The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by SandyGeorgia 19:13, 26 March 2011 [1].

---

Somerset Levels[edit]

Somerset Levels (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Somerset Levels/archive1

Toolbox
Analysis Citation bot External links

Nominator(s): — Rod ^talk 20:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Somerset Levels cover a large area of low lying wetland, with complex geology and ecology. Man has been living on the Levels since the Paleolithic era, with many loosing their lives in floods, and trying to drain the area for about a thousand years. Its even been the site of several battles - so there is something in the article for almost everyone.

To reach FA quality has been a long process with gradual improvement since it achieved GA back in the summer of 2007. Recent work has included a helpful peer review by Finetooth and an extensive copy edit by Malleus Fatuorum, along with input from several other editors and a push on the referencing. I now feel it meets the FA criteria and would welcome your comments.— Rod ^talk 20:30, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - A locator map for the area, similar to the one shown for Exmoor would be nice. P. S. Burton (talk) 17:24, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the comment. Map making is beyond my capabilities, and it is difficult because of the lack of explicit boundaries, however the map at File:Map of Somerset Levels.png was kindly made for this purpose following the peer review - I suppose that could be made larger if that would help?— Rod ^talk 17:32, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I was more thinking of an insert, similar to this File:Exmoor National Park UK location map.svg. The map workshop might be able to help you. P. S. Burton (talk) 13:03, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I see now. You are suggesting an inset showing the position in the British Isles. I have asked User:Nilfanion who created the map for this article whether it would be possible to add this. If not I will contact the map workshop.— Rod ^talk 13:28, 16 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• An insert of the British Isles has kindly been added by Nilfanion. Is this the sort of thing you wanted or were you thinking of Template:Location map England with a red dot on it? This would probably be appropriate for an infobox, however I can't find a suitable one as the Levels are not a protected area in the way that Exmoor or the Mendip Hills are.— Rod ^talk 08:48, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs, but a couple of dead external links- [2] and [3]. this one also hit its bandwidth limit, but I'm sure it will return. 1 external redirect which may lead to link rot; see it with the tool in the upper right of this page. --PresN 00:38, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for these checks - all were working fine a few days ago when I last checked them.

• The Langport and River Parrett Visitor Centre seems to be affected by the use of toolserver looking to the server as if they are redirects. It gives error 302 "Excessed redirect limit (8)" but if you click on the URL directly it works without problems.
• The Brent Knoll link works fine for me
• I'm not sure about the Drainage Boards Newsletter bandwidth problem. The top level of that domain gives the same error, even though it is a .gov.uk (government) domain. I will check again in a day or two to see if the problem has resolved.

• The drainage boards newsletter is working fine again now.— Rod ^talk 21:49, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I presume the potential linkrot you are referring to is 40ft sculpture unveiled in Somerset This is a BBC news page and although the link checker always highlights these as 301 "Redirect preserves id number". The BBC news URLs have remained stable for some years.— Rod ^talk 09:40, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The 8x redirect was ending up at their main page yesterday; seems to be fine now as does the mysteriousbritain one. I do actually click on the links, the tool server has quirks sometimes. As to the BBC one, I know about the /1/ versus /2/ just being which server it sends you to, but the actual redirect I meant was the /uk/ being changed to /uk_news/. Whatever, It's not a big deal in this case. --PresN 20:15, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

• Earwig's and Coren's tools found only mirrors. Manual spotchecking not done yet - I'll try to do the next couple of days
• I'm somewhat confused as to the purpose of your Bibliography section - some of these sources are cited in References, but include full bibliographic information there, while others are not cited anywhere. I also see discrepancies in citation formatting in this section, and some slight variations between identical entries in Bibliography and References - for example, what is the actual title of the Havinden work? This section needs work

• As far as I can see, Havinden (1970) is correctly transcibed using the ((cite book)) template. The title is "The Somerset Landscape", it is one volume of a series entitled: "The making of the English landscape". What exactly is your concern? Pyrotec (talk) 08:55, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• I have changed this to further reading - the intention is to give details of other relevant sources which are not directly referenced in the text. I have removed those which are now used as references and hopefully improved the format.

• "King Andy"? Other than that, looks fine. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:25, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comma added.— Rod ^talk 08:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Be consistent in whether you include counties for English publisher locations, or indeed whether you include publisher locations at all

• I have removed place of publication for consistency

• Use a consistent format for references with multiple authors

• I have revised these - hopefully got them all

• Missed a few - for example 34 and 36

• Hopefully fixed now.

