Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chat Moss

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 18:49, 31 December 2007.

Chat Moss

Check external links

I'm nominating this article for featured article because I think it meets the FA criteria. It's a fairly short, though I believe comprehensive, article about a large raised peat bog in Greater Manchester, England, complete with its own bog body. Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:07, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support I believe it fulfills all FACr --Kiyarrllston 13:40, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
PS:[Query:]should it be " Derek Hampson and Gary Priestnall [said that they] chose Chat Moss because [...]"?

The reference just says "'It [my emphasis] was chosen for the project because ... ". Adding "said that they" seems to imply some doubt that they actually chose Chat Moss for the reasons given? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 01:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

---I believe that if the artists said it then it is verified that they said it- even if the authors themselves are not reliable in their public statements.

but their true predominant motive for chosing Chat Moss is unknown even if they did say that.

At least putting their words up there would improve it - but if the source doesn't have them saying it... ummm... I don't know... -

Thanks for answering my query.

--Kiyarrllston 14:58, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've added to that bit slightly, quoting the artist's own words. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:43, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Have you done a thorough Google search to ensure the article is comprehensive? There are other sources available, especially at Google books. Although, I understand there's a fine line between comprehensiveness and letting an article become unfocused. Epbr123 (talk) 16:57, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Reply. I have yes, along with searches of scientific literature databases like JSTOR, but there may of course be some sources that I haven't found, with new material. Most of the stuff written about Chat Moss is concerned with Stephenson's construction of the railway line through it, rather than about Chat Moss itself. However, I'll be continuing to look for further relevant information to add to this article whether or not it gets promoted to FA, of course. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 17:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support Epbr123 (talk) 17:46, 28 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should "site of special scientific interest" have capitals? Done
"Even after all of the reclamation work that has taken place, parts of the area are still surprisingly remote and bleak." - surprisingly may be POV Done
"it was decided that the head had been in the bog for at least 100 years" - if this was proven, a better word than decided could be used Done
"it was reported that of the 54 farms on the moss, occupying 3,000 acres (1,214 ha) – almost half the area of the bog – only three were growing vegetables." - should the second dash be a comma? Not done Epbr123 (talk) 19:14, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hyphens seem appropriate. Rt . 19:22, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"In 1793, William Roscoe had begun work on reclaiming the smaller Trafford Moss" - probably should be "In 1793, William Roscoe began work" or "By 1793, William Roscoe had begun work" Epbr123 (talk) 22:07, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed and done. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:16, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Support - fulfills requirements of a FAC article. Rt . 18:47, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support DDStretch (talk) 18:12, 31 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.