Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Grade I listed buildings in Bath and North East Somerset/archive1
- The following is an archived discussion of a featured list nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured list candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.
The list was promoted by The Rambling Man 15:36, 26 September 2009 [1].
Grade I listed buildings in Bath and North East Somerset edit
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating Grade I listed buildings in Bath and North East Somerset for featured list because I believe it meets the FL criteria, including suitable graphics (with ALT tags) and supporting citations. It is the 7th in the series Grade I listed buildings in Somerset and follows the format of Grade I listed buildings in South Somerset which is the most recently promoted. — Rod talk 21:37, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well I noticed that no-one had commented on this and I have to say that overall it is very good with just a few comments. I also corrected a few typos that it wasn't worth writing out a comment for.
- I believe that the county of Avon was created in 1974 not abolished.
- "Outside the city of Bath most of the buildings are..." You might want to qualify the word buildings with listed (or similar) just to make it clear that we are still talking about those in the list.
- In the list it would seem that the default order is based on the location (which is fine) but this column isn't sortable so you can't get back to the initial order.
- I am not sure that it is usual to put a Category into a See Also section, especially as the page is already in the category.
Boissière (talk) 19:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Response - thanks for the comments (& edits). I believe Avon, outside of the city and See also are dealt with. I've made location sortable, however this doesn't put them quite back into original order as they were done with Bath first & then the rest. As the street or area is included when they are resorted some of the villages appear earlier in the list - do you think I need to make these return to their original order?— Rod talk 20:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Anyway, support. Boissière (talk) 14:20, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)
- I made a few minor tweaks to the lead, hope they look OK.
- Thanks great
"he oldest sites within Bath are the Roman Baths, which were provided with their foundation piles" Not sure what "provided" here means here.
- I've tried to clarify this. The spring was used for bathing before the romans but it was them which put in foundations (on piles into the mud).
No page numbers or ISBN for ref 13 (Georgian Summer)?Dabomb87 (talk) 02:32, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Added
- Response. Thanks for these comments (& your edits) hopefully all now addressed?— Rod talk 08:56, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Sources look good. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:27, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What makes http://www.buildinghistory.org/bath/index.shtml reliable? I lean reliable, considering the author's background, but it would help to know that the ref isn't used for anything controversial or obscure.
- Jean Manco is a well known & respected author on local architecture. A list of some of her publications (books, journals & for official bodies is available here). (see also User:Genie). The reference is about the period and ornamentation of Bath Abbey, the period & style is supported by the English Heritage ref given & I've added a journal ref which talks about the ornamentation.
What makes http://www.essential-architecture.com/STYLE/STY-E02.htm reliable?
- I can't find the ownership details of this site so I've replaced it with a reference to Gadd's book
http://www.plumbingworld.com/historyroman.html – I'd prefer if the actual magazine article were used (there's always the possibility for transcription erros), but won't push this too hard if it can't be done.
- I do not have access to the original hard copy of Plumbing & Mechanical magazine, July 1986 so am just going by the web page. Therefore I've added another ref to the local council document "City of Bath World Heritage Site Management Plan" which talks about Roman involvement: "Evidence of pre-Roman timber lining was found at one of the springs suggesting a more formal arrangement than previously thought" & "The temple was constructed in 60-70 AD and the bathing complex was gradually built up over the next 300 years".
- Comment. I like this list but would find it easier to use if the architects sorted by surname rather than by first name, with "unknown" at the end. There are two blank spaces - should they be "unknown"? Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:00, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Response - Thanks for the comment. The two blanks are not known to me & I can't find them in any of my sources - I was hoping someone would be able to add these, but can add unknown. As far as sorting the list by surname - I could add the sort template, but might run into problems with those where more than one architect is identified.— Rod talk 12:42, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I sympathise, but it looks a bit odd when the sort leads to a string of "unknown"s followed by "William Killigrew and John Wood, the Elder". When there is more than one architect, how about using the more prominent first, I guess often this will be one of the John Woods? Then it would sort, for example, Wood, John the Elder, and John Pinch. Just a thought. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- OK I've sorted by first named architect in the sources which is generally the one with most input or initial idea. Take a look & see if this is what you intended?— Rod talk 14:43, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I sympathise, but it looks a bit odd when the sort leads to a string of "unknown"s followed by "William Killigrew and John Wood, the Elder". When there is more than one architect, how about using the more prominent first, I guess often this will be one of the John Woods? Then it would sort, for example, Wood, John the Elder, and John Pinch. Just a thought. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:01, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Thanks, that's great. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 15:05, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from Hassocks5489
|
---|
Comments from Hassocks: Another high-quality list in this topic. As with previous lists for other districts, all content is good, individual articles are present for each building, architectural descriptions are sound, referencing is strong and so on; there are only some minor formatting-type things to think about. Lead
Table
Notes
Refs
I'll keep this FLC on watch. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 20:40, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply] |
- Response - thank you for your sharp eyes and helpful comments. I hope they have all been addressed & sorry for my inability with n dash & m dash (I've looked at Dash & still can't understand why people get so het up about this).— Rod talk 22:01, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Me too; after several years I have finally learnt the "rules" for dashes, but never really established the purpose! All alterations look fine; I corrected a minor typo. Sorry for being ambiguous on my comment under "Notes"; the decapitalisation was the intended meaning. Support accordingly. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 22:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.