Talk:Magherascouse

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Relativity (talk · contribs) 03:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'll start taking a look. Pinging @Dr Ulster. ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 03:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the review, I shall update and reorganise where necessary and resubmit it when I think that it is suitable. Dr Ulster (talk) 18:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Review

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   For the MoS guideline you should fix the lead's citations first as I elaborated on in my comment in criterion 3. Also, the lead fails MOS:LEAD because it is not an adequate summary of the rest of the article. There is an entire paragraph on education in Magherascouse, but it isn't mentioned in the lead at all. There are no census results mentioned in the lead as well even though they take up a lot of the article. On the flip side, there are many things mentioned in the lead that weren't mentioned in the rest of the article, such as the townland's location and size. For criterion 1a please refer to my notes below as I'd like to make my comments into a bulleted list. Since the article would require a substantial amount of copyediting to fit criterion 1a, I'm failing for now.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Checked against Earwig's Copyvio Detector and it's clear. In the "Education" section, there are no inline citations for the paragraph that starts with "The third school building is the oldest of the three..." Do the citations at the end of the next paragraph work for that paragraph that I quoted above? Also, there is no citation at the end of "Magherascouse is a mainly Protestant townland, evident by the quantity of Protestant churches nearby and lack of Roman Catholic churches." It is possible to figure this out by looking at a map, but that would not be straightforward reading of it, and therefore would probably WP:OR, as covered in WP:ORMEDIA. Citation 3 goes to Wikimedia Commons, and you do not need that citation in that sentence anyway. You also have a few citations to townlands.ie, which has users on OpenStreetMap map areas in Ireland, and therefore is WP:USERGENERATED and not reliable. Citation 6 was created by a user, and is also WP:USERGENERATED. Citation 7 is a hand-drawn image by one person, and therefore is not reliable. What makes https://www.emeraldancestors.com reliable? For Citation 15, the main page of that website states "The IreAtlas Townland Database is hosted by TheCore.com and administrated as part of the Leitrim-Roscommon Genealogy Site." The Leitrim-Roscommon Genealogy Site main page mentions a group of volunteers helping out on a project of that page. I don't know if that source is reliable or not or has much editorial oversight. Citation 21 seems to be run by mostly one person, and therefore would not be reliable. Same with citation 46.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   This is the problem that catches my attention the most. Starting with 3a, there is a lot of information in the lead that isn't anywhere in the body, leading to WP:CITATIONOVERKILL in the lead, and the lead section of the article should not be cited except for some circumstances, like when information in the lead will or would be likely to be challenged. (see MOS:CITELEAD.) I don't see much potential for that happening, especially since Magherascouse is not especially controversial or is a BLP. I would suggest creating a new section on its location and adding a lot of the information in the lead there and moving the citations to that new section. Moving on to 3b, there is way too much information on all of the census data on Magherascouse. At the very least you would need to organize all the census data into a table, but I would suggest using Template:Historical populations.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Good work

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Good

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Nice. I wish there was an image on more of the settlements, but the images still work for the article.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

@Dr Ulster: This article needs quite a bit of work to be a Good article. Take a look at all of my comments above in the criterion section and my comments below in the criterion 3a section. With some work, this article could become a Good article, but please take some time to make the necessary improvements. I would say that this article is a C-class article. You've been doing a great job improving the article so far, so keep up the good work. You can contact me on my talk page if you have any questions or anything like that. Happy editing! ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 00:30, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Miscellaneous Comments and Improvements

• I've already suggested that you change the census sections, but I do have one comment to add about what is currently there. I'm seeing, for example in the 1881 Census section, "In 1881 the population of Magherascouse was 483 from 94 households(excluding 3 uninhabited houses)" There should be a space between "94 households" and "(excluding". This problem is also prevalent in the other census sections. Of course, at this point that entire census section should be changed, but I thought I should add this here just in case.
• Consider running IABot on the article.