• All citations to books should have page numbers

• I believe all the books now have page numbers

• Missed a few here - for example 37. Also, make sure page ranges use ndashes and single pages don't use "pp."

• I have never understood the mdash v ndash argument but have used citation bot which has hopefully fixed these and found one occurrence of pp for a single page - if there are others I can't see them.— Rod ^talk 08:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• I don't have a copy of Hollinrake, Charles; Hollinrake, Nancy (2007). "Chapter 9: The Water Roads of Somerset". In Blair, John (ed.). Waterways and Canal-Building in Medieval England. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-921715-1. to hand but will ask for help or get a copy from the library.— Rod ^talk 08:35, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Now done. Pyrotec (talk) 09:57, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• It's good that you indicate format for PDF sources, but you should do the same for doc files

• I could only find one .doc & have added format= to this one

• Spell out or link acronyms like ONS on first appearance

• Done - hopefully got them all

• I'm having some issues with the webcitation.org links - they don't seem to be loading for me

• Work OK for me but can be a bit slow

• Use consistent names for things. For example, Dovecote Press or The Dovecote Press Ltd.?

• Consistency improved

• Still needs work - for example, ref 17 uses "Dovecote Press", 21 uses "The Dovecote Press Ltd." and 71 uses "Dovecote press". Rechecked 04:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC), still not done

• I found and fixed another one.— Rod ^talk 20:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Be consistent on what is linked when, what is italicized, etc - lots of minor inconsistencies

• Several were in italics as work= had been used rather than publisher= - hopefully got them all now

• Also check date formatting, how you format works within larger works, etc

• Sorry I can't see this error

• For example, ref 18 uses "28 January 2010" and ref 19 uses "2011-02 24"; ref 37 uses "In Blair, John" and ref 132 uses "In B. Purdy"

• Requested changes Done, but I'm not sure why an accessdate is considered necessary (ignoring date consistency for the moment) for a map that exists in paper form - it has an isbn after all. Pyrotec (talk) 17:03, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Still some minor inconsistencies, but much improved. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• What is this source? Who publishes it?

• I have replaced this source as same information is available in the English Nature "Conservation Profile" document

• Check formatting on Ashe

• Changed

• What makes this a reliable source?

• According to this page the content on the site is based on Cope, Julian (2011). The Modern Antiquarian: A Pre-millennial Odyssey Through Megalithic Britain : Including a Gazetteer to Over 300 Prehistoric Sites. Thorsons. ISBN 978-0722535998. However I don't have a copy of the book so I'm relying on the web site for this citation, however I was worried about sourcing legends about giants so gave three references.

• I agree that this isn't reliable, since the it is SPS. I noticed that the 'Landscape of King Arthur' mentioned in a post is on google books though (only in snippet view) but you can confirm that the post is a faithful copy and then cite the book instead. SmartSE (talk) 11:23, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• What about this?

• I would agree this is a commercial site selling coins. I could not find another source for the specific age of the coins in the Shapwick Hoard. I will remove that information if required.

• This?

• It is the site of a campaign group - only used to support the claim that there had been local opposition to the electricity cables. The other details about the proposals are covered in the next ref (currently 115) from the BBC

• I found a BBC article about protests against the pylons and have removed the link above. SmartSE (talk) 11:12, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I have made further changes, so the relevant citations are now 116 & 117 (now two, not one). Pyrotec (talk) 12:23, 19 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Spell out journal names (ex. Topham)

• Done

• Publisher for ref 106?

• Done (this was a formatting error using a capital P for publisher=)

• As a general point, I would prefer to see fewer sources that are either a) commercial or b) promotional. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:53, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a few spotchecks now, and am concerned:

• "about 6 metres (20 ft) above mean sea level (roughly west of the M5 motorway). The inland Moors can be 6 metres (20 ft) below peak tides" - not in source

• That has been added since this FAC nomination. I believe it is an accurate description & I will look for a source and contact the editor concerned.

• I reworded the section and added a citation to cover it. It currently states: "The Levels are a coastal sand and clay barrier about 6 metres (20 ft) above mean sea level (O.D.) (roughly west of the M5 motorway). The general elevation of the inland Moors is 3 to 3.7 metres (10 to 12 ft) O.D. and with peak tides of 7.6 to 7.9 metres (25 to 26 ft) O.D. recorded at Bridgwater and Burnham On Sea, respectively, the inland Moors lie below peak tides.(Ref)". Pyrotec (talk) 21:02, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "Brent Knoll has been inhabited since at least the Bronze Age" - source?

