Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Listed buildings in Poulton-le-Fylde/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured list candidates
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 Giants2008 18:24, 26 March 2011 [1].

Listed buildings in Poulton-le-Fylde edit

Listed buildings in Poulton-le-Fylde (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): BelovedFreak 13:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This is a fairly short list of all the listed buildings in Poulton-le-Fylde, which I believe meets the FL criteria. It has benefited from some early advice from Peter I. Vardy, on whose Listed buildings in Runcorn (urban area) and Listed buildings in Runcorn (rural area) this list was modelled. It has also received a peer review by Brianboulton. There may be a problem with accessibility in the table which I haven't been able to fix on my own (see WT:Manual_of_Style_(accessibility)/Data tables tutorial# Sortability/unsortability and scope), so any advice there would be appreciated. --BelovedFreak 13:13, 26 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 17:40, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Suggest you somehow crowbar listed buildings links into the lead for our non-UK readers, e.g. Listed building?
    • Don't know why I hadn't. I've linked "listed", as that occurs before "listed building. Is that ok, or should I save the link until both words are used?--BelovedFreak 18:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There has been a church on the site since no later than 1094" seems an odd phrase for me. I get it but it reads odd. Is there a way of reversing the grammatical logic to make it read more easily?
    • Yeah, I struggled with that originally. I've made it a bit longer, but hopefully is clearer now.--BelovedFreak 18:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in and around the" in and around simultaneously?
  • Column "Date" has multiple entries, so maybe "Date(s)"
  • Sorting by Date, I'd expect St Chads to come in before End Cottage (17th C vs 1723).
  • 4, 6, 10 ... perhaps should sort ahead of 25, 27, 29 ... in the Name & location col?

The Rambling Man (talk) 21:42, 28 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou very much for your comments. --BelovedFreak 18:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • And I guess I'd sort "probably 18th C" before "mid-18th C".
    • Could you give me a suggestion of when to sort the "probably"s to? At present they sort to eg. 1750, the same as the "mid-"s. I have a "probably early 18th century" sorting to 1710. It's messing with my head a bit now. --BelovedFreak 18:53, 1 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I'd sort the "probably 18th C" to 1700. That is just my opinion though... Early stuff, would sort like you have... It's not critical. No major issue. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:41, 2 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Resolved comments from — Rod talk 09:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A few comments and questions.

In the lead:

  • I'm not sure about the capitalisation of "the Fylde" for The Fylde
    • In what way? Capital T or capital F? Capital F for Fylde - yes definitely. Capital T for The Fylde - I'm not sure, to be honest it seems to vary in both official and unofficial sources.--BelovedFreak 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I was thinking of changing "the Fylde" to "The Fylde" if that is the formal title, but I'm not an expert.— Rod talk 17:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport" redirects to Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport. I know this is a modern term, but the post holder now has responsibility for listed buildings so should probably be a direct link.
    • I'm not sure in a way since the buildings were listed when the previous name applied, but on the other hand it's essentially the same "person" that does the listing, just a different name, so... I've changed it. --BelovedFreak 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Table