Criterion 3a

• "The first element of the place name means ‘plain’ and the most plausible explanation for the final element is likely to be a form of the word scamh which is related to the word scamhach/scafach which is defined by Ó Dónaill as ‘bare patch of rock’." Seperate with commas, clarify, and italicize by changing to "The first element of the place name means ‘plain’, and the most plausible explanation for the final element is likely to be a form of the word scamh, which is related to the word scamhach or scafach, defined by Ó Dónaill as ‘bare patch of rock’."
• Is "Ó Dónaill" their full name? Or do they have a seperate first name? In the source, it refers to them as simply Ó Dónaill, but if that's not their full name it should be corrected. Also, it should be clarified who Ó Dónaill is.
• Clarify "All the earlier spellings suggest that the original form of the place name was Machaire Scamha ‘plain of the bare patch of rocks’." by turning into "All the earlier spellings suggest that the original form of the place name was Machaire Scamha, meaning ‘plain of the bare patch of rocks’."
• "The absence of final 's' in the earliest spellings (first appearing as Maghrescows c. 1659) would seem to suggest that the final element is scamh rather than sceamhas and the modern final 's' seems to indicate an English plural form, suggesting that the townland may have formerly been made up of multiple portions." Improve by changing to "The absence of final 's' in the earliest spellings (first appearing as Maghrescows c. 1659) would seem to suggest that the final element is scamh rather than sceamhas, and the modern final 's' seems to indicate an English plural form, suggesting that the townland may have formerly been made up of multiple portions."
• In the entire toponomy section, I'm seeing terms such as "the most plausible explanation", "suggest", "would seem to suggest". Who is saying that "the most plausible explanation" is something? This should be attributed to someone. For example, if Ó Dónaill says that the "most plausible explanation" for the final element is likely to be a form of the word scamh, then it should be stated as such, like "According to Ó Dónaill, a toponymist [I don't know if they are or aren't, but it should be stated how exactly Dónaill has the expertise to say this], the most plausible explanation for the final element is likely to be a form of the word scamh..."
• I'm seeing more common usage of the word "Toponymy" than "Toponomy", and so maybe you ought to fix the section title there
• "In 1837 farms were from 10 to 30 acres, the land quality was described as middling and rent was 21- 32 shillings an acre." Described as middling by whom? This sentence may benefit from a pair of quotation marks around "middling".
• Because the rest of the census section doesn't word dates this way, "10th September 1858" should be changed to "10 September 1858". If the census sections are removed, this may not apply.
• "Lord Dufferin sold the townland of Magherascouse to Robert G. Dunville in 1877, and was valued at £1,341 in 1881 and Mr Dunville still owned it in 1889" Consider splitting this up into two sentences, like "Lord Dufferin sold the townland of Magherascouse to Robert G. Dunville in 1877, and was valued at £1,341 in 1881. Mr Dunville still owned it in 1889."
• The second mention of Robert G. Dunville, which is written as "Mr Dunville", should be changed to just "Dunville" per MOS:SURNAME
• Because the rest of the census section doesn't word dates this way, "15th January 1950" should be changed to "15 January 1950". If the census sections are removed, this may not apply.
• "The population of Magherascouse declined a considerable amount in the first half of the 20th century as people moved away and found jobs in nearby towns and cities like; Comber, Saintfield and particularly Belfast." There should be no semicolon before "like"
• "Magherascouse is a mainly Protestant townland, evident by the quantity of Protestant churches nearby and lack of Roman Catholic churches." There should be a citation at the end of this.
• "Magherascouse has had three schools in its history, two of these schools were around during the early 19th century." Should be "Magherascouse has had three schools in its history, with two of these schools were around during the early 19th century."
• "This school was typically a Presbyterian school, it had a new school building built around the late 19th century to early 20th century which was funded by Lord Dufferin, John Craigan was appointed Head Master in 1885 and was Principal there until at least 1918, after John Craigan the new Headmistress was Miss Mercer who retired when she turned 60, after Miss Mercer the Headmistress then became Miss Corrigan (later Mrs Jack), Miss Corrigan became burdened with leukemia and had to leave the school, a woman of the name Gladys McBride happened to be vice principal nearby in Ballykeigle Primary School and so she became the last Headmistress of Magherascouse National School before it was closed and put up for sale." This is a pretty big run-on sentence, and should be split up. There are several ways that you could do this, so I won't write them all here.
• "St. Mary's cost the Church £45 at the time to construct and was built almost entirely by a local man named James Mitchell who used voluntary labour to reduce the cost of construction, half an acre of land was donated by the Truman family who owned a farm there at the time." Should be split into "St. Mary's cost the Church £45 at the time to construct and was built almost entirely by a local man named James Mitchell who used voluntary labour to reduce the cost of construction. Half an acre of land was donated by the Truman family who owned a farm there at the time."
• "The third school building is the oldest of the three, it was described in 1898 as a 'hedge school' which existed long before the Magherascouse School." Should be changed to "The third school building is the oldest of the three, and was described in 1898 as a 'hedge school' which existed long before the Magherascouse School."
• "The school was decommissioned shortly after the Stanley Letter..." "Stanley Letter" in that sentence is Wikilinked and should not be because it was already Wikilinked earlier in that section. Also, the "L" in "Letter" should be lowercase.
• "...named John Lyons as a private dwelling by Daniel McMorran, after this the building was finally demolished into a heap of rubble in the corner of a field ossibly due to the building starting to collapse." Should be ""...named John Lyons as a private dwelling by Daniel McMorran. After this the building was finally demolished into a heap of rubble in the corner of a field possibly due to the building starting to collapse."
• "All three schools are now defunct, Magherascouse school now being a private dwelling and St. Mary's School is now rented as offices to the NHS and the third school was demolished." Would read better as "All three schools are now defunct, Magherascouse school now being a private dwelling, St. Mary's School now rented as offices to the NHS and the third school was demolished."

