Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/London Wildlife Trust/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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) 00:33, 3 June 2016 (UTC) [1].[reply]

London Wildlife Trust edit

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

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) and Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:09, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is a joint nomination by Chiswick Chap, who is mainly responsible for the lead, and Dudley Miles, who has worked on the sites. It uses the same format as the Herts and Middlesex Wildlife Trust, which is an FL. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:09, 20 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. Dudley Miles (talk) 22:36, 21 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
And from me! Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:40, 22 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed the yes/no formatting. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:08, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help Reywas92. All the google searches showing skipping flower beetle derive from the LWT page, so I suspect it is a typo. I think the beetle should be deleted unless you have a source to say it is Mordellistena neuwaldeggiana. What do you think? Dudley Miles (talk) 08:52, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, better to leave it out. Reywas92Talk 17:05, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reywas92Talk 07:07, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the review. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:11, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Many thanks. Dudley Miles (talk) 08:30, 27 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - Here are a few wording issues. The list itself looks good.

  • "over 40 nature reserves in Greater London,[2] One of its"... need a full stop, not just a comma.
Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "thus was in effect already a Trust reserve"... can cut "in effect"
Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "an award for its work"..... add preserving natural habitats?
No, it's not a reserve. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, but you should say what they won the award for...
  • "environment in the capital, its "Biological Recording Project".... could turn that comma into a full stop. But the next sentence would then change becoming to became.
Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "who together work on" into "who work together on"
Done. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • activities from water management to chalk grassland restoration,... not really a range, so maybe "activities including water management, chalk grasslands restoration, "
Tweaked wording. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • " per year.[7][9] The trust is " = "per year and is..."
No, the first is about reserves, the second about membership. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "on projects such as to support pollinators" - needs a bit of wording change "such as to" doesn't flow well.
Rearranged and reworded. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:27, 28 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm confused why some organisms have wikilinks, and some others do not. Is there logic behind it? For example why is water-dropwort linked but not common spotted orchid?
  • Links added. I find it difficult to get the balance between over and under linking. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • including the rare small blue.... is that the name of the creature? "small blue"?
  • why not link german hairy snail isntead of " Pseudotrichia rubiginosa"?
  • First citation is just a bare url
  • Not sure what to do about this as it was a live link a few days ago and now appears dead. Chiswick Chap is away for a few days but should be back shortly. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've replaced it with a formatted ref from LWT and one from The Wildlife Trusts. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a reason the sources are separate from citations? Why not just have citations?
  • It is usual and I think helpful to have a separate section for sources which are repeated with different page numbers. It means that the citation can be given as e.g. For a Wilder City, p. 5 and elsewhere p. 10 rather than having to give full details each time. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • If there is a section called "Sites formerly managed by the Trust", it should probably have a short description explaining why the sites are no longer managed by the trust?
  • This information is not usually available, just an old source showing the site as managed by the LWT and a recent one not. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:49, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good so far! I think these are the last of my recommendations. Mattximus (talk) 21:07, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Great article. Support as long as the citation is fixed. Mattximus (talk) 22:29, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, reviewers were quite keen to jump on this one, weren't they? Did a source review, which passed, so... promoting! --PresN 15:55, 2 June 2016 (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/London_Wildlife_Trust/archive1&oldid=723429443"