Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Local Nature Reserves in Suffolk/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 PresN via FACBot (talk) 23:31, 9 November 2017 (UTC) [1].[reply]

List of Local Nature Reserves in Suffolk

Featured list candidates/List of Local Nature Reserves in Suffolk/archive1

Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 23:13, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This is the latest in my nominations of county lists of Local Nature Reserves, and is in the same format as Essex and Cambridgeshire, which are FLs. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:13, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 07:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

" are 36 Local Nature Reserves in" use the abbreviation.

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"Nature Conservation Review" shouldn't that be in italics, like our linked article?

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The largest is " reiterate LNR here otherwise it could be confused with the two run by SWT.

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Link siskin appropriately.

Siskin goes to a disambig and the source does not specify the species.

Landguard Common - "Felixtowe" typo.

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Avoid spaced hyphens, e.g. ref 33, per MOS:DASH.

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Rambling Man (talk) 11:24, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the review. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:05, 1 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support good work as usual. The Rambling Man (talk) 07:26, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks TRM Dudley Miles (talk) 18:52, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I have tried to be as pernickety as I can, but still can't find much to grumble about.

Lead: "as of" appears twice, and though I can't offhand think of a suitable alternative it would be nice to avoid the repetition of an unlovely, though useful, phrase.

Changed first to "in". Dudley Miles (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Aspal Close – if one tried really hard it would be possible to imagine that six was the total number of bats rather than of bat species. And in "There is a car park and a football pitch", I'd make the verb plural to match the two nouns, as you do elsewhere on the page.

Fixed. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Church Meadow – "frogs, newts toads and many dragonflies" could, perhaps, do with a comma after newts.

Fixed. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Fen Alder Carr – I wondered why "siskin" wasn't blue-linked.

Siskin links to a disambig and the source does not specify the species. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That's my meagre haul. Certainly nothing there to stop me adding my support. Another delightful and evidently comprehensive page in a splendid series. – Tim riley talk 23:02, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Tim. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:01, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Rodw Another good list. Coming to this late it appears most of the issues I might have commented on have been resolved, However...

~~In the lead we have "borough and district councils" and then in the table "borough". I don't know all the areas but some of their articles say they Non-metropolitan districts - which is correct?~~

I am not entirely clear, but Ipswich and St Edmundsbury are described by the county council (and themselves) as boroughs and the others as districts. According to the Non-metropolitan district article they are all non-metropolitan districts - that is non-unitary districts of non-metropolitan counties - but some non-metropolitan districts are boroughs. Maybe change the table heading from borough to district? Dudley Miles (talk) 23:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Changing the column header to District would work for me.— Rod ^talk 06:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 12:24, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The description of Spring Wood, Belstead includes the claim that "There are small-leaved limes in groups several metres in diameter, which are genetically one tree, as a result of coppicing decades ago." I have no doubt that this is true but I can't see it supported in either of the references used.

This is on page 6 of the Local Wildlife News. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My error - I see it now.— Rod ^talk 06:54, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~The description of Moreton Hall Community Woods says "This site in six separate nearby areas.." and I wasn't quite sure what this meant.~~

This was intended to convey that the six areas all close to each other. Deleted "nearby". Dudley Miles (talk) 23:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find much else to comment on.— Rod ^talk 20:16, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your comments. Dudley Miles (talk) 23:54, 7 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for another excellent list I can now Support as meeting the criteria.— Rod ^talk 17:51, 8 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passed; promoting. --Pres N 19:46, 9 November 2017 (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.

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