Jump to content

Talk:Bournemouth/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ritchie333 (talk · contribs) 19:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Well my dad grew up here and I have fond memories of playing on the beach at Durley Chine, so how could I not review this? I'll read through the whole article now and probably leave comments tomorrow. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 19:55, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

General[edit]

  • No dablinks
  • Stable

Lead[edit]

  • I'm not sure about putting "ceremonial county of Dorset" in the opening sentence. The evolution of local government (no part of Bournemouth 50 years ago was in Dorset, for instance), particularly since it's now self-governed, makes it complicated. Also this DEFRA source you used explicitly marks Bournemouth (and Poole) outside of what it calls Dorset. By all means mention government changes in the second paragraph, but for the opening, I would say it's proximity to the New Forest (neighbouring Christchurch UA borders the national park in places) is more relevant to a layman or foreign reader (as South East Dorset conurbation states)
    Done - I have placed the bit about the ceremonial county in the second paragraph as you suggest. Instead of the New Forest, I've mentioned its proximity to the Jurassic Coast as this is already cited in the article.--Ykraps (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • " Initially marketed as a..." - could this sentence be split into two
    Done--Ykraps (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead could mention some of the more notable landmarks, particularly the Grade I listed ones.
    Done--Ykraps (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Toponomy[edit]

  • "A bourne being a small stream" - this sentence doesn't have a finite verb. I'd suggest something like "The name "bourne" means a small stream"
    Done - "The word bourne..."--Ykraps (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "From the latter half of the 15th century "Bourne Mouth" seems to be preferred" - by whom?
    Done - In addition to turning up on maps of that period, it is also recorded in surveys and soldier's reports, most notably a survey for James Blount, 6th Baron Mountjoy and a report on possible enemy landing sights by Henry Wriothesley, 2nd Earl of Southampton. Both these people are mentioned later on in the article so didn't want to say too much in 'Toponomy' but have added a bit. See what you think.--Ykraps (talk) 16:26, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    Oops, sorry, we are talking about the late 1500s here which is the latter half of the 16th century. I have corrected the sentence.--Ykraps (talk) 18:16, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Names - This website contains a variety of maps in Hampshire, and includes Bournemouth. I see a reference to "Bourne mouth" (a literal description, pointing to the mouth of the river) on an 1836. Have a look and see if you can find anything else. Edit - I notice Hillbillyholiday81 (talk · contribs) has already directed you there. The other ones I can suggest are the National Library of Scotland map archive and SABRE Maps, which has a bunch of "Historic OS Maps" (mostly from the 20th century) on the left hand menu.

History[edit]

  • The previous section said "latter half of the 15th century". This one starts "In the twelfth century." WP:CENTURY doesn't say to use one or the other style when naming centuries, so just pick one and make everything match consistently
    Done - Wikipedia:Numbers#Numbers_as_figures_or_words says either is okay but in my experience it's more often figures so I've changed to that.--Ykraps (talk) 18:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pages in British History Online are actually reprints of out of copyright books, so can be cited via {{cite book}} with full author / editor name and original publisher. See "page, William, ed (1911)" in Bramshill House for an example of this.
    Done - Okay, have changed to cite book template.--Ykraps (talk) 22:46, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although the Dorset and Hampshire region surrounding it had been the site of human settlement for thousands of years" - are you sure about that? Large amounts of it, as mentioned above, are part of the New Forest
    Pretty much, there were settlements to the east (Christchurch) and west (Poole) and settlements to the north along the River Stour (Holdenhurst, Throop, Kinson etc). I can see how this might be confusing though so any suggestions about how to make it clearer would be welcome. Perhaps, "Although the immediate Dorset and Hampshire region..."?--Ykraps (talk) 22:46, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I meant to take this comment out - I'm happy with what's in the article as is. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No problem with that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I would just simply say it was stationed at Bournemouth from 1965 to 1972 and leave it at that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:25, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Ykraps (talk) 00:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Coverage for the area has otherwise been provided from Poole Lifeboat Station" - missing a full stop
    Done--Ykraps (talk) 11:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "A large conference and exhibition centre, the Bournemouth International Centre" - swap these two clauses round. State the BIC, then say what it is"
    Done--Ykraps (talk) 11:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in 1984 and in 1985" - suggest "in 1984, and the following year"
    Done--Ykraps (talk) 11:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is George Monbiot's blog a reliable source? The other source cited the information in the previous sentence anyway. Also I'd recommend using {{cite news}} for this source. The work is the Dorest Echo, not This is Dorset.
    Done - I have replaced these two references with another.--Ykraps (talk) 11:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Waterfront complex..." - I'd suggest reworking this paragraph. Start off with its construction year, then explain it was intended to hold the cinema, then the architecture, then the negative responses to it, and finally the demolition.
    Done--Ykraps (talk) 11:17, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 2012, Bournemouth was unsuccessful" - normally we try and avoid single sentence paragraphs. However, it doesn't fit in with the context of anything else in this section. You could try putting in a quote from somebody responding to the decision not to award it city status.
    This sentence was initially in the lead but needed moving to main text. I am aware of the guideline but I couldn't find anywhere better to put it and think it is an interesting piece of information. As the guideline is not a policy, I ask you to overlook this. I will continue to think about how the sentence can be expanded.--Ykraps (talk) 11:37, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have consulted the Gospel according to St Manuel of Style and it says for a GA they are discouraged but not a deal breaker, so I'm not going to let this hold the review up. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Governance[edit]

