Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sale, Greater Manchester/archive2

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 not promoted 01:11, 7 July 2007.

[edit] Sale, Greater Manchester

previous FAC

I believe this article passes the FA criteria. Epbr123 13:28, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Two opposes in the previous FAC were based on comments written on another FAC you had submitted at the same time. I have no idea what FAC that was, so I can only ask you this: have you cleared up the issues raised by SandyGeorgia? DevAlt 13:38, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I have. I have fixed the problems with wikilinking and the sources. Epbr123 13:43, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
I haven't yet checked this article, but yes, Epbr cleared up my objections on the three other articles. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:44, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

I am unable to provide the page numbers of book sources as they were found by other users. I have contacted the users, asking them to provide the numbers. Epbr123 13:51, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Support I was the one who provided the sources, as I borrowed the books from my local library the page numbers will take time, which at the moment I do not have but fully intend to find. I think that the page numbers are a very minor issue that should not prevent this article becoming FA. I should point out that I am not impartial as I have heavily editted this article but I believe it meets the FA criteria. Nev1 15:23, 18 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Questions/Concerns:
    • The History section stops at WWII.
    • Some of the information listed in the census table is repeated in the body of the text. Also, some is repeated in the Religion section (weak section, might make a good paragraph in the Demographics section, though).
    • What does the Fair Use logo Image:Sale FC logo.jpg add to the article that cannot go in the text?
    • Who provide Sale with utilities, such as drinking water, sewage, electricity, etc.?

--maclean 23:41, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

      • Recent history is incorporated into the rest of the article. The census table is for comparison with other areas, whereas the text gives more detailed stats. I think the consensus is that images of football club logos are acceptable, as per most Featured football articles. WikiProject UK geography doesn't regard the mention of utility providers as relevant, but I'll try to include them anyway. Epbr123 00:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)
        • Would that be relevant? Since privatisation, pretty much any commercial utility company can supply electricity or gas to anywhere in the UK, for instance. They're not necessarily linked to local areas like they used to be. ---- Eric 23:46, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose—1a, 2a. I started copy-editing the lead, but gave up. Lots of redundancy; ideas awkwardly merged into sentences (why the population bit in amonst all of the locational information?). The lead is composed of three shortish paragraphs that don't really serve the reader well. Tony 09:52, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
    • I have made improvements. Is it enough? Epbr123 22:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
      • An editor has reverted your copy-edit of the lead, calling it "grammatically strange, and inconsistent with much of the UK... and, is hardly an advanced or incredibly scholarly edit to make by anyone or any standards". So if that's a problem, you'll have to discuss it with them. Epbr123 13:15, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
        • I've also raised concerns as to your ownership of this article and am somewhat displeased with your contributions to my talk page and others. Please allow others to contribute to this article, and have their concerns treated with respect on the article's talk page. You've also used some misleading edit summaries and falsifications when asserting how the content should be worded - I wanted to let you know (assuming good faith) incase you were not aware of these issues. Jza84 14:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose.
    • Comprehensiveness: The Geography section ignores the built environment (eg. village layout - a map would help greatly - infrastructure, buildings, residential/commercial/industrial neighbourhoods, etc.) Drinking water source is not identified though the River Mersey is mentioned: is that where the town gets its drinking water from? The Demographics section is limited to 2001, with no indication if the demographics are changing (eg. growing/shrinking, aging, etc.). If I'm understanding the Civic history and Political divisions sections correctly, the town of Sale doesn't have a local government itself but is instead apart of the Metropolitan Borough of Trafford, so what services does the Borough provide Sale?
    • Prose: The Demographics section consists of lists of census data.
    • Images: Unnecessary Fair Use of Image:Sale FC logo.jpg. A picture of their team in action would be more appropriate.
  • Otherwise this is a very good article and has one of the best Notable residents sections I have seen. --maclean 19:17, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Improvements made. Epbr123 09:08, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
      • I have now improved the village layout and demographics sections. Epbr123 17:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Oppose Even though I have contributed to this article I oppose the nomination. Much for the same reasons as Tony. But in particular, ideas awkwardly merged into sentences, simply to satisfy the perceived FA criteria. ---- Eric 21:15, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Please provide more specific examples. Thanks. Epbr123 22:35, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


After the arrival of the Bridgewater Canal in 1765 and the railway in 1849, Sale grew into a commuter town for workers in Manchester.

