Wikipedia:Peer review/Navenby/archive1

Navenby

.

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I would like to polish it up to the highest standard possible.

Thanks, Seahamlass (talk) 15:33, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

Hello Seahamlass, here are some comments which may help you on your quest for one of those little bronze stars...!

Per WP:HEAD, you should avoid over-capitalising, so "Early History" should be "Early history" etc.*: Done
Any chance of making the co-ordinates at the top of the page read in degrees, minutes, seconds with a N for north and W for west? I think you can modify it to be coords dms if memory serves...Sorry: Really sorry, can't work out how to.
The WP:MOS#Images recommends that you don't "squeeze" text between two images. With thirty images on this page, it's probably over-illustrated so try to avoid having images squashing the text.*: Done
"Chapel Lane" - why italics? same with all the other italics in the early history section, is there a good reason for using italics here? Reply: Sorry - thought I had to do that to street names, have now removed the italics*: Done
Curiously, despite my previous point, I would think that "Nafni+by" should be, at least, in quotations perhaps also italicised.*: Done
"October 17th" - October 17 or 17 October, but ditch the "th" - see WP:DATE.*: Done
Ref [15] is used twice for the quote, no need.*: Done
Image:Stpeterchnav.jpg you say you have written permission to use this. Does Wikipedia also have that written permission? *: Done Reply I have written permission for all the photos used. I'm happy to pass that on to Wikipedia, but not sure how to do that.--Seahamlass (talk) 16:45, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
RAF wasn't formed until 1 April 1918, so the fledgling RAF didn't exist in 1917...*: Done Changed to the Royal Flying Corps and the Royal Naval Air Service.
Argh, "WW1"? Generally British English would refer to this as the "First World War".*: Done!
"8 for World War Two" - "eight for the Second World War"*: Done
Ensure that image captions which are fragments don't have full stops and image captions that are grammatically complete sentences do have a full stop.*: Done
Does Wikipedia have permission to use Image:Navenbywitch.jpg?*: Done Reply Yes, I have an email from the Portable Antiquities Scheme, granting me permission to use it on Wikipedia.
Governance paragraph has several short paragraphs, could do with merging them to make the prose flow better.
Not sure of the style of these articles but in the topography section , I'm really not keen on the in-line link to geographical co-ordinates. Reply: I don't like it either much, but I have noticed in other peer reviews that editors have been told to put it in, so I think I had better keep it.
No spaces between citations please, so [36] [37] needs adjustment.*: Done
Not sure I understand your source for climate statistics, "Source: MSN Years on Record: 11"? Can you clarify?*: Done Changed and simplified.
"next 5 years " five years.*: Done
Can you link to something relevant for "Grade II listed" and be consistent with II-listed and II listed.*: Done
"It is allegedly ..." something like "It is claimed to be..." with appropriate citations would be more encyclopaedic.*: Done
Numerical ranges should be separated with an en-dash, not a hyphen, so "aged 5-15" should be "aged 5–15".*: Done
"rate was 3" - 3 isn't a rate, it needs a "per..."*: Done
"20.18 km" - use the convert template for the imperial-ists amongst us.*: Done
"now 47.9% do" - now? needs context, like, As of March 2008, ...*: Done
1859/60 - 1859–60. There are others...*: Done - Several anyway!
"1832.[63]x " - what's the x?*: Done Random character removed!
Avoid bullet point lists in potential FA's when prose would be better.Fixed them.*: Done
Culture and community section could use some work on prose, merging paragraphs, reducing the over illustration.*: Done: Took out a couple of pictures, merged paragraphs, removed bullet points etc.
Shouldn't Under 11 be Under-11? Not sure myself...*: Done Looks better like this anyway!
"Tracey Duxbury " - again, why italics? *: Done Correcte - italics removed.
Trim the external links to those directly relevant.*: Done

That's a good start for you. Let me know if you need anything more from me. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:11, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]