Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Works of John Betjeman/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 Crisco 1492 23:19, 25 November 2014 [1].

Works of John Betjeman edit

Works of John Betjeman (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 08:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

John Betjeman was a rather unique figure in 20th century English literature. A popular poet—probably the most popular since Lord Byron, a writer on matters architectural—mostly railing against the destruction of Victorian and Edwardian architecture for concrete monstrosities of the 60s and 70s, and a broadcaster who highlighted some of the aspects of forgotten corners of Britain—or forgotten corners of high-profile parts of Britain. This list has undergone a major renovation recently to the point it is FL compliant. - SchroCat (talk) 08:08, 15 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support – I'm madly envious that I haven't written this article, and I'd like to find reasons for opposing, but I can't, so am contenting myself with some petty sniping:

  • Lead
    • "he attended Oxford University, although left without qualifying" – for what? You want "graduating" here, I think.
    • "shortly after the BBC began regular broadcasts" – the BBC began regular broadcasts in the 1920s: strictly, you mean regular television broadcasts, though I admit this makes an unwelcome repetition of television necessary. I do not press the point.
      • I've tweaked to mention "regular screen broadcasts"; it's slightly inelegant, but covers the point, I hope. - SchroCat (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • Good! I'd not have thought of that, which works very well, and is by no means inelegant. Tim riley talk 23:36, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • "and his output was prolific, according to Michael Brooke, writing for the British Film Institute": this is genuinely ambiguous: it reads at first glance as though it was JB who was writing for the BFI. I think, as we have the citation, you could just lose the last ten words of the sentence.
    • not sure why you link CBE but not his knighthood
    • Clarke quote: I'd drop the square bracketed [Lord] competely.
  • Editor
    • Rupert Hart-Davis has an article you could link to, though it is about the man rather than the firm, and again I don't press the point.

I boggle at the width and depth of the research SchroCat has put in for this article, and I support its promotion, without the slightest reservation. Superb stuff! – Tim riley talk 21:16, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • As always, many thanks for your thoughts, Mr R. I've covered all except the RHD one: I looked at his article, and thought it was a little too much about him, rather than the company, to be of use. I suspect someone will link it at some point, and I'll leave it in if they do, as I have no real feelings either way. Thanks as always – and keep me abreast of any reviews (or revues) you have coming up. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 22:30, 17 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Doc, Thanks for looking in. The obituarist for The Times isn't named, unfortunately. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:13, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Great looking list, looks super comprehensive, good job!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:43, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

  • "In 1932 Betjeman began a career in broadcasting, with a radio programme about the proposed destruction of Waterloo Bridge; he continued with regular radio programmes for the rest of his life, appearing in a wide range of genres, from panel and game shows, interviews, news programmes, documentaries and poetry readings" - programmes in this sentence appears three times. It's not wildly vexing me, but it's a humungous sentence with massive repetition....
  • Yeah, not good! Tweaked down to one. - SchroCat (talk) 09:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "his output was prolific" is worth expanding on this, or even explaining who claimed his oeuvre to be "prolific"? One man's "prolific" is another's "long weekend on the sauce", after all...
  • I've citedd this to the BFI, by way of explanation - SchroCat (talk) 09:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "made a CBE" perhaps expand this first (for our esteemed non-Brit readers)?
  • "Garden City N.Y." can we just say "New York" or is that the actual title of the publisher?
  • Two blank cells for "Author" in the "Editor" section, never keen on blank cells...
  • Wouldn't his role in Pity About the Abbey be "co-writer"?
  • Ref 160 seems to have an odd hyphen, probably should be a spaced en-dash...

Otherwise, a substantial and excellently presented body of work. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:26, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cheers RM, Many thanks for your time and thoughts here, and I think I've covered them all properly. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:31, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support subject to a few minor points:

  • ODNB entry gives 1930 as the year he became Assistant Ed. of the Architectural Review
  • Added a footnote to cover the discrepancy. - SchroCat (talk) 23:41, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lead, end second paragraph: the attribution to the BFI seems barely necessary. They are not the recognised authorities on JB's output.
  • CBEs are appointed, not "made". And Companions of Literature are "elected"
  • (How did John Clarke get into the act?)
  • Thankfully not that John Clarke!
  • With regard to Collected Poems (1958) it might be worth noting that this title is slightly misleading. It implies a collection of all published work to that date. In fact, Sir John Piers and St. Katherine's Church are omitted altogether; of the 20-odd poems in Poems of the Porch, only "Diary of a Church Mouse" made it into the collection. Sixteen poems that had not previously appeared in book form were included. So it was something of a mish-mash. The Collected Poems have been updated and republished several times, most recently I believe in 2006; should not these later expanded editions be at least noted?
  • I'll dig out something on this, either as a short note in the table or, more likely, a footnote. - SchroCat (talk) 23:41, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now clarified in the table, and information about the reprints in both table and footnote. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 18:15, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there any relevance to the "Save Lewisham Town Hall" image, or is it merely decorative?
  • Only there as a pretty picture! - SchroCat (talk) 23:41, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A most impressive list. Brianboulton (talk) 16:48, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks indeed Brian, it is much appreciated. Betj is one of those who I want to have a go at the main article sometime, but I have a few others I want to do first. Thanks again, - SchroCat (talk) 23:41, 24 November 2014 (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/Works_of_John_Betjeman/archive1&oldid=1138489618"