Jump to content

Talk:Rhondda/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]

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

Starting GA review.Pyrotec (talk) 09:39, 14 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Initial review

[edit]

This is a readable, interesting, wide-ranging, article on Rhondda. It's taken me a bit of time to go through it in some depth; but I have now finished the first pass.

I consider that this article is at the right level to get through the WP:GAN, but there are a few "problems" that need some attention first. So I will put the article "On Hold" while these are addressed. The "defects", mainly, consist of lack of references/citations, so a failure under WP:verify; or bold over-simplifications. I will consider them below, section by section, with the WP:Lead considered last of all:

  • General - Lower Rhondda is mentioned in Industrial Rhondda 1850—1945 and Religion, but only Rhondda Fawr, Rhondda Fach have been mentioned / discussed / defined.
    The 'Lower Rhondda' is not a defined geographic area, it is a terminology to describe the area where the Rhondda Fach and Rhondda Fawr meet around Porth, the lower elevation of the valleys. If confusion exists, it needs to be defined, suggestions? FruitMonkey (talk) 06:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks. I "found" it first in Religion and, as it did not understand what it was, I used Find to look for it. It is defined in Industrial Rhondda 1850—1945 as "the lower Rhondda villages of Dinas, Eirw and Cymmer", but I "did not see this". Why not expand the use of the phrase "lower Rhondda" in Religion in a similar manner?Pyrotec (talk) 10:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. FruitMonkey (talk) 11:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
     DonePyrotec (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rhondda Fawr -
  • The figure entitled "A rough layout of the main villages of the Rhondda" is a helpful addition, but what are the wavy blue lines, roads, railways, rivers, etc? Later on, glacial action is mentioned, so these are presumably rivers and/or streams - why are they not named?
 DonePyrotec (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Etymology -
  • Penultimate and last paragraphs, are unreferenced.
  • Dark Age and Medieval Rhondda: 410—1550 AD- Bro is presumably Welsh, does it need italics?
 DonePyrotec (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Settlements of Medieval Rhondda -
  • Owen Morgen stands accused of getting it wrong, let's either have a verifiable reference or remove it as WP:POV?
 DonePyrotec (talk) 20:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Post-Medieval and pre-industrial Rhondda: 1550—1850 -
  • The final sentence in the first paragraph has two direct quotations from Merrick and Benjamin Malkin. These need citations.
 DonePyrotec (talk) 20:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Settlements of post-Medieval Rhondda -
 DonePyrotec (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Industrial Rhondda 1850—1945 -
  • Did Rhondda really "lay deep within" the Southern Coalfield of Wales?
 DonePyrotec (talk) 20:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph (about the TVR) is completely unreferenced.
 DonePyrotec (talk) 08:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • This sentence, in the second para, "In 1849 the TVR had extended into the Rhondda Fach and by 1846 the railway had reached the furthest areas of both the Fach and Fawr valleys at Maerdy and Treherbert", is written backwards in respect of dates.
 DonePyrotec (talk) 08:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is this statement true (or at least verifiable) in the 1840s: "For the first time the Rhondda Valley was connected by a major transportation route to the rest of Wales"?
  • The opening of the Rhondda and Swansea Bay Railway needs a date (or dates, if appropriate).
 DonePyrotec (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Industrial period population growth -
  • I assume ref 52 is intended to apply to the table below, not the section title?
 DonePyrotec (talk) 19:55, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Modern Rhondda 1945-present -
  • The following is somewhat controversial / a gross over-simplification: "There are many reasons for the collapse of the mining industry within the Rhondda, but most are connected to the fact that oil superseded coal as the fuel of choice in the Western economies and that the expectations of the British worker moved from manual to manufacturing and then white collar work." Its needs a citation; and arguably it's a point of view. The decline could be due to Margaret Thacher's attempt to destroy the power of the trade unions, especially the miners, the railway unions and the power workers; a switch from coal-fired power stations to nuclear energy; open cast mining; getting rid of steam trains; smokeless zones. Did many miners become white collar workers, or did they just end up on the dole?
  • Comment - Having checked some UK publications from the mid 1970s the change to oil (in power stations and diesel locomotives) was given as the reason for the decline in industrial coal consumption between the 1950s and the early 1970s. A reference is still needed (and clarification of the time frame). I could provide a UK reference to justify the statement, but not a Rhondda-specific one. The 1973 oil crisis and 1979 oil crisis somewhat distorts the economics / argument after the mid-to-late-1970s.Pyrotec (talk) 10:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Have now addressed the concerns, with the removal of certain statements, and an increased input on the decline of coal. Many of the sources relate to the issues faced by Glamorgan as a whole, but still explain the causal effects of the slow down on the Rhondda. Have not mentioned Thatcher, as to be honest, as much as she is seen as the bad guy in Wales, the coal industry was dead decades before she decided to crush the unions. Thoughts? FruitMonkey (talk) 08:03, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

 Done - an excellent rewrite.Pyrotec (talk) 12:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Religion -
  • 2nd para. Rhondda may be on the Cistercian Way (Wales), but this is a modern 20/21st long distance footpath. This sentence needs some copy editing as it is hardly an explanation for "the main reason why the first bridges were built over the River Rhondda".
 DonePyrotec (talk) 20:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Brass bands-
  • Needs references for the first paragraph.
 DonePyrotec (talk) 20:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Media -
  • completely unreferenced.
 DonePyrotec (talk) 08:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Residents of note -
  • completely unreferenced.
  • Industrial Rhondda 1850—1945 and Political activism
  • No mention of the 1926 General Strike and its effects?
  • Have now added the cause and effect of the 1926 strike, plus some information on the effects of the Great Depression on health provisions in the Rhondda.

 DonePyrotec (talk) 12:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • This is quite a reasonable introduction and summary of the article. This is only a personal viewpoint. No mention of the change in ratios between monoglot Welsh/English over time. "Mining" could perhaps be expanded to include a summary of the dependence upon the development of a transport infrastructure; what happen when the mines closed; and Political activism.

Pyrotec (talk) 20:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Summing up

[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

An excellent, highly readable wide-ranging article.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  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:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    This article has the makings of a WP:FAC

You have very competently addressed the "defects" discussed above, I'm very happy to award GA-status. This article is probably at WP:FAC level in parts - each statement needs a verifiable statement, which you have provided in some sections (but not all) - but it is not a requirement for GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 12:16, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rhondda/GA1&oldid=273861702"