Talk:Northern Isles

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleNorthern Isles 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.
Good topic starNorthern Isles is part of the Islands of Scotland series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 19, 2011Good article nomineeListed
June 23, 2011Featured topic candidatePromoted
Current status: Good article

Category:Northern Isles is itself a category within Category:Islands of Scotland and Category:Islands of the North Sea. — Robert Greer (talk) 18:41, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Pyrotec (talk) 09:44, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will review. Pyrotec (talk) 09:44, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments[edit]

I've had a quick read of this article, and on the basis of that my first impression is that this is a good article and should make GA-status this time round (but there is a big "But", see later).

The article is well referenced, so I have no real concerns on WP:Verifiability; and the article is well illustrated.

BUT: There is nothing about climate (climate is included in both the Orkney and a Shetland articles) and nothing about transport and transport routes (these are Islands!!). "Obvious" means of transport are boats/ships/ferries (harbours) and planes (airports), but what about roads and causeways; and both topics are discussed in the Orkney and a Shetland articles, so only a summary is, possibly, needed.

I'm now going to work my way through the article, but I will be returning to these points: in respect of WP:WIAGA, criteria 3. I will be mostly concentrating on "problems", if any. So if I don't find any/many, this section could be quite short. Pyrotec (talk) 11:25, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for undertaking this. I didn't add a climate section as there is very little to say that would not be repetition of the existing island sections, but it's easy enough to put together. Likewise transport - I'll get to this in the next day or two. Ben MacDui 20:14, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Now attempted. Ben MacDui 13:43, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Geography, Geology, Prehistory -
  • These three sections are OK.
  • History, culture and politics -
  • This looks OK.
  • Modern times -
    • Politics -
  • This looks OK.
    • Economics -
  • This is highly summarised, and I'm not sure that the balance is right: i.e. "The very different geologies of the two archipelagos have resulted in dissimilar local economies. In Shetland, the main revenue producers in Shetland are agriculture, aquaculture, fishing, renewable energy, the petroleum industry (crude oil and natural gas production), the creative industries and tourism.[62]".
  • Well perhaps, but does Shetland produce crude oil and natural gas, or just revenue from crude oil and natural gas? I'm assumed (since I've seen it), since it is not mentioned at all, that there was a place called Sullom Voe Terminal where this product was brought ashore from the North Sea Oilfields and was merely stored before being taken away by ships. The major benefit, apart from jobs, is tax revenue. There is no mention of how long it has been there (at Sullom Voe) and what was there before oil; and, there is less information about North Sea oil than, for instance, "Shetland has a strong tradition of local music.....". (I'm not knocking local music and I happen to enjoy it, but in terms of generating revenue North Sea oil makes much much more money).
  • I have added some detail about Shetland's oil and gas industry. Shetland is a major producer from the East Shetland Basin and I have added the word "offshore" to emphasise this. (It's also in the lead). As I understand it the Sullom Voe throughput is mostly from the Brent and Ninian fields to the east and the Schiehallion oilfield to the west. I also added some information about renewables to expand this section a little.
  • Orkney, takes a longer view, going back to the 19th century, but the discussion is mostly "ag & fish". Its' importance in the World Wars is air brushed out, i.e. no mention even in respect of tourism. (same applies to Whale hunting, i.e. no mention).
  • World wars section added plus a sentence on whaling. Ben MacDui 15:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Culture -
  • This looks OK.
  • Island names -
    • Shetland, Orkney -
  • These two subsections look OK.

... stopping for now. To be continued, tommorrow. Pyrotec (talk) 21:28, 17 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The recent series of edits, see discussion above, have both addressed my comments in respect of the Economics section and plugged a hole in "scope" that I had not yet got round to mentioning in detail. The WP:Lead is possibly rather "thin" nad in my eyes could do with a bit more "meat", however, I'm not going to delay my final summary. Pyrotec (talk) 12:19, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


A wide-ranging summary of the Orkney and Sheltland isles.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    Well illustrated.
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
    Well illustrated.
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

In the light of recent improvements, I'm happy to be able to award this article GA-status. Congratulations on producing a fine article. Pyrotec (talk) 14:03, 19 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Northern Isles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 11:39, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Northern Isles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 17:43, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Northern Isles. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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 IITalk to my owner:Online 11:20, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 11 external links on Northern Isles. 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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 23:04, 11 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Norse name[edit]

"Norðreyjar" is a straight translation of the modern British name "Northern Isles" rather than the old Norse name for the islands, which was "Vestrøyar" - "western isles" - because the islands were west of Scandinavia. Similarly the islands now known in Britain as the Western Isles were called Suðreyjar - "southern isles" — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nasty swimmer (talkcontribs) 18:39, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Nasty swimmer: Personal knowledge is not verifiable, either by an editor or one of our readers and therefore not acceptable, even if you're an expert. Please perovid a reliable source to support your claim. - FlightTime (open channel) 18:51, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]