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Magherascouse/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shannon1 (talk · contribs) 01:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Hi, I'll be reviewing this article. I've gone and fixed some minor nitpicky things with formatting and grammar; this mostly needs a decent amount of attention to the citations/references. Shannon [ Talk ] 01:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   "toponomy" section is approaching copyvio, see below

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 non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• General comments
  • Several citations are formatted wrong. We don't want a bare URL in the website/publisher field. #1, for example, should read "Irish Townlands" rather than "www.townlands.ie". Similarly, #2 should read "Northern Ireland Placename Project" not "www.experience.arcgis.org".
  • Please add a publisher to the following citations. #3, 6, 9, 13, 22, 23, 24 through 36
  • Citations to books/long reports need page numbers. For example, #4, 5, 7, 8
  • Don't put "Google Books" in the name= field of the citation. The actual publisher is listed in the description page. For example, #8, "Reports from the Commissioner" attributes the publisher to Institute of Irish studies, and should be listed under the publisher= field. Put Google Books under the website= field.
  • Some statistics are missing metric/imperial conversions, e.g. "lough of about 4.452 hectares" under Geography.

• Toponomy
  • The source seems fine, but the text follows it a little too closely. Some sentences are 100% lifted from the source, for example, All the earlier spellings suggest that the original form of the place name was Machaire Scamha meaning ‘plain of the bare patch of rocks. Suggest completely rewriting this section in original prose. It's ok to paraphrase but it's just too similar.
  • Some of the sentences are long and hard to read, would suggest breaking up.

• History
  • I made a few minor edits to the layout.
  • What is "middling" in comparison to?
  • Citation #10, "Griffith's Valuation BCDR", appears broken. It gives me a "session timeout" error

• Geography
  • citations #16 and #17 reference the Ros Davis genealogy site which I question below as a reliable source, would suggest finding a secondary source to back this up.

• Demography
  • What does "very large ethnicity" mean?

• Education
  • I'm not sure if every headmaster of the Magherascouse School needs to be listed. See Wikipedia:Too much detail. I think just the first and last would be fine.
  • Genealogy sites (#31, 35) are not considered reliable sources by Wikipedia. The Ros Davies site does helpfully give a list of primary sources; I would suggest finding those sources and citing them directly.
  • Second paragraph does not appear to be supported by citation #33 ("Lennon Wylie Ballygowan"). I searched for several of the names and did not find them in the source.
  • Third paragraph is unreferenced.

While short, I could see this qualifying for GA after the above concerns are addressed. Regards, Shannon [ Talk ] 01:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)

@Shannon1, it looks like your nominator is inactive. Do you think it's a pass or a fail in its current state? (Just to be clear about citations - so long as you can figure out what the source is, that's good enough for GA.) -- asilvering (talk) 03:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

@Asilvering: I would not pass it in its current state. This is the first time I've done a GA review (I've put a lot of articles through GA but never been a reviewer) so I'm not sure what the protocol is here. Is there a certain amount of time to wait? Shannon [ Talk ] 04:44, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

You're supposed to give the editor a week to work through the issues, though it's very common for reviews to end up taking longer since most reviewers are happy to wait longer if the nom pops in to say "got busy, will do this weekend!" or whatever. That doesn't look like it will happen with this nominator, since they've been gone since early January, so it's fine for you to fail it now. By the way, since you started this review in March, it qualifies for the backlog drive. -- asilvering (talk) 04:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Failing the nomination due to inactivity. Shannon [ Talk ] 20:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Apologies for my absence, I'll likely sort out these issues and try another nomination. I was away due to personal issues so there wasn't much i could do. Dr Ulster (talk) 20:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)