, if available list the publisher's name rather than a url, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:46, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

I have re-organized the sections as suggested, with a short lede and referenced material moved to the body of the article. Hope that helps. --Bermicourt (talk) 18:07, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

it does ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:30, 1 October 2012 (UTC)