• Reference added

• "shows a seasonal and a diurnal variation, but due to the modifying effect of the sea the range is less than in most other parts of the UK" vs "Temperature shows both a seasonal and a diurnal variation, but due to the modifying effect of the sea the range is less than in most other parts of the UK" - very close paraphrasing
• "January is the coldest month with mean minimum temperatures between 1 °C (33.8 °F) and 2 °C (35.6 °F). July and August are the warmest months in the region with mean daily maxima around 21 °C (69.8 °F)." vs "January is the coldest month with mean minimum temperatures between 1 and 2 °C." and "July and August are the warmest months in the region with mean daily maxima ranging from around 19 °C"
• "The south-west of England has a favoured location with respect to the Azores high pressure when it extends its influence north-eastwards towards the UK, particularly in summer." vs "The south west of England has a favoured location with respect to the Azores high pressure when it extends its influence north eastwards towards the UK particularly in summer"
• "Rainfall tends to be associated with Atlantic depressions or with convection. The Atlantic depressions are more vigorous in autumn and winter and most of the rain which falls in those seasons in the south-west is from this source." vs "Rainfall tends to be associated with Atlantic depressions or with convection. The Atlantic depressions are more vigorous in autumn and winter and most of the rain which falls in those seasons in the south west is from this source"

Neutral - the major concerns above and the egregious instances of close paraphrasing found on earlier spotchecks have been addressed. However, I have not checked every source, and among those I did check I still found some information not supported by the source (for example, "In December 1998, there were 20 days without sun recorded at Yeovilton"). Good work has been done so for, but more is still needed. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:15, 5 March 2011 (UTC) Oppose. Too many instances of close paraphrasing/plagiarism. I've only checked a few sources; this article needs to be checked top to bottom for plagiarism, and potentially for copyvio issues. There are also some issues with sources not supported the material they cite. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:22, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• The paragraph about climate which is all cited to the single Met Office source has been used on several geography articles in this part of the country (egs Glastonbury (GA), Somerset, Mendip Hills & Exmoor (which are all FAs) & copied many times (with little or no variation) so it is difficult to identify exactly where it was first written, although I probably copied it into this article and should have checked. I will reword this to remove the close paraphrasing & then try to find all the others which use it and revise those as well. Thank you for all your comments.— Rod ^talk 18:43, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I have now reworded the climate paragraph and replaced the copyvio/close paraphrase paragraph on 40+ other articles which all use it. Thanks for spotting this it was obviously more widely used than I realised.— Rod ^talk 22:12, 18 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "20 days without sun recorded at Yeovilton" now referenced to an archive of the site as the latest version doesn't seem to include it.— Rod ^talk 20:33, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SupportQuery I've made a few tweaks, hope you like them, if not well it is a wiki...

1. "A number of Saxon charters document the incorporation of areas of moor in estates, with several towns, villages and hill forts being built on the natural "islands" of slightly raised land," This seems to be combining two different things, a settlement pattern that is skewed towards higher land and the Anglo Saxon changes. Hill forts elsewhere are not usually of Anglo-Saxon origin, could you check this please. resolved now thanks
2. There is some overlinking such as bird, by all means link where you have a relevant link, but if I see bird linked in an article I rather expect it to be piped to an article about the bird life of that area rather than birds generally. I've fixed some of these, also generally we should link the first occurrence and repeat sparingly where relevant and much further down the article.
3. "which the Lords supported but the Commoners opposed" it isn't clear to me whether this is talking about local Lords and Commoners or the houses of Lords and Commons. If the former I suggest adding the word local, if the latter I suggest replacing Commoners with a piped link to Commons.
4. The map is helpful at least as far as the river system goes, but doesn't show many of the features and places mentioned in the article, nor does it show the area of the levels -one shade of green is clearly the lowest land but it is not stated what the maximum height is of this colour and therefore whether this coincides with the levels.

