1423:
reasons. Among them are: (1) oftentimes people just utilise whatever citation they can find, and since I'm particularly good at finding information, part of my task is to demonstrate how to do this; (2) having found a more reliable citation, the question can then be addressed of whether information X belongs. One reason (but not the only reason) for this approach is that sometimes the standard of information in a
Knowledge (XXG) article is an artifact of the source/s utilised. By improving the source, one allows a broader approach to the 'keep/don't keep' question, by allowing for expansion, improvement, or alteration of the text in question, if the desire is to keep. Further to this, oftentimes I may edit an article on something that is closer to other editor's hearts than to mine. This being the case, I prefer to expand on the options and leave some sorts of editing and dialogues alone.
322:
considerably more diversity prior to various developments in transport and related infrastructure (esp road & rail, and - on an international scale - sea and air). Couple this with standardised education, and now with increasing electronic communication, and you have the world we currently live in, where the number of dialects we see is significantly less than ever before in human history. Thus, with dialect as with any other phenomenon, we cannot extrapolate from the world we now observe to the world which once was. We must rely on whatever records we can find from the world that once was to get the context of that world. Palaeontologists and anthropologists are particularly cognisant of this.
283:(expanded) The latter half of the article is made up almost completely of short, choppy paragraphs and sections that do a disservice to the information they are trying to present. Many of these could (and should) be combined, which will make the article flow better and be more intuitive to read. For example, the Sport and Media section could be combined with the Culture section, and many of the subsections within Culture don't need their own subsections - just use transition sentences to flow between one idea and the next.
35:. There are a number of statements that could be queried, but are unsourced - such as "Every year there are asparagus auctions", "Further features of local language give rise to variations in the pronunciation of the town's name", "The nearest major airport is Birmingham International", etc. The Notable people section needs writing up in prose. The history of the foundation is presenting legend as fact. Though the foundation is shrouded in legend,
788:
768:
740:
503:
474:
445:
417:
401:
299:
288:
277:
265:
248:
1039:
hundred years, there are still unreferenced areas, mis-spellings and poor grammar/punctuation are easily found, the lead still needs to be expanded, and these are just issues that I found in a quick scan. This review has been open for more than a month, and the editors don't seem to have the time to devote to it at this point, as evidenced by the non-existent work since the day after I brought up serious copyvios.
655:
641:
610:
678:
586:
559:
549:
392:
378:
364:
239:
205:
1058:; I'm still editing, but on a stab-and-dab basis from an Internet connection in a remote part of Asia that does not hold for more than a couple of minutes at a time, and I won't be home to my broadband until Saturday 19 Feb. It has absolutely nothing to do with coinciding with comments about possible copyvios, and I find the emphasis unfortunate. --
1362:
1150:
1121:
1104:
91:
1016:
During the 19th century market gardens on rich fertile soil were established around the town, and horticulture became the main industry. Asparagus and other vegetables were extensively cultivated. Along the river were two corn-mills and a mill for extracting oil from linseed. There were two factories
1457:
The transport section needs some work, but I'm not sure how to untangle it. The historic facts about the roads and railway formation are interesting, but make the section difficult to read. The transport section is usually a very terse description of the transport links available in a town - I think
1162:
Thanks for lending a hand Gyro. I'm out of town (back in hospital for a couple of days) but I'll address the issues too as soon as I can locate a WiFi. Looks as if Dana has already run the link-check script, but I'll run it again adn see what I come up with. I'll also try to sort out the new refs I
845:
KP, can you make a note here on the talk page of what you remove? There is some good content there that I would hate to lose - although clearly it needs re-writing. Dana, what is the threshold for copyvio? While some of these sections clearly fall foul, others are short, factual sentences (e.g. "The
780:
Article: "After the
Dissolution of the Monasteries of 1540 to the end of the 17th century, the town's economy depended on the cloth trade, especially trade in finished articles – caps, collars and gloves." Source: "from the Dissolution of 1540 to the end of the seventeenth century, the town depended
726:
supposed to have developed. Different sources report the stories differently - I'm not sure if it's
Knowledge (XXG)'s job to sort out the mess of 1,000 year old legend, but we do our best with Englnd where recorded history goes back over more than two thousand years since the Roman occupation.
