Talk:Old Man of Hoy/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Madalibi (talk · contribs) 13:41, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I will take care of this review tomorrow. Madalibi (talk) 13:41, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No need to wait till tomorrow! I only have a few suggestions that should be quick to address.

Prose:

The Old Man of Hoy is a 449 feet (137 m) sea stack on the island of Hoy, Orkney. It would be nice to specify that Orkney is in Scotland, as most readers of Wikipedia will not be familiar with Orkney. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think "449 feet" should be "449-foot", because it is used as a modifier.

It previously used {{convert}}, so I'll change all the instances where that doesn't look right.

The northern part of the island, including the Old Man, is an RSPB nature reserve... The "Royal Society for the Protection of Birds" is not well known internationally, so the acronym "RSPB" should be explained long-hand.

Done

It stands close... The first section should probably start with "The Old Man stands close..."

Done

Wind are faster...: singular subject with plural verb.

Oops.

...a high-energy wave climate...: I'm not sure I understand what a "wave climate" is. Is there another Wikipedia article you could link to that would explain it, or a short explanation you could add?

I've removed the reference to it. There should be an article, because it is a phrase I've seen used, but there isn't at present.

...60 metres chasm...: should be "60-metre chasm"?
Is there a difference between "red sandstone" (with piped link to Old Red Sandstone) and "Old Red Sandstone"? Is there a good reason why one should be capitalized and the other one not?
Link to headland?

Done.

40 metres crack: should be "40-metre crack"?

Template changed.

In 1992, a 40 metres (130 ft) crack had appeared... Do you mean by 1992? If it was in 1992, there is no reason to use the past perfect.

Changed it back to "by" per the sources.

The Great Climb: the title of a TV program should be either italicized or presented in quotation marks (not sure what the convention is).

Italicized - looks correct.

Could you specify who all these people who climbed the Old Man were? Were they adventurers, mountaineers, stunt actors, celebrities, etc.?

I've added that they are mountaineers, but I don't know much more than that, I'm afraid.

"E1" is the only jargon that is not explained in the article: could you add a little explanatory phrase to help uneducated readers?

Added Extremely Severe in brackets (and that's the easier ascent.)

What is RAF?

I've removed that - although it worth noting that it's probably been stolen from the British Government.

Shag is a disambiguation page. Could you specify which page is right?

Fixed.

Otherwise I have no MOS issues. The lead is short but it mentions all the aspects of the topic that are discussed in the rest of the article.

All information is verifiable and the article contains no original research. Even though I don't know anything about this topic, every aspect of the topic that I can think of is covered, and there are no unnecessary digressions. It is also stable, and it satisfies the requirement of neutrality.

Images: everything looks good! Incidentally, it would be nice if you or someone else could upload the painting of the Old Man by William Daniell that is found on the website of the Tate Gallery: http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/daniell-the-old-man-of-hoy-t02864. It's in the public domain, easy to download, and different from all the pictures of the Old Man on Wikicommons.

This is a fine article, written fluidly and without jargon. I will promote to GA as soon as the minor issues I listed above are addressed! Madalibi (talk) 14:37, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

PROMOTED Everything looks good, now. Congratulations, and keep up the good work! Madalibi (talk) 04:03, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]