Wikipedia:Peer review/Oldham/archive1

Oldham

I've listed this article for peer review because I believe it is close to the WP:GA standard. It's classed as "Top" importance by the WikiProject Greater Manchester too.

I've pretty much written the article myself, so there's bound to be mistakes/issues with some text, hense the peer review request from a wider readership. I'm keen to get both the semi-automated and manual feedback on how I can improve any/all sections of the article. At the time of the request I'm aware there are two statements requesting citation, but I'm on to sorting those within the next few days!

Thanks, -- Jza84 · (talk) 23:15, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dihydrogen Monoxide

And-Rew (talk · contribs) (and old adoptee of mine) asked me to take a look at this, so here goes. I'm notoriously lazy at PR, but here are some quick and easy comments :)

Firstly, take a look at Brownhills, currently a featured article candidate.

"Oldham is a large town in Greater Manchester, England.[1]" - That's a bit too obvious, you don't need to source it.

Not done We have had problems with an annoymous user in the past changing "Greater Manchester" to "Lancashire". The source is there to assert verifiability.

"Toponymy" section should either be in the lead or somewhere else (can't think where), unless there's more notable stuff about it to mention. -- Jza84 · (talk)

Not done WP:UKCITIES recommends the History section, though I do have material I can add to boost this section. -- Jza84 · (talk)

""Royd" mill, built in 1907,[3] and seen here in 1983, was just one of Oldham's peak of 360 textile mills which operated night and day." (image caption) - It's very rare to have refs in image captions. In fact, as that image isn't mentioned in the article...I dunno *shrugs* Anyways, I'd remove the ref at least.

Not done It's difficult finding an appropriate image of Oldham's former "mill-scape", though they do exist. This image is the best I've found thusfar. The source merely strengthens verifiability.

"it has been said that "if ever the Industrial Revolution placed a town firmly and squarely on the map of the world, that town is Oldham."[5]" - Said by who?

Not done I'm not sure the specific historian is helpful - and it is an assertion that's quite well known (at least in the UK). I could say "a local historian"? Though it is referenced. -- Jza84 · (talk)

{{fact}}s - as you noted in your intro, but it makes my review look substantial! :P
The third paragraph of the Coal mining, engineering and Platts section is quite long (read: too long)

Not done Yes I agree with this. I'm awaiting for the delivery of a book about Oldham's coal mining, which will then allow me to provide citation and elaborate upon material. This should then fix this imbalance. -- Jza84 · (talk)

"The Riot Act was read in 1852 on election day following a mass public brawl over the Reform Act,[23] and irregularities with paliamentary candidate nominations.[9]" - Stubby paragraph - merge into another?

Done Merged into another paragraph.

What's the permission deal with [1]?

Done I've made this clearer and provided a full rationale.

Units (such as km etc.) should be wikilinked at least once.

Done

Areas and suburbs of Oldham - Lots of redlinks, enjoy!
Take this to GAC!

— H ₂O — 09:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've inserted comments at the time of this sig. Thanks ever so much for the input! Though there's alot of things "not done", I aim to fix these asap! Thanks again, -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Derek's Comments

I don't like the use of the term "Anglian peoples". The page it links to doesn't mention the phrase. Does it mean Anglo-Saxons or Angles, or something more specific?--Derek Andrews 13:02, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done - The book says "Anglian" but I know from other sources it really means the Anglo-Saxons, -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The wikilink to spindle is inappropriate as this article is about drop spindles which are not used industrially. It might be shuttles they are referring too?--Derek Andrews 13:14, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done- ~~The source I have says spindles, and doesn't elaborate much beyond that. Perhaps there is a better link somewhere? -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

Can I suggest piping it to Cotton-spinning machinery which mentions spindles, albeit in passing, but I think it gives a clearer idea.--Derek Andrews 20:36, 3 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've done this! Thanks, -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:20, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"It was not until the second half of the 19th century when Oldham became the world's manufacturing centre for cotton spinning." Should 'when' be replaced with 'that'? Or maybe better: "Oldham became the world's manufacturing centre for cotton spinning in the second half of the 19th century", if that retains the true meaning.--Derek Andrews 14:51, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done You're right about this, I've fixed it! Thanks, -- Jza84 · (talk) 16:37, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 17:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]