39:
does give more information, and does make it clearer what is fact and what is fiction. The Battle of
Evesham is significant enough for there to be more information about it - it should be mentioned in the lead, and should have a section on it. I think there is a fair amount of work to do, so I don't
1438:
Thanks everyone for your grand efforts so far. I've now spent a day on this (see history), and can't think what else I can do to improve it. I think all Dana's points have been addressed - let's not try to find new solutions to problems that we haven't got, and see if it can pass GA by the end of
305:
The
Language section seems to be more of an etymology section or pronunciation section than a section about the language. You say the local dialect is "distinctive", but then go into a discussion of various pronunciations of the town's name. What about the local dialect is "distinctive"? Have there
1241:
There is an awful lot of information missing from this article, are there no landmarks? Such a section could mention the wood framed buildings, old bridges etc. What about parliamentary representation, population, public services?. It seems to be a very interesting place and I have found out a few
1076:
Allright, I'll close the review and the article can be renominated when you all have time. My apologies if you thought I was accusing you of bad faith, but from my point of view, editing stopped completely very soon after I brought up the copyvio comments, with no comments on the page for over two
860:
You are correct that things like "The town received a royal charter in 1603" are kind of on the edge between copyvio and non-copyvio. However, it's really better to try and reword it even a little bit - "In 1603, the town was given a royal charter" or something or the sort. Many of them that I saw
171:
Hi! Thank you for the kind invitation to review this article. First, let me say that some of the comments that SilkTork posted on the talk page are quite valid, and should probably have been given more attention than the rather dismissive reply they received. Just because they didn't place them on
830:
None of the current four editors would have knowingly made any copyvios. We did not create the article from scratch and there is a lot of old stuff in it. Assuming good faith, each of us has probably though that one of the others had systematically been through checked all the sources. I will do
1099:
Hello again Dana, and thanks for your initial comments. I agree with you, this article will take some work, but let's see how far we can get. I've made a start on the history section - the paragraphs are now in chronological order, and I've folded the abbey section into the main text. I think we
1038:
There is still some major work that needs to happen on this article, so I'm wondering about the main editors' thoughts on closing the review and letting the article be re-nominated when the editors have a chance to put more time into it. Currently, the history section is missing the last several
321:
I found and added some citations on the dialect. It does appear that it was distinctive within its local geographic region. However by the time attention was paid to this particular dialect it was already in decline. This fits with my overall impression regarding
English dialects, that there was
59:
One or more contributors to this article may not wholly agree with one or more of the points above. As you were not asked to make this summary, other reviewers may have other opinions and may be prepared to make a correct GA summary on the required template, and put the article on hold for the
1077:
weeks. I wouldn't have blamed you for losing interest in the article after having copyright violations pointed out in what you probably thought was a close-to-GA-status article. I understand that you were not the one to add the violations, but unfortunately, you have been left to clean them up.
1422:
I know I'm a bit late here, but I concur. Although I found a citation for this, the sole purpose of that exercise was to replace a contentious citation with something more substantive. I'll often address that issue separately from the issue of "should content X be in article Y" for a number of
725:
This is being fixed. It's a similar confusion to that of the founding of
Malvern, where there was also a shepherd or a hermit credited with either the foundation of the town or the abbey, and a monk or a bishop who later actually had the monastery built, from which the town is also
313:
No further information is available from other sources regarding the accent. I am from 20 miles from the area and I do not find that it differs much at all from the genera, local, rural
Herefordshire/Worcestershire accent that is spoken for example in Malvern, Upton-on-Severn, and
690:
Here are a few of my initial comments. There is a good bit of work that is needed, and so I am putting the article on hold to allow these issues to be addressed. I haven't had a thorough look at prose yet, and more issues will possibly rise to the surface as the ones above are taken care of.
