Jump to content

Talk:Glenrothes

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleGlenrothes 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.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 18, 2007Peer reviewReviewed
June 24, 2008Featured article candidateNot promoted
July 17, 2008Peer reviewReviewed
June 14, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
May 2, 2010Peer reviewReviewed
May 16, 2010Good article nomineeListed
July 23, 2011Peer reviewReviewed
September 6, 2011Featured article candidateNot promoted
February 28, 2013Peer reviewNot reviewed
Current status: Good article

Wikiproject WikiProject Fife

[edit]

Description

[edit]

This article would cover all Fife-related articles such as places, famous people, museums, football and rugby clubs and churches to name a few. Examples would be: Kirkcaldy, Andrew Carnegie, Adam Smith, Dunfermline Abbey, Dunfermline Athletic, The Old Course and Kirkcaldy Museum and Art Gallery. This could also help support articles that really do need a lot of work while keeping general maintenance. Examples would be: Methil, Dunfermline, Cupar and a lot of the smaller towns such as Kennoway and Lower Largo. Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Proposals#Wikiproject_WikiProject_Fife. Kilnburn (talk) 16:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

[edit]

Does anyone know how to change the Vehicle Code on the Infobox? Glenrothes falls under the Dundee and Edinburgh Vehicle Licence codes, not Glasgow.

WP:SCO assessment

[edit]

First of all, this is a fine article, and with a few adjustments should certainly sail through GA if you were so inspired. It is certainly not far off an ‘A’ class. Here are my comments, with those I think are particularly important marked with >.

*Lead – should link to Fife and mention something from every major section. >Thus if transport, education and worship are worthy of a section, the lead should say something about it. Why around ‘40,000’ when there is a more accurate number in the infobox? Can you substantiate ‘The town is well known…’? Changes made

  • History - Thornton is linked lower down – its best to link to other articles when they first appear.

‘The name Rothes comes from the association with the north-east Scotland Earl of Rothes, family name Leslie, who owned much of the land historically and after whom the largest local settlement Leslie, pre-Glenrothes New Town, was named, and still exists to the north-west of the town.’ This is a clumsy and over-long sentence. Changes made

>‘In hindsight the loss of the pit can be seen as a blessing in disguise given the demise of Britian's coal mining industry by Margaret Thatcher's Government in the 1970's/80's. The pit's closure did however help change the fortunes of the town for the better.’ Why was it a blessing? There's a typo and it's a clumsy sentence. A British reader would guess, but others may not be sure what you mean. ‘However’ is redundant. Changes made

* GDC ‘480,692 sq m’. There is a protocol about putting horrid little   markers between the number and the descriptor. See for example St Kilda, Scotland#Geography.

‘ The winding up of the GDC meant that Glenrothes was no longer an official new town.’ “Official’ is a little hackneyed – 'designated' might be better. Done

>* References – The article begins with (Ferguson 1996) style and then moves on to in-line. I believe this should be consistent and I much prefer the latter. Later on the are lots of examples where the inline ref marker comes before the punctuation e.g. ‘to a min of 9°c [2].’ This is incorrect. Changes made

* Today – ‘two of which (at the time) won Saltire Society Awards.’ 'At the time' is redundant. Is ‘Marching Hippos’ a title? In which case it should be Marching Hippos. Ditto Irises lower down. I don’t believe ‘pleasant modernity' needs to be in quotes and italics. (check with WP:MOS). Done

* Geography – should Warout ridge hve a capital R? The temperatures should certainly have a capital C. Done

>>Housing precinct list. See WP:EL Lots and lots of other examples of this need fixing. Fixed

>*Demographics – ‘Detailed information about Glenrothes from the Census can be obtained from this Executive website.’ This should be a footnote. Changed

* Shopping. ‘which contain their own local newsagents.’ Not really worth saying. Removed

* Industry ‘Manufacturing and the Public Administration, Education and Health sectors’ should not be capitalised. Done

I doubt caps are needed in 'Glenrothes is the Administrative Centre for Fife'. This is also a duplicate of information in 'Background'

* Landmarks - 'As already mentioned Glenrothes is home to a large number of artworks' Unless it was in the lead why is it mentioned again? Changed

'Two other gateway landmarks, located just outside Glenrothes, are also worthy of mention.' That's an unnecessary statement of opinion. Suggest 'There are two other gateway landmarks, located just outside Glenrothes.' Changed

*Media: Suggest: Glenrothes has a weekly newspaper, the "Glenrothes Gazette" which is operated by the Fife Free Press group, and which is published every Wednesday. Changed

'McLeish's resignation in 2001.' Resignation from what? Added further details

* Education - 'creative arts' is an odd red link. Changed

*Kirks - ' St. Columba's was designed by architects Wheeler & Sproson' We know already! point taken and removed

I've looked at it using two browsers and the co-ords are running over the top of one another at top left.