So which was it? The canal or the railway? There's quite a big difference, over 80 years if my elementary mathematics hasn't let me down. Was the canal a commuter route before the arrival of the railway? ---- Eric 23:26, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Fixed. Anything else? Epbr123 23:30, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


*Not fixed at all. Your change has simply piled confusion upon confusion. Are you really claiming that people in 1765 were commuting between Sale and Manchester via the Bridgewater Canal? ---- Eric 01:27, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
  • It says after 1765, not in 1765. Epbr123 01:32, 1 July 2007 (UTC)


  • So provide some evidence that in 1766, or at least before the arrival of the railway in 1849, Sale had become a commuter town.
    • I have changed to wording to make it less ambiguous. I hope that's resolved your concerns. Epbr123 09:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
On the bad side, ome of the content does not remain focussed (some content goes into to much detail into another topic - drinking water supplies), nor is particularly well defined ("probably", "other areas"). Some internal links are overly repeated; most of the external links are not directly related to the article (Trafford council, Bridgewater Canal). I personally don't believe the latter parts of the second and third paragraphs in the lead are well defined or adequately sum up Sale as a whole and go into too much detail. The Sale war memorial image is a little dubious as to it's quality for an FA article.
I'd consider double checking the UK Geography settlement guidelines and contacting members of the Wikipedia:WikiProject Greater Manchester for their input. On the plus side I think this article's length, paragraphing and referencing is at FA standard. I'd be happy to help also. Jza84 00:17, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
some external links and wikilinks have been removed. Drinking water supplies was requested by an FA reviewer. "probably" and "other areas" can't be removed without going into more detail, which you have objected to. The latter parts of the second and third paragraphs in the lead are needed to summarise the economy and notable residents sections. I don't think there are any guidelines against slightly poor quality images. Epbr123 08:21, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Drinking water supplies too detailed? Settlements live and die by access to drinking water. It is the most basic service provided to communities. Access to water is a fundamental part of any settlement's geography, how it relates to its surrounding natural environment. --maclean 10:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Information on water supply etc isn't too hard too get hold of, the question is where to place it in the article. If some editors are worried about excessive detail, it would take only one sentence: "Sale utilities are supplied by United Utilities[1]." Is it worth including? Nev1 10:24, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Exactly - I hardly think it is suitable, and doubt any other major encyclopedia would add this kind of material. Indeed Oxygen is needed for life, but we don't put air quality results in the articles, nor food transportation arragements, and lists of doctors. I found it a very strange statement to include when reading it. Jza84 12:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
Quiet, don't give them ideas. Nev1 12:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
  • I was asked to look again. I chose the start of the History section.

"Evidence suggests that the area around Sale was inhabited during Roman, Anglo-Saxon and prehistoric times. A Neolithic arrow head, evidence of Saxon habitation, and Roman coins have been found in the area.[12] The town is on the route of a Roman road between Chester and Manchester, now part of the A56 road. The name Sale is derived from the Anglo-Saxon word 'seale', meaning 'at the sallow tree'. This provides evidence that Sale began as an Anglo-Saxon settlement.[1] Though not mentioned in the Domesday Book, the first documented reference to the township of Sale dates from the 12th century. This is further evidence of pre-Norman habitation as townships were a Saxon development.[1]"

    • "Evidence" x 4. To start with, the first one is redundant, since you provide a reference as evidence. Just make the statement and link to the arrow head with a semicolon, not a stop ("The area around ..."). Comma after "habitation" would be nice.

Or this bit: "Its lodge, now used by Sale Golf Club, and its dovecote still remain. Crossford Bridge, which carries the northbound carriageway of the A56 road over the River Mersey, existed as early as 1538.[9]" "The lodge" is more idiomatic. The comma after "Club" is awkward. So is "still remain"—recast the sentence. "Existed as early as" better as "dates back to at least".

"The canal enabled the transport of goods and people in and out of the town easier than previously possible. The canal was utilised as a means of commuting and Sale residents were able to catch the ‘swift packet’ to work.[1]" "Easier" is ungrammatical. Why not just "more easily."? "Used", not "utilised", the ugliest word around. "A means of commuting"—why not just "The canal was a means of commuting [to where?], on the "swift packet". MOS says double quotes.

It's a little better, but not nearly good enough. Bring on board another one or two good copy-editors who haven't yet seen it. Couple of hours of intensive work required by them. Tony 14:37, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

I've instigated the changes Tony highlighted, except for "Existed as early as". Replacing it with "dates back to at least" would be repeating the phrase within the paragraph. Nev1 15:01, 4 July 2007 (UTC)
My notes here exemplify the need for more thorough copy-editing throughout. They were examples taken at random. Tony 05:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I was asked by the LoCE to check the article for copyediting, and I corrected the few errors there, mainly replacing slang and the vernacular with the "Queen's English" e.g. pub --> public house. Editus Reloaded 10:20, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
I fixed some more grammar issues, but some parts are still clunky despite my best efforts. There's perhaps some reorganization necessary, but I will need to think on it a bit first. MSJapan 17:21, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Since Sale is an English settlement, shouldn't the article use Queen's English as opposed to American English as Erythromycin has now changed it to? Nev1 20:42, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

  • I've changed center back to centre. I'm sure Erythromycin won't mind too much. Epbr123 20:55, 5 July 2007 (UTC)
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.