Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Sussex Wildlife Trust/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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) 00:25, 4 February 2020 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Sussex Wildlife Trust

[edit]

Sussex Wildlife Trust (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 11:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is the latest in my nominations of wildlife trusts. It is in the same format as other wildlife trust FLs, such as Norfolk and Kent. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:30, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from CAPTAIN MEDUSA
  • When talking about a currency can you include &nbsp which adds Non-breaking space. For example £5.7 million (please view this in edit mode)
  • Remove all of the unused parameters from the Infobox Organization.
  • All of the sources need to be archived.
  • Unused parameter from ref 7 can be removed (date=)
  • foxes can be unlinked as they are common terms.
  • The image in infobox needs more info in caption i.e. when it was taken, and where it is located.

Once the comments have been fixed. I will be more than happy to support.___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk (We are the champions, my friends) 16:08, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments
  • "This site has ancient woodland and species rich unimproved grassland. The wood has standards of pedunculate oak and coppice" - in this context, what is a "standard"? And should "coppice" be plural?
  • "All three British species of woodpecker breed breed on the site" - duplicate word
Source and images reviews
Resolved comments from Giants2008 (Talk) 17:42, 30 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comments –
  • Eridge Rocks: Is there any reason that the last "and" in the note is italicized?
  • It wouldn't hurt to have a cite for note c, if it isn't covered by that entry's reference.
  • In ref 1, the publisher probably shouldn't be italicized since that isn't done for any of the other Sussex Wildlife Trust-published sources
  • The template used for ref 3 doesn't seem to allow for an access date to be added, so that's missing from this cite. I would just add it manually after the template to make that reference's formatting nice and clean. Giants2008 (Talk) 23:27, 29 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dank:

  • "Ramsar site, an internationally important wetland site": I've seen this language many times, and I want to respect consensus, but it seems to me that "internationally important" is in Wikipedia's voice here, when it should be attributed to the Ramsar listing, or maybe reworded, for instance as "a site listed by the intergovernmental Ramsar Convention". YMMV. If some Python Convention had added this site to their list of sites of breathtaking beauty, we wouldn't describe it as a "Python Convention site of breathtaking beauty", we'd just say that it's a Python Convention site.
  • "360 degree view": 360-degree view
  • "unusual silver-spotted skipper": Does "unusual" mean uncommon, or odd, or something else?
  • "It has a rich invertebrate fauna and breeding heathland birds include nightjars and stonechats.": comma after "fauna" to avoid the (tiny) garden path.
  • "endangered with extinction": I get that you don't want people to misread that the fly is in some other kind of danger, but this sounds wrong to me. Try: endangered species of fly, a fly in danger of extinction, etc.
  • "high quality water": not sure what this means ... non-stagnant water? unpolluted water?
  • "two which": two of which
  • "There is a variety of breeding woodland birds": "variety" sounds singular to some readers and plural to others, which means it winds up sounding wrong no matter what you do. I'd probably avoid the verb entirely.
  • FL criteria: it appears comprehensive and appropriately sourced, and meets the other comprehensiveness criteria, judging from similar lists. Also meets the navigation and stability criteria. - Dank (push to talk) 04:28, 2 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting. --PresN 22:09, 3 February 2020 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Sussex_Wildlife_Trust/archive1&oldid=939043239"