260:
The majority of the article goes into exquisite detail about even the most mundane details of contemporary life, but then gives one sentence to a major battle (Evesham was the site of a major battle—the Battle of
Evesham,...) and leaves it at that. Is nothing more known about this
1130:
For the notable people section, an introductory sentence is difficult - all these people really have in common is
Evesham! I've looked around a few pages for other towns - most simply give a list with no introduction. In fact, the only one I could find with an introduction is
1265:
Yep, I think we still have a lot missing, but it's growing now. For notable poeple, I prefer to have a list on the main page, rather than a separate article. I'd never read a separate page, but I do sometimes stumble across someone interesting while reading about a
774:(removed) Article: "King Charles I stayed in the town in 1644, probably in one of the town houses in Bridge Street that were crown property." Source: "Charles stayed in the town in 1644, probably in one of the town houses in Bridge Street that were crown property."
929:
An enormous amount of work was done following Dana's initial comments but RL got in the way and for some reason this page is not registering on my watchlist. I'll have to finish the improvements alone, and I will have this done in the next day or two.
814:
This is from only checking parts of a couple of sources! Every single reference needs to be gone through and checked, and my first instinct is to fail this article right now. However, I will keep it on hold for the moment, to give you some time to respond.
715:
abbey dedicated to St Mary on the site which was built by 709 A.D." Doesn't the contradict the sentence above, where you say that Egwin followed the vision to Eof? Also, needs a ref (according to legend? says who?), and AD/BC do not have punctuation, per
1242:
bits without too much trouble. As for the notable people, why not turn it into its own list article and link to this one, mentioning any really notables in relevant sections. I personally dislike these sections but they do seem to attract other editors.
794:'removed) * Article: Source:"Along the river were two corn-mills and a mill for extracting oil from linseed. There were two factories making ribbon." "There are two corn-mills, a mill for extracting oil from linseed, and two ribbon manufactories."
514:
The Steam index ref (now #41) is detailed, very well referenced, looks well researched, and does actually look reliable. Indeed I'm reasonably impressed with it. A hardcore researcher could glean a considerable amount of material from this.
875:
How is the reference checking going? Also, please note that I'm not expecting you to just remove all copied sections - just paraphrase them. If you remove all of the copyvio areas, it's going to leave the article rather incomplete.
1004:
After the Dissolution of the Monasteries of 1540 to the end of the 17th century, the town's economy depended on the cloth trade, especially trade in finished articles – caps, collars and gloves.<ref name="Cromwell"/:
846:
town received a royal charter in 1603."). While we can rewrite them, it tends to generate rather convoluted language. I think AP claim a violation at two sentences (although even this is rather untested).
271:
The battle has a main article. Some elements have been borrowed and paraphrased, with a link to the main article. The battle section is not too long because the main battle article is not very long
254:
The lead should be expanded. For an article of over 30 kb, two large paragraphs or three medium-sized ones are adequate. Not the one medium one and two almost non-existant ones that are currently there.
294:
The tag in the Notable people section needs to be dealt with. Although I have no problem with the format as a list, I would like to see some sort of opening sentence or two tying these people together.
1009:{{cite web |url=http://www.olivercromwell.org/evesham.htm |title=Cromwellian Britain - Evesham, Worcestershire |publisher=The Cromwell Association |accessdate=8 October 2010}} </ref: -->
172:
the "official" review page does not mean that they are not valid, and editors should be willing to at least consider all comments in their quest to improve the article. Initial comments shortly...
1319:
The town is on the once planned line of the Strensham to Solihull motorway, linking the M50 to the M42. However, in 1974 the scheme was dropped in favour of widening the M5 through Worcestershire.
746:
Battle section, if the battle was a massacre, how was the outcome not decisive? Or do you mean that while we know who won the battle, the battle didn't end the war? This should be made more clear.
991:
Sorry, they were on my hard disc to see if I could do anything with them, I meant to put them here but I got side tracked by a couple of messages on my talk page. Here they are:
1008:
until May 1645 when it was taken and occupied by ] with a large force of ] troops from the garrison in Gloucester and remained in ] possession for the rest of the ].<ref name="Cromwell": -->
306:
been any linguistic studies on it? What is it related to? How did it develop? Is it similar to dialects used in other local towns, and is it just used in Evesham/the surrounding countryside?
