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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 03:19, 3 July 2017 [1].

Northern England[edit]

Nominator(s): Smurrayinchester 12:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Northern England is, well, the northern part of England. But it's also an increasingly distinctive cultural area, shaped by centuries of Celtic, Roman, Saxon, Danish, Norman and Scottish invasion and more recently by the rise and fall of heavy industry. In this article I've tried to summarise the region's history, its economy, and its culture to explain why there is such a North–South divide in England. Unfortunately it didn't get any feedback at peer review, but it has had some useful edits from members of Wikipedia:WikiProject United Kingdom. Thanks in advance for any reviews, comments or suggestions. (Still needs a source review) Smurrayinchester 12:02, 9 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updated! Smurrayinchester 18:24, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Media review

Comments by Wehwalt[edit]

Impressive article, done through the bit on agriculture and only a few comments:

  • " The deindustrialisation that followed in the second half of the 20th century hit Northern England hard, and many Northern towns remain deprived compared to Southern England." I would cut the second use of Northern.
Done. Smurrayinchester 07:33, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Charles had to call the Long Parliament," it wasn't Long when he called it. Suggest "what became the Long Parliament" or similar.
Done. Smurrayinchester 07:33, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Have changed to say "starting in the 1950s" (the source also discusses Bangladeshi immigration in the 1970s and onwards, so that's fine). Before 1971 Bangladesh was part of Pakistan, so the sentence should still be correct without bogging the reader down in the details of the history of East Pakistan.
Thanks! Smurrayinchester 07:33, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "over the previous two decades" I might specify years, since you are saying previous to a two-year range, making exactly what you mean uncertain.
Done. This one was a bit tricky, because life expectancy stats are averaged over several year ranges. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Even before the Second World War, the Belgian coast at Ostend had become popular with Northern working-class tourists," There is a slight hint that the war caused the coast to become more popular with British tourists, which may or may not be true, but I'm not sure it's what you're driving for.
Clarified. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "of 24 national museums and galleries in England outside London, 14 are located in the North." I might put a "the" before "24" to make it clear these are the only such museums etc.
Done. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Since The Guardian moved to London in 1964" This is the first time you mention it so a link would be appropriate, as might be a way of signaling to the reader that it used to be the Manchester Guardian.
Done. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • On media, can anything be said about electronic media? More generally, there doesn't seem a lot said about the internet throughout the article. Likely towns are installing wifi through the town centre, or otherwise encouraging technology.
Done. See Northern England#Communications and the internet. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the disbanding of the Cheshire, Lancashire and Yorkshire military bands" possibly a synonym for "disbanding", considering ...
Ha ha, good point! Went for "dismissal" Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is some unsourced matter under "rugby". Also under "Rail"
Assuming you're referring to the lists of rugby teams and list of light rail systems, done. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Jews were forcefully expelled from England by the 1290 Edict of Expulsion" This may be an ENGVAR thing, but "forcefully" comes across more as "energetically" in American English. Also, "expelled ... Expulsion". consider "forcibly banished" or some such.
Done - your wording sounds better. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Have clarified. Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
That's all I have.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:45, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! Smurrayinchester 11:13, 18 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice article on a large and somewhat indefinite subject. I certainly learned a few things from it!--Wehwalt (talk) 02:22, 19 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Edwininlondon[edit]

I enjoyed reading this well-researched, well-structured, well-written article. A few comments so far:

Removed the sentence. It doesn't add anything, and it reminds me of Bart Simpson's awful "Libya is a land of contrasts" essay filler. Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, this is unclear to me. Foreign names should be in italics, but proper names generally not. Going to follow the FA Greater Manchester and unitalicise them. Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I also thought that when I created the legend, but I just double checked and they are identical colours (#dfc779). I guess it's an optical illusion caused by the contrast with the grey box around it. Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Have added some examples of place names (for the most part, Northern surnames are taken from place names - Scargill is Norse name for instance, but it's derived from the village of Scargill. The sentence is already a bit bloated, so I've just taken out the mention of surnames) Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Added a mention of missionaries. Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Done Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's a slightly confusing sentence. Changed. Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think this is OK - United States at the first instance, US afterwards. I do the same thing with European Union/EU. (MOS says that US and EU are both widely understood enough that they don't need explanation.) I just don't like having two uses of "United States" right next to each other. Maybe it's just inelegant variation. Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oops! Thanks. Smurrayinchester 18:29, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A bit more later. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:05, 30 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As promised, here's more:

Fixed Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, fixed. Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Changed. Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All the footnotes are referenced.* I've changed a couple to nested footnotes where the footnote needs a separate citation, but in cases where the footnote is simply a parenthetical remark (i.e. explaining the non-standard definition of "English-speaking", or enumerating the 10 most deprived boroughs) to a sentence that is cited, I've not added a reference, per WP:CITEDENSE ("Wikipedia requires inline citations based on the content, not on the grammar and composition elements."). *(With the exception of footnote 2, which explains terminology used in the article rather than an external fact) Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In general the formatting of the references needs quite a bit of work still:

I'm going to try running a pywikibot task to convert all these - there are 87 ISBNs in this article. Run! (The only books I can see now that lack ISBNs are those are older than the ISBN system; The English Catholics in the Reign of Queen Elizabeth for instance doesn't have an ISBN in any catalogue I checked, because it was published in 1920. There are also some university theses and white papers, which don't have ISBNs either) Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Per MOS:REF, it's optional, and I don't include it because a) it's not always available and b) it clutters the reference without adding any useful information. Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I think I've caught all these now. Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Page number was a copying error. Any book where more than one page/page range is cited appears in the bibliography, so Harvard referencing works. Books that are only referenced once are simply footnoted - I don't think it helps to clutter the bibliography with books that are only mentioned to cite a single fact. Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
They should be, although I listed the books without named authors (i.e. the IPPR North and Highways England whitepapers) after the ones with authors. I could mix them in if that makes more sense. Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Edwininlondon (talk) 10:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! If I can get pywikibot working, I should be able to iron out the last point later today. Smurrayinchester 12:41, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, have managed to convert the page to ISBN-13. (pywikibot doesn't make it easy!) Smurrayinchester 19:56, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
All fine. I support. Edwininlondon (talk) 16:33, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source review[edit]

Thank you very much! Smurrayinchester 18:18, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie[edit]

I've copyedited; please revert at will. Overall this is in outstanding shape and the prose is excellent. I have a few nitpicks.

Wait, that was my misreading (I thought you said "not only"). OK, changed and all clear. Smurrayinchester 11:38, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

-- I expect to support once these minor points are addressed. A very impressive article. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:33, 1 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Thanks for the comments! Could you explain the first one a little more? Smurrayinchester 08:57, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:16, 2 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note[edit]

Appear to be quite a few duplinks in the article; I won't hold up promotion over them but pls check and rationalise as appropriate (you can use this script to highlight -- note that it boxes the initial instances in green and the subsequent/duplicate instances in red). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:19, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Looks like quite a few crept in during editing. All resolved (except for links that duplicate those in the lede). Smurrayinchester 08:30, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
More