ϢereSpielChequers 16:33, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments and edits (all of which seem fine to me). I have revised the conflation of Saxon charters & hillforts, changing the chronology in both lead & appropriate section. I've just checked with a couple of the relevant books & it was "local" lords, at the request of the king - commoners were worried about loosing grazing rights. Some overlinking has been reduced since your comment and I will look for others. I have asked Nilfanion about a key for the map giving the heights the coulours represent, but what other features and places would you like to see included, without overcrowding the map? - perhaps I should change this to a lead image and increase its size?— Rod ^talk 18:34, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing the hillforts bit, and explaining the commoners - I've added the grazing rights bit. Ideally the map should show the levels themselves as they are the subject of the article, and the features - villages, rivers and motorway referred to in the article. The more incidental the mention of an item the less important to include it on the map - so the listed villages are unimportant as would be a place like Wells which is on the map you are using, but is only mentioned once. ϢereSpielChequers 23:15, 21 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved the map to the lead & made it bigger. The significant rivers are included, so do you feel the M5 motorway should be included & which villages?. I've added the heights the colours represent - but not sure of the best way to do this in the caption.— Rod ^talk 08:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Currently the scale is a tad overwhelming, and I'm pretty sure that the lowest altitude bit covers rather more than just the levels. I think that the motorway is such a feature of the modern day that it should be in, but this is one of those articles that would really benefit from different maps for different eras, or one of those graphics that changes over time, in this case showing the flooding of the land in the mesolithic, the Roman era, the post roman era, the Anglo-saxon era etc. Of course that depends on whether it can be done and whether it can be sourced - so I wouldn't oppose FA status for the lack of it. Different maps for different eras would enable you to depict more info without cluttering one map and would give a great way to show the fluctuating shoreline and extent of things like the great flood ϢereSpielChequers 17:38, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• That information exists in graphical form in, "Williams (1970) The Draining of the Somerset Levels" for instance, but under UK copyright law that book is still in Copyright: it is claimed by Cambridge University (not the author). Any work based on it would be regarded as a derivative work and would therefore not be copyfree. Pyrotec (talk) 22:30, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've moved to support per the improved mapping. I'd have liked to see a map that actually shows the levels themselves, but accept that we can't use what isn't available under an appropriate licence. ϢereSpielChequers 13:49, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment Regarding the map, the yellow region on this map is the Somerset Levels and Moors Natural Area (That data is not free, so cannot be used here). The 10m contour is possibly a better match to that region in some places, but to split 0-20 to 0-10 and 10-20 could unbalance the map by giving undue weight to the lower altitudes. As it is the map reflects the information in the lead section, the hills and the rivers - the physical geography. I'm not convinced the M5 is that relevant, its an important road, but its merely something that passes through and has no apparent significance to the Levels themselves. For that matter, the Willow Man is more relevant to the Levels than the motorway. That said, if including the road network (not just the M5) would provide helpful context to the map then it is worth including.--Nilfanion (talk) 13:35, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Here is an image copyright review by Stifle.
• All images are properly licensed (although it took me a while to ascertain this for the OS map). Stifle (talk) 15:13, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Resolved comments from Reaper Eternal))

Comments by Reaper Eternal

I try to be direct in addressing issues, so I'm sorry if this sounds a little blunt. I'm not commenting on anybody personally!

• 1st paragraph of "Settlements" section: "Small villages in the centre of the Levels include: Burtle, Catcott, Chilton Polden, Cossington, Edington, Greinton, Lympsham, Mark, Meare, Middlezoy, Moorlinch, Othery, Pawlett, Puriton, Shapwick, Sharpham, Stawell, Stoke St Gregory, Weare, Wedmore, Westhay, Westonzoyland and Woolavington." Unsourced. (Maybe needs ((cite map))?)

• Cite map reference added

• 2nd paragraph of "Settlements" section: "It is a natural hill of Triassic sandstone capped by Keuper marl. Excavations showed evidence of a 12th-century masonry building on the top of the hill. The northern edge of the Levels approaches the southern slopes of the Mendip Hills; from west to east it contains the settlements of Compton Bishop, Axbridge, Cheddar, Rodney Stoke, Westbury-sub-Mendip, and Wookey." Is this covered by ref #22 in paragraph #3? If so, the reference needs to be added to the end of this paragraph too.

• Two references added about Burrow Mump

• 3rd paragraph of "Settlements" section: "The position of the town on the edge of the Somerset Levels has resulted in a history dominated by land reclamation and sea defences since Roman times." Who says this? You need a source.

• Reference added

• 3rd paragraph of "Settlements" section: "Burnham was seriously affected by the Bristol Channel floods of 1607, and various flood defences have been installed since then. A concrete sea wall was built in 1911, and after the Second World War further additions to the defences were made, using the remains of a Mulberry harbour; the present curved concrete wall was completed in 1988. Highbridge, which neighbours Burnham, is near the mouth of the River Brue and the villages of East and West Huntspill." This is also unsourced.