1054:
Close it if you wish. The article was nominated in good faith but unfortunately RL got in the way for two of the major contributors/editors as can be seen from the link above, and my
1113:
I think we should also say something about the 'Evesham Custom'. It is relevant because it explains why Evesham became such a centre for market gardening. There is a good description
1100:
still need some expansion here - as I understand it, Evesham was once one of the major abbeys in the country, but I don't remember where I read that (!). Does anyone have a source?
485:
Replaced Pathetic motorways ref (now #31 as at this edit) with ref from Motorways Archive. Straightforward descriptive, with research leads for tracking down original documents.
861:
though weren't two sentences, but also were most definitely copyvios - the King Charles I sentence and the Dissolution of the Monasteries sentence above are prime examples.
129:
119:
257:
History section - please put this in chronological order! It jumps from 1086 to 1265 to 1149 to 1930 to 1603! Also, did nothing happen between 1645 and 1930?
1007:
As an important stage on the route from ], it served as a royal garrison during the ]. The town remained in the hands of the ]<ref name="Cromwell"/: -->
96:
183:
177:
633:
124:
967:
915:
890:
Is work still ongoing on this? If I don't see any response/work in the next couple of days, I'm going to have to fail the article.
384:
1347:
Do we really need to mention a motorway that wasn't built 37 years ago? I vote for cutting both sentences - does anyone disagree?
1185:
Excuse my butting in but I thought I'd add a bit to the History section. And a ref or two Ref4 has quite a bit of useful info.--
101:
31:
There are a number of short sections, and the sections themselves could be better grouped. The lead needs development per
809:
and is out of copyright. The website' offers read-made citations to use in Knowledge (XXG) per Knowledge (XXG) format.
211:
1211:
Hello J3Mrs, and welcome to the party! Please keep butting in -- I like your additions, and there's plenty to do :-)
777:
Article: "The town received a royal charter in 1603." Source: "The town only first received a royal charter in 1603,"
1291:
I know we're trying to expand the article, but I'd like to chop some. Currently, the road transport paragraph reads:
350:
231:
143:
711:
History section, "According to legend, Eof went to Egwin, who shared the vision and was moved to establish a
1132:
781:
on the cloth trade, and particularly the specialist trades in finished articles – caps, collars and gloves."
1463:
1352:
1216:
1140:
926:
851:
1082:
1044:
895:
881:
866:
820:
696:
162:
717:
623:
219:
50:
1117:, although I'm not sure this counts as a reliable source. Again, does anyone have good sources?
806:
1459:
1444:
1348:
1212:
1168:
1136:
1063:
1055:
1024:
935:
847:
836:
65:
572:
215:
32:
1428:
1078:
1040:
891:
877:
862:
816:
800:
692:
520:
490:
461:
432:
327:
158:
147:
36:
647:
227:
223:
1400:
1190:
410:
What is reference #12? It has a retrieval date and part of a link, but no actual web link.
370:
957:
905:
787:
767:
739:
735:..." Some of the names in this list could probably be linked without too much digging.
502:
473:
444:
416:
400:
298:
287:
276:
264:
247:
732:
43:
1440:
1164:
1059:
1020:
931:
832:
61:
17:
956:
Okay, just as long as it gets done soon; article's been under review long enough.
799:'Everdon - Ewen', A Topographical Dictionary of England (1848), pp. 191-195. URL:
1458:
it works well that way. Maybe these facts should move up to the history section?
1424:
712:
516:
486:
457:
428:
323:
1396:
1186:
904:
Looks like it will have to be failed, no work on the page plus no note here.
1467:
1448:
1432:
1404:
1356:
1220:
1194:
1172:
1144:
1086:
1067:
1048:
1028:
973:
939:
921:
899:
885:
870:
855:
840:
824:
700:
524:
494:
465:
436:
331:
166:
150:. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
69:
53:
1114:
751:
The battle did not end the war, which continued for another two years.
1006:
The town received a royal charter in 1603.<ref name="Cromwell"/: -->
456:
Replaced Beermad ref (now #21 as at this edit) with Town Council ref.
1395:
I agree, it would be better to include info on Public transport.--
407:
There is one dead link (already marked) that needs to be fixed.
480:
What makes ref #32 (Pathetic motorways) a reliable source?
