Talk:River Coquet

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Rivers Low‑importance

	Geography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Rivers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Rivers on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RiversWikipedia:WikiProject RiversTemplate:WikiProject RiversRiver articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

North East England Low‑importance

	North East England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject North East England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of North East England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.North East EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject North East EnglandTemplate:WikiProject North East EnglandNorth East England articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Comments

pronunciation unclear - anybody know?

It's pronounced more in the English way than the French way - unsure of how to write in IPA, but is something like "Kohk-ut" AndrewMcQ 11:56, 11 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Drainage Area

A drainage area that "does not exceed 240 square metres" seems low for a river of some 40 miles length. Am I misunderstanding the term, or does this need correction / clarification? J mcquillen (talk) 19:39, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; it seems too low by some orders of magnitude. I've removed it. Let someone who knows re-instate the corrected information with a reliable source. Feline Hymnic (talk) 21:44, 2 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment

I have assessed the article against the following criteria for B-class:

Suitably referenced, with inline citations
Reasonable coverage - no obvious omissions or inaccuracies
Defined structure, with adequate lead
Reasonably well written for grammar and flow
Supporting materials - Infobox, map, images
Appropriately understandable

Since it meets these, I am rating it as B-class. Bob1960evens (talk) 08:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

River length

The length given in the article had previously been unreferenced. The entire river is an SSSI and a new figure is provided based upon the citation provided by Natural England - for information; the ref says '90km (57 miles)' though 90km actually converts to 56 miles so the latter figure differs slightly from the referenced figure.Geopersona (talk) 06:45, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]