Talk:Zennor Head

Zennor Head has been listed as one of the Geography and places good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 3, 2013	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 25, 2012.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Zennor Head, Cornwall, is named after a woman who was reputedly washed up there after being thrown into the sea in a barrel by her husband?

Cornwall Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Cornwall, an attempt to improve and expand Wikipedia coverage of Cornwall and all things Cornish. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project member page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.CornwallWikipedia:WikiProject CornwallTemplate:WikiProject CornwallCornwall-related articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

See drop-down box for suggested article edit guidelines:

Be bold - if you know something about Cornwall then put it in! We value your contributions and don't be afraid if your spelling isn't great as there are plenty of spelling and grammar experts on clean-up duty!
Articles on settlements in Cornwall should be written using the standard set of headings approved by the UK geography WikiProject's guideline How to write about settlements.
At WikiProject Cornwall we subscribe to the policies laid down by Wikipedia - particularly civility and consensus building. We are aware that the wording on Cornish entries can sometimes be a contentious topic, especially those concerning geography. You don't have to agree with everything but there is no excuse for rudeness and these things are best solved through consensus building and compromise. For more information see WP:CornwallGuideline.
These pages are not platforms for political discussion. Issues relating to Cornish politics should be restricted to those pages that directly deal with these issues (such as Constitutional status of Cornwall, Cornish nationalism, etc) and should not overflow into other articles.
Most of all have fun editing - that's the reason we all do this, right?!

UK geography Low‑importance

	United Kingdom portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.UK geographyWikipedia:WikiProject UK geographyTemplate:WikiProject UK geographyUK geography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

DYK nomination[edit]

Peer review[edit]

Here are some comments that I hope will be helpful. I enjoyed reading about the promontory, which I have never visited. Please let me know if anything I say below is unclear.

Infobox

Here and in the "Etymology" section Saint Senara is mentioned. The connection between "Senara" and "Zennor" is not obvious because they begin with different letters of the alphabet. It might be helpful to add a brief explanation to the "Etymology" section about how the S became a Z, if you can find a reliable source for that. I'm assuming that Ss become Zs in other names in the region, but that's just a guess.

Lead

The lead, per WP:LEAD, should be a summary of the main text. Nothing important should appear in the lead that does not appear in the main text. The existing lead is actually an introductory paragraph rather than a summary. My suggested fix for this would be to expand the relevant text sections with material from the lead. For example, the exact length of the promontory should be included in Geography and geology" and the business about the letter "Z" should be included in the "Etymology" section, probably. The lead can only summarize what actually appears in the main text sections.

The other thing to consider when rewriting the lead is that to be a summary it should include at least a mention of the main ideas of the main text sections. The existing lead does not mention Saint Senara, Exercise Brandyball, or wildlife and is therefore not a true summary.

Are you sure that Exercise Brandyball was on Zennor Head? I thought it was on (or near) Bosigran Castle which is in western part of Zennor parsh. Commando Ridge is on the west side of Porthmoina Cove and the Brandys are just off shore.Jowaninpensans (talk) 20:18, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I have seen from various sources yes it was, however I have not seen the archived footage so cannot be sure. I have ordered a copy of The Fighting Fourth to check this.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 23:42, 31 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am still not convinced that Excercise Brandyball was on Zennor Head! Think I need to speak to someone more local than I. Jowaninpensans (talk) 23:57, 30 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"a 750-metre long promontory" - Most quantities in Wikipedia articles appear in metric and imperial units. In articles about England, imperial would be first, I think. The {{convert}} template is handy for these conversions. This one would be 750-metre (2,460 ft). Flipped to put imperial first, it would be 2,460-foot (750 m). If the number is an approximation, it would make sense to round it to 2,500-foot (760 m). (The adj parameter, short for "adjective", adds the hyphen and changes "feet" to "foot".)_Done

Modern history

Being an outsider, I knew nothing about the South West Coast Path. I clicked through to the linked article about it, and found it most interesting. I think it wouldn't hurt to add perhaps one more sentence about it to this article. The fact that it's 630 miles (1,010 km) long amazed me, for example. If a reliable source mentions how many people walk this segment of the path every year, I would include that statistic too.

Geography and geology

" between approximately 375 and 415 mya" - I'd spell out, abbreviate, and probably link "mya", like this: "mya" as "million years ago (mya)". Also, geologists usually write the date ranges with the older date first; i.e., 475 to 375 mya. _Done

Layout

It's generally best to avoid really short subsections. One of the reasons to avoid them is that it makes it difficult or impossible to insert images that fit completely into the sections they illustrate without displacing edit buttons or overlapping section boundaries. I would consider eliminating "Exercise Brandyball" and "Modern History" as subsections and just making them paragraphs of the "History" section. The plaque image would then fit nicely within the "History" section.

In the case of the "Wildlife" section, I would suggest eliminating the "Flora" and "Fauna" subheads and renaming the section "Fauna and flora". The image of the chough will then fit nicely. _Done

The "Gallery" on my computer screen is split into two rows, one with six images and one with one image. It might appear differently on other screens, but it looks lopsided to me. I'd recommend using just one row. If you expand the main text at some future date, you may create room for additional images within the text.

Citations

Citations to books should include all the bibliographical details that a reader might find useful; i.e., author, title, publisher, publisher's location, date of publication, page number(s), and ISBN. You can generally find missing data, except page number(s), via WorldCat. For example, the data for the James Dunning book, if I've picked the correct edition, is here. The 13-digit ISBNs are preferred to the 10-digit. Page numbers would have to come from your notes or a re-check of the book. Citation 16, for example, needs a page number.

The citation formatting should be consistent throughout the article. For example, citation 1 uses a "cite" template, but citation 2 does not. Pick the format you like best.

Citations to web sites should include author, title, publisher, URL, date of publication, and date of most recent access, if all of those are known or can be found. For example, citation 2 should include the publisher, which appears to be Zennor Parish Council, and you should add an access date. The title should probably be "Zennor Parish" (map). If you decide to use the "cite" family of templates throughout the article, you could use Template:Cite map for citation 2.

Titles of journals like Lichenologist should appear in italics._Done

Date ranges and page ranges take en dashes rather than hyphens. I ran a script to fix these.

My best. Finetooth (talk) 19:39, 29 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Zennor Head/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 20:17, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be glad to take this review. I'll do a close readthrough of the article's text today or tomorrow, noting any initial problems, followed by the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Initial readthrough[edit]

The lead section needs work to meet WP:LEAD; this section should summarize all the sections that follow (including etymology and history), and contain no important information not in those sections. -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:15, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"it is flanked by two coves, Pendour and Porthzennor" -- does the "it" here refer to the village of Zennor or the promontory? -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:32, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The headland, I have corrected this.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 20:40, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist[edit]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is clear and accurate; spotchecks of available sources show no copyright issues.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images are properly tagged
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are appropriate and captioned
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass-- thanks for your work on this one!

Geology[edit]

Are the cliffs formed from granite or killas - or both? Either way it's inappropriate in the lead to put 'Killas' in brackets after 'granite' suggesting that they are equivalent - they are not. cheers Geopersona (talk) 18:00, 23 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Zennor Head. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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) 10:51, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]