801:
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=50952
424:
509:
What makes ref #42 (Steam index) a reliable source?
40:want to take this on as reviewer at the moment.
451:What makes ref #22 (Beermad) a reliable source?
60:improvements. Thank you for your interest. --
8:
632:(images are tagged and non-free images have
79:
110:
82:
7:
1017:making ribbon.<ref name=tde/: -->
797:However, this appears to be from:
731:History section, "An entry in the
627:, where possible and appropriate.
24:
803:Date accessed: 18 January 2011.
759:- Copyright violations, really?!?
1360:
1148:
1119:
1102:
786:
766:
738:
676:
653:
639:
608:
584:
581:Fair representation without bias
557:
547:
501:
472:
443:
415:
399:
390:
376:
362:
297:
286:
275:
263:
246:
237:
203:
677:
585:
558:
548:
391:
377:
363:
238:
204:
1:
1087:20:11, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
1068:19:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
1049:18:04, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
974:16:23, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
54:17:21, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
1468:16:35, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
1449:09:17, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
1433:23:39, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
1405:23:28, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
1357:22:29, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
1221:22:34, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
1195:18:31, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
1173:08:54, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
1145:08:10, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
1029:15:46, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
940:18:24, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
922:15:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
900:15:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
886:22:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
871:14:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
856:14:47, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
841:08:40, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
825:15:49, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
654:
640:
609:
525:14:05, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
495:13:50, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
466:12:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
437:11:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
332:21:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
1163:added a couple of days ago.
701:14:38, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
167:14:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
70:07:09, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
1486:
1095:Starting the grand tidy-up
1133:Malvern, Worcestershire
807:British History Online
805:It's taken online from
193:reasonably well written
1135:, written by Kudpung.
646:(appropriate use with
621:It is illustrated by
573:neutral point of view
537:broad in its coverage
423:Became ref #11 as at
733:Great Domesday Book
634:fair use rationales
318:Pershore. (Kudpung)
1013:and this section:
969:Operation Big Bear
917:Operation Big Bear
605:No edit wars, etc.
346:factually accurate
648:suitable captions
138:
137:
1477:
1368:
1364:
1363:
1156:
1152:
1151:
1127:
1123:
1122:
1110:
1106:
1105:
1056:talk page header
980:Removed sections
970:
964:
918:
912:
790:
770:
742:
680:
679:
657:
656:
643:
642:
612:
611:
588:
587:
561:
560:
551:
550:
505:
476:
447:
419:
403:
394:
393:
380:
379:
371:reliable sources
366:
365:
301:
290:
279:
267:
250:
241:
240:
207:
206:
148:Talk:Evesham/GA1
92:Copyvio detector
80:
52:
46:
1485:
1484:
1480:
1479:
1478:
1476:
1475:
1474:
1361:
1359:
1149:
1147:
1120:
1118:
1103:
1101:
1097:
1036:
982:
972:
968:
958:
920:
916:
906:
570:It follows the
544:(major aspects)
142:This review is
134:
106:
78:
44:
41:
29:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1483:
1481:
1473:
1472:
1471:
1470:
1452:
1451:
1420:
1419:
1418:
1417:
1416:
1415:
1414:
1413:
1412:
1411:
1410:
1409:
1408:
1407:
1380:
1379:
1378:
1377:
1376:
1375:
1374:
1373:
1372:
1371:
1370:
1369:
1334:
1333:
1332:
1331:
1330:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1326:
1325:
1324:
1323:
1322:
1321:
1303:
1302:
1301:
1300:
1299:
1298:
1297:
1296:
1295:
1294:
1293:
1292:
1278:
