Talk:Gwbert

Review September 2011[edit]

Areas where the article can be improved.

Lead

Lead does not mention which country the settlement lies in. This is very important.

The Lead mentions a dead whale, which is then not mentioned in the article, the lead should be a brief recount of the article as a whole. The whale thing is actually trivial, though it does point to evidence of wildlife in the area and could be included in the wildlife section if approached in that manner.

Same with the shipwrecks and lifeboats. Mentioned in the lead, but not in the article. These though are notable events and facts and should be covered in a bit more detail.

Overall it feels as if the lead is actually the article before someone came along and added all the other interesting parts.

Origins of the name

5 Saints, it should be five saints, use words for numbers under eleven and as it is not a specific saint it is lower case.

Coastline

"running from here..." From where?

Wildlife

Why is the coastline unique? Unless it is meant as unique as all coastlines are unique.

Population

The 2001 census states that for Welsh speakers, 723 out of the 1145 population over 3 years old can speak, read or write Welsh. That's 63.14% not 82.8%.

Promotion as a 'fashionable watering hole'

The section title uses a quote 'fashionable watering hole' which is then not used or cited in the article.

"The local paper effused"; although I see it too, let the reader decide how a journalist or person relates events.

General points

The cites can be improved by dating and author notes. Check WP:Citations for guidance.

There is little about the town today, the population section and the lifeboat are about all that cover this period. Is it prosperous? A retirement area? Are there any schools or religious buildings? Do people commute to work?

Review overview[edit]

I believe to get this to a B class article; two sections need to be improved.

Section 2 - Modern information need to be expanded slightly to explain the settlement today.

Section 3 - The lead needs to reflect the article. The latter information from the lead needs to be moved into the main article, and the main points from the main article need to be summarised in the lead.

A vast improvement, a definite C grade, bordering on a B. FruitMonkey (talk) 17:34, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

B Grade[edit]

Work has now been done to address the issues raised. The article will never be more than low in importance, but I am quite happy that this is now a good B grade (if not higher), and have changed it accordingly. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 09:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Patch[edit]

This article mentions several times something called the "Patch", but makes no attempt to describe what this "Patch" is. It's very confusing for the reader. -- Fyrael (talk) 16:54, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

'Patch' is simply a place-name. It might seem a strange name, but that's all it is. Hence the caravan park at Patch, the boatyard at Patch, the road running to Patch, etc. Hogyn Lleol (talk) 19:18, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gwbert. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:18, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Gwbert. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:44, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]