• References added for flood & sea defences

• 1st paragraph of "Climate" section: "Along with the rest of South West England the Somerset Levels..." Comma needed after England. "In December 1998 there were..." Comma needed after 1998. "In summer a large proportion..." Comma needed after summer. There are more related issues with comma use, and I am willing to copyedit the article if the nominator wants.

• I'm never sure about too many comma's and tend to go with the copy editing of Malleus Fatuorum and others, but I would be happy to accept your kind offer.

• 5th paragraph of "Drainage" section: "The first steam pumping station was Westonzoyland Pumping Station in 1830, followed by more effective ones from 1860. Automatic electric pumps are used today." Unsourced.

• Reference added

• 6th paragraph of "Drainage" section: "Water levels are managed by the Levels Internal Drainage Boards (IDBs)..." Apostrophe needed.

• I'm not sure about apostrophes for plural abbreviations either, but I've added them.

• "Sea defences" section: The picture breaks the formatting on my computer. You probably should add a ((clear)) at the end of the paragraph.

• added

• 1st paragraph, "Sea defences" section: "Much of the area is at, or only slightly above, mean sea level, and thus was frequently flooded by the sea, a problem that was not fully resolved until the sea defences were enhanced in the early 20th century. The Parrett is the only river in the Level and Moors that does not have a clyse on it." This paragraph is completely unreferenced.

• I've rewritten this section. The referencing is now better: but, I've using 40-year old references. I need to add a more recent one, and a reviewer would (obviously) expect to see one (or more). (Note to Rod: I hope to find one at the EA-but you tend to be quicker than me at web searching). Pyrotec (talk) 22:16, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Now added current (Dec 2009) reference. Pyrotec (talk) 10:01, 25 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• "Teazel growing" section: This isn't really an issue, but could you expand this one-liner section?
• 3rd paragraph, "Biodiversity and conservation" section: "there is currently no single conservation designation covering the Levels and Moors." This is unreferenced.

• I'm not sure how there can be, as the absence of a single designation is the issue - the various designations which do apply to parts of the levels are included.

• Natural England has a designation "Natural Area" that applies to this. (See page #7 [4].) Also, this book mentions that SSSIs are patchy on the Levels & Moors, which would indicate a lack of one continuous designation. Apart from these, I can agree that such a reference might prove impossible to find, since it is a reference for a lack of information. Reaper Eternal (talk) 21:00, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• I've now added a reference which talks about how the patchwork of different designations doesn't provide the same level of protection.— Rod ^talk 09:40, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• 3rd paragraph, "Tourism" section: "It has been designated by English Heritage as a grade I listed building,^[142] and is a Scheduled Ancient Monument." Does ref #142 apply to the Scheduled Ancient Monument phrase? Also, what is the number? (I know this can be very hard to impossible to find, and definitely will not oppose if you cannot.)

• Reference moved to the end of the sentence as it says it is an SAM but I haven't been able to find the number.

• 3rd paragraph, "Tourism" section: "The barn and courtyard contain displays of farm machinery from the Victorian and early 20th-century periods. Other exhibits show local crafts, including willow coppicing, mud horse fishing on the flats of Bridgwater Bay, peat digging on the Somerset Levels, and the production of milk, cheese, and cider. In reconstructed rooms detailing domestic life in the nearby village of Butleigh, the story of one farm worker, John Hodges, is told from cradle to grave. Outside, there is a beehive and rare breeds of poultry and sheep in the cider apple orchard." This description is not sourced.

• Reference added.— Rod ^talk 20:43, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• No problems about you being "blunt"; however, I would like to be able to read your comments without having to use a magnifying glass. Was it necessary to make the comments that small? Pyrotec (talk) 20:14, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Changed. ;) Reaper Eternal (talk) 20:27, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments from Reaper Eternal

• 3rd paragraph, "Settlements" section: "Highbridge, which neighbours Burnham, is near the mouth of the River Brue and the villages of East and West Huntspill." This probably needs a ((cite map)).

• cite map added

• 1st paragraph, "Tourism" section: There are a large number of (1234 mi, 1974 km). This should probably be changed to (((convert|1234|mi|km|disp=comma|abbr=on))).

• convert template used.— Rod ^talk 16:54, 24 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

|}