1277:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1273:
1272:
1271:
1270:
1269:
1268:
1267:
1252:
1251:
1250:
1249:
1248:
1247:
1246:
1245:
1244:
1243:
1230:
1229:
1228:
1227:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1223:
1202:
1201:
1200:
1199:
1198:
1197:
1178:
1177:
1176:
1175:
1096:
1093:
1092:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1071:
1070:
1035:
1032:
1012:
1001:This section:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
993:
992:
981:
978:
977:
976:
966:
954:
953:
952:
951:
950:
949:
948:
947:
946:
945:
944:
943:
942:
914:
813:
811:
810:
804:
798:
795:
784:
783:
782:
778:
775:
761:
760:
753:
752:
748:
747:
736:
728:
727:
722:
721:
688:
687:
686:
685:
684:
683:
664:
663:
662:
661:
660:
619:
618:
617:
616:
615:
595:
594:
593:
592:
591:
568:
567:
566:
565:
564:
533:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
527:
511:
510:
498:
497:
482:
481:
469:
468:
453:
452:
440:
439:
412:
411:
408:
369:(citations to
342:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
336:
335:
334:
319:
308:
307:
295:
284:
273:
262:
258:
255:
188:
187:
153:
152:
136:
135:
133:
132:
127:
122:
116:
113:
112:
108:
107:
105:
104:
102:External links
99:
94:
88:
85:
84:
77:
74:
73:
72:
28:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1482:
1469:
1465:
1461:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1450:
1446:
1442:
1437:
1436:
1435:
1434:
1430:
1426:
1406:
1402:
1398:
1394:
1393:
1392:
1391:
1390:
1389:
1388:
1387:
1386:
1385:
1384:
1383:
1382:
1381:
1367:
1358:
1354:
1350:
1346:
1345:
1344:
1343:
1342:
1341:
1340:
1339:
1338:
1337:
1336:
1335:
1320:
1317:
1316:
1315:
1314:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1309:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1305:
1304:
1290:
1289:
1288:
1287:
1286:
1285:
1284:
1283:
1282:
1281:
1280:
1279:
1264:
1263:
1262:
1261:
1260:
1259:
1258:
1257:
1256:
1255:
1254:
1253:
1240:
1239:
1238:
1237:
1236:
1235:
1234:
1233:
1232:
1231:
1222:
1218:
1214:
1210:
1209:
1208:
1207:
1206:
1205:
1204:
1203:
1196:
1192:
1188:
1184:
1183:
1182:
1181:
1180:
1179:
1174:
1170:
1166:
1161:
1160:
1159:
1158:
1157:
1155:
1146:
1142:
1138:
1134:
1128:
1126:
1116:
1111:
1109:
1094:
1088:
1084:
1080:
1075:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1069:
1065:
1061:
1057:
1053:
1052:
1051:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1033:
1031:
1030:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1010:
1002:
990:
989:
988:
987:
986:
985:
984:
983:
979:
975:
971:
965:
963:
962:
955:
941:
937:
933:
928:
925:
924:
923:
919:
913:
911:
910:
903:
902:
901:
897:
893:
889:
888:
887:
883:
879:
874:
873:
872:
868:
864:
859:
858:
857:
853:
849:
844:
843:
842:
838:
834:
829:
828:
827:
826:
822:
818:
808:
802:
796:
793:
789:
785:
779:
776:
773:
769:
765:
764:
763:
762:
758:
755:
754:
750:
749:
745:
741:
737:
734:
730:
729:
724:
723:
719:
714:
710:
709:
708:
707:
706:More comments
703:
702:
698:
694:
682:
681:
674:
671:
670:
668:
665:
659:
658:
651:
649:
637:
635:
629:
628:
626:
625:
620:
614:
613:
606:
603:
602:
600:
596:
590:
589:
582:
579:
578:
576:
574:
569:
563:
562:
555:
545:
541:
540:
538:
534:
526:
522:
518:
513:
512:
508:
504:
500:
499:
496:
492:
488:
484:
483:
479:
475:
471:
470:
467:
463:
459:
455:
454:
450:
446:
442:
441:
438:
434:
430:
426:
425:this revision
422:
418:
414:
413:
409:
406:
402:
398:
397:
396:
395:
388:
386:
374:
372:
360:
356:
355:
353:
352:
347:
343:
333:
329:
325:
320:
317:
312:
311:
310:
309:
304:
300:
296:
293:
289:
285:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
259:
256:
253:
249:
245:
244:
243:
242:
235:
233:
229:
225:
221:
217:
213:
201:
197:
196:
194:
190:
189:
186:for criteria)
185:
181:
179:
175:
174:
173:
169:
168:
164:
160:
157:
151:
149:
145:
140:
139:
131:
128:
126:
123:
121:
118:
117:
115:
114:
109:
103:
100:
98:
95:
93:
90:
89:
87:
86:
81:
75:
71:
67:
63:
58:
57:
56:
55:
51:
48:
47:
38:
34:
27:GA nomination
26:
19:
1460:GyroMagician
1421:
1365:
1349:GyroMagician
1318:
1213:GyroMagician
1153:
1137:GyroMagician
1129:
1124:
1112:
1107:
1098:
1037:
1019:
1015:
1011:
1003:
1000:
960:
959:
908:
907:
848:GyroMagician
831:this now. --
812:
791:
771:
756:
743:
705:
704:
689:
672:
666:
645:
631:
622:
604:
598:
580:
571:
553:
543:
536:
506:
477:
448:
420:
404:
382:
368:
359:(references)
358:
349:
345:
315:
302:
291:
280:
268:
251:
209:
199:
192:
176:
170:
155:
154:
141:
130:Instructions
42:
30:
18:Talk:Evesham
1439:this week.