  • "the Bournemouth Borough Council is elected every four years" - the BBC source doesn't directly say this. The page shows old results for 1999 and 1996, not a gap of four years
    Done - I have added a reference for this.--Ykraps (talk) 12:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "For 2013–14 the mayor is Councillor Rod Cooper" - should be "The current mayor is Rod Cooper" (unless mayors are honorifically referred to as "Councillor", which I don't think they are)
    Done - I'm not sure so have removed.--Ykraps (talk) 12:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bournemouth East and Bournemouth West" (parliamentary constituencies) should have wikilinks.
    Done --Ykraps (talk) 12:09, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Geography[edit]

  • "Bournemouth is located 105 miles from London" needs a source. Google Maps from Charing Cross to Bournemouth Pier via the Great Chertsey Road shows 104 miles.
    Of course it depends where the measurements are taken from and not being responsible for that sentence, I'm no wiser than you. It is obviously a via road distance though. In the past I have quoted 'as the crow flies' distances. Which do you think is better?--Ykraps (talk) 12:58, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you can find a source for "as the crow files", use that. If you can't, I think you're allowed to cite Google Maps road directions as a source (it's a reputable company and you can't change the directions without going through strict editorial channels), so I'd do that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Ykraps (talk) 00:26, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I see what you mean, but for me, "bisecting" is more akin to something like the Berlin Wall - the Bourne goes through the town but it doesn't chop it in two distinct pieces that don't mix! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done - Okay, I accept that as a valid point of view and have simply said that it flows through the middle.--Ykraps (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
"I'm not monotonous, I just lack variety. Are there peas for dinner, Norma?"
  • "The area's geology is monotonous" - can you clarify what you mean by "monotonous". Monotonous redirects to boring and there is no disambiguation page
    Mmm, I think that is inappropriate redirection. Monotonous means the same, unvarying. It is sometimes used to mean boring but only when the cause of the boredom is something that is unvarying. I have changed to "lacks variety"--Ykraps (talk) 13:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, it's been a while since we've had such a charismatic leader :) --Ykraps (talk) 00:36, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The link for the BGS source appears to have changed and it's no longer obvious where exactly the information is cited
    Done - I have located the new viewer although this reference is only supplemental as Wightman's book gives all the information required.--Ykraps (talk) 14:09, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a 36 Hectare site most of which is designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest" - the source given, though, states "The entire site is a Local Nature Reserve covering 36.15 Ha but only 23.53 Ha is SSSI." which is a slightly different emphasis
    Done - Personally, I consider 23 from 35 to be most but I've changed the wording to "much of which.."--Ykraps (talk) 14:32, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Small populations of Exmoor pony and Highland cattle help to maintain the area." - the source says "Shetland cattle"
    Done - Changed to agree with reference. I thought at first they had changed the information on their website but I've just checked with Wayback Machine and it appears not.--Ykraps (talk) 15:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Areas within Bournemouth" - single sentence paragraph. For a second sentence, you could maybe add a paragraph saying if there are any areas outside of the town centre with some degree of autonomy (eg: Wimborne Road is - or at least was a typical high street with shops away from the centre - see here), although this is mentioned in "Economy" further down.
    Done - Added to the end of the first paragraph instead.--Ykraps (talk) 15:12, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Climate[edit]