The most important stuff is the WP:EL. "External links should not be used in the body of an article". To be honest, I don't think you need list every estate and precinct anyway.

Hope that's helpful Ben MacDui (Talk) 19:24, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There was a request for a further review at WP:SCO. There has of course been significant progress, but a few items still need attention.

1) "References – The article begins with (Ferguson 1996) style and then moves on to in-line. I believe this should be consistent and I much prefer the latter. Later on the are lots of examples where the inline ref marker comes before the punctuation e.g. ‘to a min of 9°c [2].’ This is incorrect." In short, the referencing style at the beginning should be consistent with that at the end, and the spaces between the in-line ref tags and the text should be removed. Changes made
2)'Administrative Centre for Fife' still appears under 'Industry'. This is its third appearance, and a local authority is not generally considered to be a Changes maden 'industry'. I have attempted an improved version.
3) The co-ords are still running over the top of one another at top left. Not sure how this can be changed...?


4) I didn't notice before, but the sub-sections in the External links make the TOC over-long. The could simply be split up using bold rather than sub-section headers.

I also think you the article would benefit by attempting GA status - you would probably get a more objective non-native eye looking over it. Ben MacDui (Talk) 08:39, 11 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good work. My only final comment is that there should not be a space between the period and the ref marker, but at least the usage is consistent. Well done. Ben MacDui (Talk) 09:05, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Auto Peer Review

[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 5 miles, use 5 miles, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 5 miles.[?] *Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km2, and pounds -> lb.[?] *Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.[?] *Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings. *Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.[?] *This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.[?] *There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.

    • it has been
    • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).[?]
  • Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)

**Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”

  • As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
  • Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Ben MacDui (Talk) 07:18, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Balbirnie, Glenrothes

[edit]

Ok, just to set the records straight on this.

Balbirnie Park & Golf Course and Balbirnie House Hotel both actually fall within the Glenrothes town boundary, not Markinch. Albeit it is confusing that you have to pass into Markinch before entering the main entrance to the park. Balbirnie Estate fell under the designated area for Glenrothes New Town in the 1948 plan.

The Glenrothes Development Corporation bought the land and house off of the Balfour family in the 1960's and developed it into the park and golf course. The GDC also occupied Balbirnie House at one point to prevent it falling into total disrepair and spent quite a bit of money on converting it for office use. Had this not been done Balbirnie House may have been weather damaged and made derelict beyond repair.

Housing which has been developed on the edges of the park, at Tofthill and Mount Frost officially fall within Glenrothes also.

The Glenrothes Area Local Plan proposals map identifies the boundaries of Markinch and Glenrothes if proof is needed. Balbirnie officialy falls within Glenrothes. Glenrothes Local Plan Proposals Map

I hope this clarifies the matter.

do you think the infobox picture should be changed?

[edit]

because if so, that's what i'm thinking about. that picture of Glenrothes from East Falkland Hill would be far more appropriate than the bridge in Riverside Park. it would indicate to those unfamiliar with the town how big it is. Kilnburn (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: hamiltonstone (talk) 03:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC) This article is relatively thorough, and extensively referenced. Images appear generally OK. I am assuming that Scotland has freedom of panorama; if not, then the photos of sculptures may be a violation of the artists' copyright.[reply]