1079:Dana boomer
1041:Dana boomer
892:Dana boomer
878:Dana boomer
863:Dana boomer
817:Dana boomer
757:Major issue
713:Benedictine
693:Dana boomer
224:word choice
159:Dana boomer
144:transcluded
37:this source
351:verifiable
316:Tewkesbury
97:Authorship
83:GA toolbox
961:Wizardman
927:see here.
909:Wizardman
718:WP:MOSNUM
673:Pass/Fail
554:(focused)
156:Reviewer:
120:Templates
111:Reviewing
76:GA Review
125:Criteria
45:SilkTork
1441:Kudpung
1165:Kudpung
1060:Kudpung
1021:Kudpung
932:Kudpung
833:Kudpung
667:Overall
272:either.
261:battle?
228:fiction
200:(prose)
62:Kudpung
33:WP:Lead
1425:Wotnow
1266:place.
1034:Update
624:images
599:stable
597:It is
575:policy
535:It is
517:Wotnow
487:Wotnow
458:Wotnow
429:Wotnow
344:It is
324:Wotnow
230:, and
220:layout
191:It is
180:review
1397:J3Mrs
1187:J3Mrs
792:Fixed
772:Fixed
744:Fixed
507:Fixed
478:Fixed
449:Fixed
421:Fixed
405:Fixed
303:Fixed
292:Fixed
281:Fixed
269:Fixed
252:Fixed
232:lists
182:(see
146:from
16:<
1464:talk
1445:talk
1429:talk
1401:talk
1366:Done
1353:talk
1217:talk
1191:talk
1169:talk
1154:Done
1141:talk
1125:Done
1115:here
1108:Done
1083:talk
1064:talk
1045:talk
1025:talk
936:talk
896:talk
882:talk
867:talk
852:talk
837:talk
821:talk
697:talk
521:talk
491:talk
462:talk
433:talk
348:and
328:talk
216:lead
214:for
184:here
163:talk
66:talk
1005:-->
212:MoS
1466:)
1447:)
1431:)
1403:)
1355:)
1219:)
1193:)
1171:)
1143:)
1085:)
1066:)
1047:)
1027:)
938:)
898:)
884:)
869:)
854:)
839:)
823:)
699:)
675::
669::
652::
644:b
638::
630:a
607::
601:.
583::
577:.
556::
552:b
546::
542:a
539:.
523:)
493:)
464:)
435:)
389::
385:OR
381:c
375::
367:b
361::
357:a
354:.
330:)
236::
226:,
222:,
218:,
208:b
202::
198:a
195:.
178:GA
165:)
68:)
1462:(
1443:(
1427:(
1399:(
1351:(
1215:(
1189:(
1167:(
1139:(
1081:(
1062:(
1043:(
1023:(
934:(
894:(
880:(
865:(
850:(
835:(
819:(
720:.
695:(
650:)
636:)
519:(
489:(
460:(
431:(
427:.
387:)
383:(
373:)
326:(
234:)
210:(
161:(
64:(
49:*
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