Nor is my ability to say what I mean? ;-D ... I meant "colon" should be semicolon or (even better) a new sentence Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:26, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done - I have gone for a new sentence. Whether the first sentence is actually introducing the following information is a moot point.--Ykraps (talk) 00:43, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Demography[edit]

  • " Black British, black African, black Caribbean" - is the correct use of caps here?
    I would say so, yes. This article [[1]] talks about white (lower case) South Africans but it is from the Daily Mail so I'm not sure it proves much. :)--Ykraps (talk) 15:29, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Residents with two or more A-levels .... comprise 20.2%. A degree, such as ... is possessed by 15.8%" Probably easier to say "20.2% had two or more A-levels, while 15.8% had a degree...."
    The sentence is phrased like that to avoid starting the sentence with a number which according to Wikipedia:Numbers#Numbers is to be avoided. I'll have a think about how to make it more readable.--Ykraps (talk) 16:00, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've had a look at the MOS and all it says it to use words and "per-cent". However, I think that makes it look even worse. My advice would be to find a FA quality article on a town (Sale, Greater Manchester is the first one I can think of) and copy that. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:50, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done - That was a struggle but I think I've managed it.--Ykraps (talk) 01:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Those who are 85 years and over comprise 3.3% of the population,". Likewise, easier to say "3.3% are 85 and over"
    Done - As above, this was done to avoid starting with a number, but I have managed to re-word it.--Ykraps (talk) 16:06, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and indeed 9% of the current population are between twenty and twenty four" - don't need to say "indeed" and numbers should be in digits, not names, to be consistent with the rest of this section
    Done --Ykraps (talk) 15:48, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "sectors which through 2011, continued" - don't need the comma
    Done - (I think), Is this comment supposed to be in the Economy section? It's the only place I could find that phrase.--Ykraps (talk) 15:52, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Economy[edit]

Yes, that works fine now. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:51, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Culture[edit]

  • "It has a thriving youth culture" - according to whom exactly?
    Rawling's book talks specifically about it and attributes it to the large student population. There are a number of newspaper articles, already cited which talk about 'stag culture' and the increase in groups of young people to the town. Is it the wording you have an issue with?--Ykraps (talk) 08:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, just attribute the "thriving" to whoever claimed it ie: "According to Keith Rawlings, local journalist, etc etc".... Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:18, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Ykraps (talk) 02:04, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bournemouth has become a popular nightlife destination with UK visitors" - we've already mentioned this in "Economy", although I see the two areas don't totally overlap. Also should say "for UK visitors"
    I agree there is some overlap but feel it is important to both sections and I've tried to avoid any repetition. Is it not "popular with" not "popular for"?--Ykraps (talk) 08:37, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
A very good question! I've done a search for "popular with" versus "popular for" and can't find a definitive answer. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think it can go in the lead, being a major centre for national politics. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:58, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, done.--Ykraps (talk) 02:13, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, it's more what Wikipedia would describe as a concert band, though the music itself (things like Ralph Vaughan Williams' "English Folk Song Suite") was described as "military band". Anyway, I digress. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:40, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Tack the additional source on the end of the sentence and keep the text as is. That should suffice. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:31, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Ykraps (talk) 16:47, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Ah okay, good point. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 14:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bryson had this to say" - the quote sounds a bit too whimsical for a Wikipedia article. Keep some of it, but trim it down and keep it inline with the rest of the paragraph
    Done - The piece was added in good faith by a new editor and I didn't want to put him off by removing it so I left it in knowing full well it would be picked up at GAN. I have kept the reference to Bryson and his book but removed the quote which as you say is 'whimsical'.--Ykraps (talk) 16:08, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not so new anymore! How about this quote from John Betjeman:
..one of the few English towns that one can safely call "her". First and Last Loves John Betjeman
Betjeman's poem that mentions Bournemouth is here:John Betjeman Collected Poems
Bournemouth's looking up, I'm glad to say

That Modernistic there has come to stay.