  • The article is not neutral, nor always written in an encyclopedic style. Examples:
  • "The pit's closure was devastating and further development of Glenrothes was almost stopped. In hindsight however, the pit's closure did help change the fortunes of the town for the better."  Done Rephrased sentence.
  • "There are a number of attractive villages surrounding the town each unique in their own respect." (sounds like a promotional travel guide and can probably be simply deleted). Done Removed"attractive" from sentence.
  • " Fife Constabulary have established their modern headquarters". Does this simply meen "current"?  Done Removed "modern" from sentence.
  • "The flexible nature of the complex means it can cater for a large variety of regional and local events and performances including theatrical performances, award ceremonies, an annual beer festival, tribute bands and model railway exhibitions. " Sounds like their brochure's sales pitch. And it is in any case not referenced. Done Sentence reworded and additional reference added.
  • "The town boasts good sports facilities"  Done Reworded sentence.
  • "Landmarks and notable buildings in Glenrothes vary from tall buildings and bridges to hills, sculptures, churches and henges. The most prominent landmarks in the town include the River Leven Bridge which towers over Riverside Park, the Tullis Russell factory chimneys towering in the east of the town and Raeburn Heights, a residential tower block and Fife House, an office block, both of which sit at the western corners of the town centre. These are the most recognisable tall structures in Glenrothes which can be seen from afar." I apologise if I am wrong, but this reads like plagiarised text from a local guide.  Done Removed first sentence. For the record this was no sales pitch and was not referenced from a local guide. It was written based on evidence from books but written in my own format.
  • "The Lomond Hills form a natural backdrop to the town when looking north and can be seen from as far away as Edinburgh and the Lothians in the south, and Tayside in the north." There are a couple of things wrong with this. It sounds like geography rather than local landmarks; and the fact that these hills can be seen from anywhere other than Glenrothes is not relevant to an article about Glenrothes; "natural backdrop" sounds like promotional text, is unencyclopedic, all the more so since it is unreferenced.  Done Removed sentence.
  • "Mondrian inspired stain glass windows" - according to what reliable source?  Done Source from Historic Scotland now added.
  • "Glenrothes is also within commuting distance of the universities in Dundee, Edinburgh and Stirling." That is a subjective judgement which again comes out sounding like an advertisement for the town.  Done Point taken, sentence removed.
  • "The airport is able to accommodate private light aircraft and also contains a small restaurant, the Tipsy Nipper." More (unreferenced) advertising for tiny local businesses? Should be deleted. Done Reference added, sentence reworded to be less sales pitchy and name of restaurant removed.

But the elephant in the room (if you are familiar with that expression) is this: Glenrothes won the 2009 Carbuncles Awards for its depressed, investment-starved and ugly town centre. See, eg, this, this, this and this. Probably the most notable thing to have happened to Glenrothes, unfortunately, it should be mentioned in the lead and in the body text.  Done

The only other event that might be worth covering is the 2008 by-election, notable for the lossof voting records and for "The result was a huge fillip to the Prime Minister, who broke with convention and risked his political credibility by joining the campaign trail with his wife, Sarah" (from this).

Other points:

  • There is material under "geography" that reads more like either history, or architectural styles.  Done Sub-heading reinstated.
  • "This is bounded by a ring road, has been purposely planned, contains no residential element and is largely enclosed." What is largely enclosed? The town centre? Well, if it is by a "ring road", that would go without saying would it not?  Done Sentence reworded to improve legibility.
  • "Today, as a result, there is a large variety of artworks and sculptures scattered throughout the town (around 132)..." What is the source for this number? And how can it be "around" 132? 132 is an integer and one doesn't have half a sculpture. Is it 132 or is it more than that? Or around 130?  Done Number removed until proper reference can be sourced.
  • "an eventide home". Never heard this phrase before. What does it mean?  Done It is a name for a care home for the elderly. However reworded to make it more legible.
  • If St Pauls is "the most significant piece of modern church architecture north of the English Channel", then the article needs a photo of it, and ditch the Columba photo (speaking of which - that is a listed building? It looks like an old telephone exchange with a wierd stained glass cardboard cutout box on top. Are we sure this image is of the right object?)

Will keep an eye out. Any questions, raise them either here ot at my talk page. hamiltonstone (talk) 03:00, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comments, I appreciate the time you have taken in reviewing the article and I shall address your points in turn if I may over the next few days.

Perhaps you could clarify a few points before I undertake some of the work.

In relation to the point on public artworks and the rights associated with photographing them, and distributing or displaying the photos to others, Section 62 of the Copyright, designs and patents Act 1988 states:

Representation of certain artistic works on public display (1) This section applies to— (a) buildings, and (b) sculptures, models for buildings and works of artistic craftsmanship, if permanently situated in a public place or in premises open to the public. (2) The copyright in such a work is not infringed by— (a) making a graphic work representing it, (b) making a photograph or film of it, or (c) broadcasting or including in a cable programme service a visual image of it. (3) Nor is the copyright infringed by the issue to the public of copies, or the broadcasting or inclusion in a cable programme service, of anything whose making was, by virtue of this section, not an infringement of the copyright.

I am therefore satisfied that there is no issue relating to the display of the images of the public artworks on the Wikipedia page. I would appreciate any thoughts you may have on this.

Thank you. Agreed - no problem with those photos then. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In relation to your point on the "carbuncle award". There was mention of this previously in the article, however this was removed by another editor. For what reason I do not know? I would be happy to reinstate it if required. However I think its worth noting that the Carbuncle Awards contest is run by a body which has no official status, does not reflect an official Scottish view and only reflects the views of a self proclaimed minority, who operate a contest that is in itself questionable in the fairness and way it is run. Is it therefore reliable, crediable and relevant to include mention of such an award in an encyclopedic article?

