Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Hawkeye7 via FACBot (talk) 18:23, 14 December 2015 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust

Featured list candidates/Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust/archive1

Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 19:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So far as I know, this is the first list of nature reserves managed by a British wildlife trust nominated for FLC. It includes photographs of all the sites. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support – a lovely page, and much more than a mere list. Plainly meets the FL criteria in my view. Only two comments. At Pryor's Wood, should "sparrowshawks" be "sparrowhawks"? And the absence of a Description for Rye Meads looks like an unintentional omission (FL criterion 3 (a) came briefly to mind), though I am perfectly prepared to be told it isn't. – Tim riley talk 20:26, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tim. I don't know how I managed to miss Rye Meads - very careless. Both your points dealt with. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:51, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Another interesting list.

~~I think we have discussed the capitalisation of Local nature reserve before. On this list it is capitalised but on the relevant wp article it is not.~~

Site of Special Scientific Interest is capitalised and it would be odd to have SSSI and Lnr (or lnr). The authority should be the source not Wikipedia, and the official source capitalises. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Although the MOS may have something to say about this but I can't find it at present.— Rod ^talk 12:45, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Should Lechworth be Letchworth in "Mr Fordham of Lechworth"?~~
~~In the table "Description" column some of the species and habitat types are wikilinked in some entries and not in others (eg "Water rail" is wikilinked in Lensford Springs but not in Oughtonhead)~~
~~The lat & long is given to six decimal places which may be too exact particularly for sites which cover 100 + acres.~~

Can you advise how many decimals I should have for different areas? All the advice I have seen is vague on this. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that there is no clear guidance on this. I have been told (not RS I know) that six decimal places will narrow it down to within a few feet - probably OK for a small building, and for a large city to use two decimal places. In my opinion a site of over 100 acres I would use 3 decimal places and for small sites 4 decimal places. Template:Coord just says "Avoid excessive precision (0.0001° is <11 m, 1″ is <31 m)." Wikipedia:WikiProject Geographical coordinates#Precision guidelines is better with "A general rule is to give precisions approximately one tenth the size of the object" and a table of differences, but the variation from the equator to 45 degree or 60 degrees may be a bit more detailed than needed.— Rod ^talk 12:24, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. The location of the smallest reserve, Barkway Chalk Pit at 0.3 hectares, is slightly out using the only map which shows the reserve, Streetmap. As an experiment I tried finding the exact location using Grid Reference Finder, which gave coordinates accurate to 6 decimal places latitude and 10 longitude. Putting these full coords in the table for the site I tried again but it is still out, and Streetmap seems to give a slightly different position for coordinates from Grid Reference Finder. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:11, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've found this before for any conversion from grid ref to Lat & Long (or visa versa).— Rod ^talk 18:23, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Some of the other lesser known species (eg Hornbeam) could also be wikilinked for those less familiar with the content area.~~
In Hunsdon and Eastwick Meads, I'm not sure about the wikilink to Lammas in "managed by the old Lammas method of hay-making followed by winter grazing" as this seems to be the day or celebration rather than a method for hay-making?
What is the rationale for the inclusion of specific sites in the see also? I thought initially these were other LNRs or SSSIs in the area not managed by the Trust, or those not included in List of Local Nature Reserves in Hertfordshire or List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Hertfordshire but that doesn't appear to be the case
~~Ref 3 (Charity Commission) doesn't have an accessdate (this may be a function of the template used)~~

This was added before I started working on the article, but checking the template documentation I see it is intended for external links, not citations. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

~~Ref 7 ("A Geological Conservation Strategy for Hertfordshire") seems to have a stray ">" before it~~

Most of these are minor quibbles and shouldn't be too difficult to resolve.— Rod ^talk 21:17, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for you review Rod. Sorry I forgot to do the final checkover before nomination. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All the issues I identified are now resolved so I can support this list as meeting the criteria.— Rod ^talk 18:23, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Godot13

Images need Alt text.--Godot13 (talk) 04:50, 11 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:39, 14 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Review by PresN

FLC is running a bit slow right now, so recusing myself as a delegate to review this list.

The first sentence has it as Herts & Middlesex, but the list title is Herts and Middlesex - why is this?

Changed. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think the flow would be improved by swapping the second and third paragraphs in the lead- talk about what it is/does before getting into its history

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Two of the Trust's nature reserves are Ramsar sites, internationally important wetland reserves, fifteen are Sites of Special Scientific Interest, and five are Local Nature Reserves." - uses commas for multiple purposes; try "Two of the Trust's nature reserves are Ramsar sites, internationally important wetland reserves; fifteen are Sites of Special Scientific Interest; and five are Local Nature Reserves."

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Heathland is a threatened habitat in southern England, and this site is a good example." - odd tone; maybe "This site is an example of heathland, a threatened habitat in southern England."

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Patmore Heath doesn't mention that heathland is a threatened habitat, and since the table is sortable this may not be the second example the reader hits

I prefer not to repeat information as this makes the article less interesting, and the Natural England citation for Patmore Heath does not mention that heathland is threatened. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not much overall! If this was helpful, consider optionally reviwing my FLC up above. --Pres N 18:21, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your review. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, Support. --Pres N 21:10, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:29, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Giants2008 (Talk) 00:01, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.