I walk the asphalt paths of Branksome Chine

In resin-scented air like strong Greek wine.

The Echo also mentions that:
Poet laureate John Betjeman was founding president of Bournemouth Civic Society and described St Stephen’s Church as "the most beautiful Victorian church in the south-west".[3] -- Hillbillyholiday talk 20:24, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Hello HBH. No, you're no longer a newbie and I hope you haven't taken umbrage at what's been said here, no offence meant. I see Betjeman's been kinder to Bournemouth than he was to Slough.--Ykraps (talk) 09:13, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Landmarks[edit]

Sport[edit]

Education[edit]

Indeed I do. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 01:00, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done--Ykraps (talk) 09:42, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Transport[edit]

Road[edit]

  • "broadly east" - I'd leave these two words out - looking at a map, it seems to run more north
    Done - The road only turns north once it has left the borough. Through the borough it runs east apart from a small section which runs north-east, hence "broadly east". In the past the sentence has read: north, north-east and east. To avoid further discussion, I have removed it completely as per your suggestion.--Ykraps (talk) 20:03, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rail[edit]

  • "Bournemouth is well served by the rail network" - sure, if you want to go to London or Weymouth, otherwise forget it! I'd reword this
    Done - I think it just meant that rail access to the town was good because it had two stations but I can see how that might be misconstrued and have removed.--Ykraps (talk) 09:57, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think it's worth mentioning former rail routes, such as the lines to Salisbury and Templecombe, both of which (I presume) fell foul to the Beeching Axe
    Hmm, the problem I have with that is that it then attracts huge swathes of nostalgic ramblings from train enthusiasts.--Ykraps (talk) 09:19, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I still think a sentence is worth adding. If the article gets attacked by trainspotters, you'll be within policy to revert (mostly per WP:DUE). Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:09, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done - Okay, I have added a short sentence at the end.--Ykraps (talk) 11:12, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the line closed before Beeching BTW.--Ykraps (talk) 09:21, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that's my trainspotter credentials destroyed then! ;-) Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:10, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Air[edit]

I think this paragraph needs a bit more at the front. When was the airport originally built and what did it serve? I'd suggest looking at RAF Hurn (which is the airport in its former guise), but that doesn't have much in the way of sources

Done - I've added a short sentence but have similar reservations to the one I have about the Rail section.--Ykraps (talk) 11:14, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've added a 'see also' template directing to History_of_Bournemouth#History_of_transport_in_Bournemouth which I hope will help lessen the impact.--Ykraps (talk) 11:49, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sport[edit]

Religion[edit]

See also[edit]

Sources[edit]

Images[edit]

I wouldn't let this hold up your GA. If every other issue is resolved (and a cursory look suggests it is), I'll just comment the image out and pass the review anyway. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 15:50, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks. I'm just waiting on a reply here [[4]]. I think this is the only issue outstanding but there's so much wood, I can't really see the trees.:)--Ykraps (talk) 16:48, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Done --Ykraps (talk) 17:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Checklist[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

I think all the issues listed above should be relatively easy to solve, so I'm putting the review On hold pending completion of them. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 11:22, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked everything, and everything looks good. This is a great introduction to anyone about Bournemouth. And because the average viewing traffic is over 250,000 a year, you get a free Quarter Million Award thrown in. Well done! Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 18:49, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Phew, I'm glad that's over. I told the misses I was taking time off work to do some decorating and she's wondering why it's not getting done! Thanks for the thorough review and the award which is an added bonus. Regards--Ykraps (talk) 07:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Bournemouth/GA1&oldid=1146887712"