I think your opinion of the Carbuncles is showing :-) It is highly newsworthy, reflected in the coverage. The WP article should not be focussed on "official" views; on the contrary, it should draw on independent sources. The Carbuncles are run by people with some expertise in architecture and planning (Urban Realm / Carnyx Group) and regularly get publicity because it is an award with professional input. Note that one of the BBC stories quotes another group, the Glenrothes Area Futures Group, as supporting the award's contention - that central Glenrothes has been neglected. I am not just suggesting the award be recorded in the article - the coverage should be more expansive, outlining why it was awarded and the reception from GAFG and others. Peter Grant's reaction is typical of someone with vested interest who doesn't want to hear the bad news, but the award itself appears sound, reputable and should be addressed. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to your comments on St Columba's church. I realise Modern Architecture is not to everyone's taste. Whether a person "likes" the building or not in this case is irrelevant. As stated we shouldnt be providing bias opinions. The church has been officially recognised by Historic Scotland as an important piece of modern Scottish Architecture and has been given Grade-A listed status. I shall include further sources to back up the "Mondrian inspired" quote.

Modern Architecture is to my taste, i just thought this was a poor example, but if it is the correct building and has that historic status, then it should remain covered as it currently is. Any chance of a photo of the other church though? Good luck on the Mondrian thing. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will endeavour to reword some of the article, as I agree that in places it is not neutral.

The material under "geography" that reads more like either history, or architectural styles. Yes you are correct, the reason for this is that the geography section originally had a "built environment" sub-section which highlighted more town planning issues than geographical. This was created at the request of a former peer reviewer who suggested it would be useful. Perhaps I should reinstate the sub-heading to separate the distinction with geography? I'd appreciate your thoughts on this.

My hunch is to re-instate the subheading. Let's see how that goes. hamiltonstone (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcwesty (talk • contribs) 15:15, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All good. cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 22:27, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Closing review

[edit]

Thanks McWesty, that looks better, and well done getting the picture of the other church as well as a cite for the Mondrian inspiration. I'm passing this at GA. Some thngsstill to do:

  • The references are not all in the same format, particularly the retrieval dates on web sources. Go through them for consistency.
  • The tone is still not entirely neutral. It still reads as thought written by someone very enthusiastic about the town - i'm glad you are, it's just that it shouldn't show through too much.
    I'm assuming you don't work for Fife Council or anything like that - if you do, that would probably be a conflict of interest - which would be worth mentioning on the talk page. But you've done a good job regardless. Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 10:20, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

removed the info of the "Tullis Russell" Retail Park

[edit]

According to the source below, plans for construction of the "Tullis Russell" Retail Park in Glenrothes have been dropped by MacDonald Estates because of a lack of suitable tenants. This is so other users who edit the article know why i have removed this. [1] Kilnburn (talk) 14:52, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested future article requirements

[edit]

There is a need to bulk up the Demographics and Geography (non-built environment sections) of the article. It would also be useful if information could be provided on the performance of the schools in the town.

Suggestions of required information as follows:

Demographics -Population growth in the town over the last 60 years based upon 10 year intervals -Population context within Fife and Scotland -Datazone analysis -Levels of Deprevation -Up to date information on unemployment and claiment count -More detail on religeous and ethnic make up of the town -Population densities

Geography -More information on the micro climate of the area, including a table indicating annual temperature levels -Key natural features in the area; bedrock, soil, river and water courses etc, -Biodiversity in the area; primary plant and animal species in the area etc Mcwesty (talk) 14:13, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Glenrothes. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:34, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Glenrothes. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:16, 9 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 18 external links on Glenrothes. 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: 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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:58, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Section headings

[edit]

Thanks to the IP who has added some section headings today. This article: Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements, might be of interest in regard to laying out standard sections and headings. All the best. Mutt Lunker (talk) 16:46, 9 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Balbirnie Park & Golf Course and Balbirnie House Hotel both actually fall within the Glenrothes town boundary, not Markinch. Albeit it is confusing that you have to pass into Markinch before entering the main entrance to the park. Balbirnie Estate fell under the designated area for Glenrothes New Town in the 1948 plan. The Glenrothes Development Corporation bought the land and house off of the Balfour family in the 1960's and developed it into the park and golf course. The GDC also occupied Balbirnie House at one point to prevent it falling into total disrepair and spent quite a bit of money on converting it for office use. Had this not been done Balbirnie House may have been weather damaged and made derelict beyond repair. Housing which has been developed on the edges of the park, at Tofthill and Mount Frost officially fall within Glenrothes also. 124.253.171.184 (talk) 10:44, 2 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Glenrothes&oldid=1243786646"