Talk:Mendip Hills

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Mendip Hills has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.
Article Milestones Date Process Result August 14, 2006 Good article nominee Listed February 25, 2007 Peer review Reviewed March 30, 2007 Featured article candidate Not promoted Current Status: Good article

	This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to places in the UK. If you wish to contribute you can visit the project page where there are resources & guidelines, to do lists and discussions.	United Kingdom Portal
This article has been rated "GA" on the Wikipedia Version 1.0 quality scale.
On the project page you can find detailed guides on how to write about counties and settlements, as well as where to find statistics, references and other useful things. Additionally, the following have been identified as specific improvements this article needs:

	This article is supported by WikiProject British and Irish hills, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the hills and mountains of Great Britain and Ireland. If you would like to join us, please visit the project page.
GA	This article has been rated as GA-Class on the quality scale.

Contents 1 Climate section 2 Gliding 3 A few comments 4 Geology & Coords

[edit] Climate section

I think that the climate section is flawed and lets down the otherwise high quality of the article. A lot of this is text lifted from another website and relates in general to the South West of England region rather than specifically to the Mendip Hills. I suggest that any weather data that cannot be directly attributable to the Mendip Hills should be removed. As for the claim that snow falls on 8-15 days per year, I cannot remember there being more than 8 days of snowfall in the whole of the past 5 years that I have lived in the Mendips. --Cheesy Mike 16:10, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for this. When I have done previous articles in the area (eg Chew Valley), users from other parts of the world requested something about climate which gives an indication of tropical v temperate v whatever & therefore I used the bit adapted from the Met Office, SW England, as referenced in the article. Do you think we should 1) remove the whole section, 2) take out the bit about snow 3) soem other edit ?— Rod ^talk 13:01, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

I think it's fair enough to leave the section in, but it probably could do with some editing: maybe split it into 2 paras? I've made a couple of minor changes:

• the link to convective clouds was a bit baffling (the physics of convection): changed to cumulus.
• I deleted a blindingly obvious sentence about sunshine. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 18:28, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gliding

I was about to add a link to the Mendip Gliding Club, but then noticed that it had previously been delinked. I can see why; but this has had the unfortunate consequence of removing any link to gliding—which is a pity, given that other sports such as caving, climbing, abseiling and hillwalking are all linked.

As it happens Gliding is a FA & well worth reading. I wonder whether you could link to it by changing the current wording to something like the following:

There is a gliding club at Halesland Airfield near Priddy.

Incidentally, the MGC website has rather a nice aerial view of the Cheddar Reservoir: perhaps it could be included.

The Mendip article is excellent. Good luck with the FAC! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 12:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I just added a link to Mendip Gliding Club in the external links section. Also added links to other activity organisations mentioned in the article. MGC image of Cheddar Reservoir is almost certainly copyright so can't be used here. If you know the author maybe you can encourage it to be posted on Wikimedia Commons! --Cheesy Mike 13:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A few comments

Just a few comments on what is in general an excellent article. I could have made these points on the FAC page, I suppose, but it feels more appropriate to do so here.

• General Why so many en-dashes, where hyphens would do?

• Climate As I mentioned before, this would benefit from being shortened. I would suggest a separate paragraph for rainfall & reservoirs.

• Ecology Adding the scientific names of rabbits & sheep is verging on the pedantic. All the other plants & animals are fine.

• History "When William Wilberforce saw the poor conditions of the locals when he visited Cheddar". Clumsy: rephrase. "Throughout history settlement on the Mendip Hills appears to fall into two types." A little awkward, I feel: maybe rephrase?

• Mendips in the arts The link to Amazon in the Le Carré footnote doesn't work.

Otherwise a really good & informative read. My next appearance will be on the FAC page. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:40, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

PS Arts "Thomas Hardy ... and many of his publications make reference to ...". "books refer to" would be preferable to the John Majorish "publications make reference to". --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 10:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Response Thanks for the comments, a few answers 1) en-dashes - I went through & changed these for numbers following a previous comment & obviously got carried away. I've removed some. 2) Climate - I've split into 2 paras but not sure what to remove to shorten. 3) Latin names - this is advised by our ecology experts for consistency and rabbits & sheep may be unknown in some parts of the world ! 4) History - I've rephrased these - hope they are better? 5 Arts - I've fixed the amazon link. Thanks again. — Rod ^talk 11:47, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Much improved! 2) Leave it as it is, unless a met expert can suggest any improvements. 3) Latin names: fair comment—I was being a bit parochial there. 4) Reads much better now, don't you agree? 5) Hardy again: "many of his books"? You've cited one poem. I don't know his works well enough to judge; but as it stands that "many" is a weasel word.

Climate again: a quick look at the Bristol Water website suggests that the correct name in the 1840s & 1850s was the Bristol Waterworks Company. I suggest using that name followed by "(now Bristol Water)". HTH --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 15:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Response - 5) I've changed many to several as it is more than 1 but I don't want to list them. Climate - water co changed. — Rod ^talk 17:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Fine. Oh, those rabbits again ... If you are going to give the scientific name, give the species, not the order (which includes hares, among other things). I presume we're dealing with the European Rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus). --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 17:26, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Response Rabbits renamed.— Rod ^talk 18:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like the 6th in a series of novels by John Updike.

Wind turbine This para could do with a minor rewrite. The 2nd sentence threw me at first, because it sounds as if the local groups etc supported the proposal. I suggest:

The proposal was rejected by Mendip District Council, which enjoyed the support of a range of (representing a coalition of??) local groups and organisations, on the grounds that the environmental impact on the edge of the Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (or just AONB???) far(??) outweighed the nominal amount of electricity which would be generated.

Shouldn't this entire para perhaps go under Government and politics rather than History?

Sorry to go on about these details. I wouldn't bother if I didn't think this was such a good article. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 20:32, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Response I've accepted your wording & agree this explains the council & local groups positions better, however I think it is better in history as the govt & politics section is really about who controls what. Don'tapologise for the suggestions I think they are improving the article.— Rod ^talk 16:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Geology & Coords

Geology If it's Carboniferous Limestone, there's something wrong—or insufficiently explained—about the reference to "200 million years ago" (which is roughly Triassic/Jurassic). You'd better check this. It's not necessarily wrong, but the Carboniferous was roughly 360-300 Mya.

US geological usage divides the Carboniferous into Mississipian & Pennsylvanian: I suggest you make it clear in which period the Mendips were formed (I'd tell you if I knew!).

I've made a couple of minor edits in this section, including a para break to separate the mining.

Coordinates (at the top of the page). I would think you could drop the seconds, which specify the location down to 100 ft or so! The nearest minute would do (down to 1 mile or so). I haven't used this template myself, but usually you can just omit any unnecessary parameters—in this case, the seconds of lat & long. --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 17:19, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Response I've removed seconds from the location coordinates but the issues on age of rocks is a bit beyond my knowledge - the 200mya figure is from Barrington, Nicholas; Stanton, William (1977). Mendip: The Complete Caves and a View of the Hills. Cheddar: Cheddar Valley Press. ISBN 0950145920. as cited. I will try to contact a geology expert but any further advice or edits appreciated.— Rod ^talk 18:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

I've left a request for help on User talk:Geologyguy. He's been a major contributor to Carboniferous, so should know what he's talking about. Let's monitor it & see.

Glad to see the Mendips stayed put on the map when you zapped the seconds of lat & long! --NigelG (or Ndsg) | Talk 20:50, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Response I put my request for help on Talk:Geology of the British Isles it the hope that it would reach a group of knowledgeable people.— Rod ^talk 21:45, 29 March 2007 (UTC)