  • In the date column, where the first character is a letter rather than a number eg Probably, Mid, Late etc I would start with a capital letter (but I'm never sure on such things). Where c. is used for circa I believe this should be italicised.
    • Don't really know about these things, so I'll take your word for it.--BelovedFreak 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In describing Fox's Farmhouse "There is a gable-end chimney stack to the right," surely right and left depend on the view one takes of the building? (Similar for End Cottage and Old Farm where we have a chimney to the left)
    • I've been thinking about this, and I agree with what you've said but I'm not sure how to fix it. I can work out what direction the various features are in, by looking at the photos and maps, but would that be straying too far into original research? One of the sources I used mentioned "left" and "right". Do you think it would be acceptable to change it to something like "There is a gable-end chimney stack to the right (looking from the front)," ? --BelovedFreak 20:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • "Looking from the front" ( or whatever is appropriate) works for me.— Rod talk 20:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • If "fish stones" is a proper name should it be capitalised in the description?
    • Is it a proper name? I can't seem to find out. --BelovedFreak 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • An expert tells me "fish stones" should not be capitalised in the description as it's there as a description of the stones, not their name.
        • Ok, good. I wasn't too sure about that one myself.--BelovedFreak 20:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "woollen merchant James Baines" should this be wool merchant or have alternative punctuation?
    • I'm really not sure. Woollen merchant is certainly used in many sources, as is woolen merchant and woll merchant. What punctuation do you mean, a hyphen? I've not seen it with one. I think woollen merchant is just as correct as wool merchant, but if you think it's archaic, I'd be happy to change it.--BelovedFreak 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Again I'm not sure but the way it is written now it could imply James Baines was made of wool. I'll ask a firendly expert to take a look at a couple of the grammar issues.— Rod talk 17:34, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • An expert tells me should be "wool merchant", as "woollen merchant" implies that he was made of wool.
          • Yeah, I get that, and was about to change it. However, I am very used to hearing the terms "woollen merchant", "woollen trade", "woollen spinning", "woollen industry" etc (both with double and single "l"), so I looked into it a bit more. I didn't actually realise this until now, but woollen ≠ wool. Woollen is a kind of yarn made from wool, so I'm inclined to leave it as it is; presumably a woollen merchant would be trading in the yarn, rather than just wool. --BelovedFreak 20:49, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Could you rephrase as "James Baines, a woollen merchant" which gets around the problem?— Rod talk 20:57, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Done. Could still be made of wool I suppose, but I've linked woollen now, so that should help. --BelovedFreak 21:01, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
                • Thanks I think that is better (but I'm not an expert).— Rod talk 08:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the description of The Manor should Accrington brick be wikilinked?

Images

  • The images all appear to be 100px. Would it be possible to reduce the width slightly for the portrait images so that they are not significantly larger than the landscape ones. I particularly noticed this on the Whipping Post where the image appears much taller than the others (partly because it has less text).
    • I've tried to play around with this a bit using the preview function, but I haven't really come up with a satisfactory version. Reducing the width of the image leaves it with a noticeable amount of whitespace on one side of it. Perhaps this is less objectionable, I don't know. I'm also a bit worried about making them all look right at a particular screen size because I know they look different on other screens. Depending on how wide your screen is, you either get images floating in lots of white or you get the text floating in lots of white. I'm not really sure what the solution is.--BelovedFreak 20:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think the idea of using the number of pixels rather than a % is designed to overcome the issues with different screens. But I don't think it is a major issue.— Rod talk 08:40, 6 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments are understandable?— Rod talk 11:09, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for your comments, a couple of queries above. The ones I've not commented on, I'm still looking into.--BelovedFreak 17:12, 5 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks for all your work. Maybe one day we will get to all the listed buildings!!!— Rod talk 09:35, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I must admit I'm starting small, but it would be great to see that happen! --BelovedFreak 09:47, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments –

  • St Johns Chapel: Period needed after "The chapel is on one storey and has arched windows with timber Y-tracery".
  • The Manor: Add "in" to "This house was built 1895."? Giants2008 (27 and counting) 22:41, 8 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note from Hassocks5489: I shall review this list in the next few days, once I return from a brief wikibreak. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 23:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 23:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Here are my comments and suggestions. A good, attractively presented list; all sorting, Google coordinates and references/links work correctly.
  • Explanation of the three listed building grades: As Grade I has been removed from this table, remove "three" from the heading.
  • St Chad's Church: Suggest linking tracery.
  • 1 Vicarage Road: Consider using the {{smallcaps}} template for Poulton Savings Bank 1839, thus: Poulton Savings Bank 1839
  • 25, 27, 29 and 31 Market Place: ionic order should be capitalised. Also, brick with Flemish bond → brick in a Flemish bond pattern.
  • Market Cross: Typo (consistng).
  • The Old Cottage: 18th century and 17th century should take hyphens in this instance, as they are being used as adjectives.

Some discussion of the interior timber-framing at 2 Market Place, which is a significant part of the list description, would be good; just a sentence or so, maybe. Likewise, a few words about the possibly late 17th-century staircase inside 25, 27, 29 and 31 Market Place, and the Jacobean interior of The Manor (staircase, gallery etc.). Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 13:28, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments, I'll try to address them today. --BelovedFreak 14:13, 15 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've addressed the points above and added some detail as suggested.--BelovedFreak 11:33, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Support. All of my comments have been addressed to a high standard. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 23:37, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! And thanks again for the tips on what to add. --BelovedFreak 09:47, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Meets standards. No complaints from me. Courcelles 21:34, 23 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/Listed_buildings_in_Poulton-le-Fylde/archive1&oldid=1138487915"