Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Grade I listed buildings in Bristol

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates

Grade I listed buildings in Bristol edit

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. No further edits should be made to this page. The closing editor's comments were: 13 days, 4 support, 0 oppose. Promote. Juhachi 22:32, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This list includes all buildings in the City of Bristol which are listed by English Heritage as Grade I, supported by suitable references, photographs etc. — Rod talk 21:08, 20 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose References in a reference section, not bloating the table. Your "notes" and "alternate names" columns are only taking unnecessary space too. I'm not even sure a table is necessary. Overall... the page looks horrible and verge on the illegible. A far cry from our "finest work." Circeus 01:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response I have moved the references as suggested. The notes and alternative names provide additional information, which I feel would be useful to readers of the page.— Rod talk 09:00, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Then at least merge notes and alternate names. Consider also placing the references in the last section. And replace these "&" with "and" (unless it's part of the official name.) Circeus 14:12, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose on WP:WIAFL 1f "Well-constructed". Either put alternative names in the same cell as the "proper" ones; or add them as notes. A column with just five entires does not coutn as good layout. Also, fix the column widths.. "Built" can be smaller, allowing "Name" to wide enough to avoid linewrapping. Put the grid references in a seperate column. Tompw (talk) 15:49, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response THanks for the comments - I've put alternative names under names, removed the notes column, and moved the grid ref into a separate column & moved the references to the final column on the right.— Rod talk 20:53, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • Support much better :-) Tompw (talk) 16:03, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • An extra suggestion, because I wouldn't oppose over it: Move the images outside the table (cf. Chicago Landmark). They won't all fit, but then since they all have articles, people can always go to the specific page for images, and you can select the best of them, and even keep one for the leaqd. The page definitely looks far better now, btw. The only thing I'd ask before supporting might be that links like College Green, Bristol become College Green. After all, where else but in Bristol would they be? Circeus 21:23, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response I've piped the names to reduce Bristol appearing in place names (except where part of official title) & moved the images out of the table keeping the best.— Rod talk 21:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Just fix that "Queen Sqaure" and it's good to go for me ;-) Great work and responsiveness. Circeus 22:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response - Thanks Typo fixed.— Rod talk 07:12, 22 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - From my reading of this, particularly note B, it sounds as if this is actually based on 2001 data. Can you point to any source confirming that no other buildings have received Grade 1 listing since that date (and preferably, include that source in the list somewhere)? If you can then I'm happy to support.--OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 14:55, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response English Heritage do not make any more recent listing available - you can get an individual buildings listing (on payment of a significant fee & several weeks delay) however the most up to date list is held by Bristol City Council (dated 15th August 2003) and available here (pdf), all of which are included in the list.— Rod talk 15:20, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • That really ought to be included as a reference - maybe to the first line of the intro? Conditional on that, I will support. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 11:27, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • Response - I've added a line about the role of the city council & added the ref.— Rod talk 11:49, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support It looks vastly better since the suggestions made here were effected. William Avery 21:17, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. Very nice. It is confusing that your table has 32 entries, yet the lead claims there are 50 listed buildings. The last paragraph of the lead should perhaps give some examples of an "other structure" (e.g. the railings). Have you considered enumerating the individual "listed buildings" rather than grouping them based on the Wikipedia article. For example, having separate entries for the Exchange, its railings and the "Nails". Alternatively, list the grouped buildings within the first cell. Also, the ref you give (above) "Grade I Listed Buildings in Bristol (15 August 2003)" has 51 entries. Finally, where does the grid reference information come from? Colin°Talk 19:21, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Response Colin thanks for your comments. I have put another sentance into the lead explaining that some of the listed articles contain more than one listed structure. I don't think it would be suitable to have several different articles where the buildings are closely linked eg Portland Square where the vast majority of the information is common as they were all built by the same people at the same time etc. I had miscounted it is 51 entries - thanks for spotting that. The grid references came from Streetmap.— Rod talk 19:51, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I wasn't suggesting separate articles, just some way of detailing the separately listed structures, within this list. Colin°Talk 20:36, 3 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Grade_I_listed_buildings_in_Bristol&oldid=133562447"