Talk:Benjamin Mountfort

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Benjamin Mountfort is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 6, 2005.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
March 16, 2005 Featured article candidate Promoted
September 29, 2008 Featured article review Kept
Current status: Featured article
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Arts and Entertainment (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the arts and entertainment work group (marked as Mid-importance).
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Architecture (Rated FA-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject New Zealand (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject England (Rated FA-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
This article has an assessment summary page.
Version 0.5      (Rated FA-Class)
Peer review This Arts article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia. It has been rated FA-Class on the assessment scale (comments).
Wikipedia CD Selection
WikiProject icon Benjamin Mountfort is included in the Wikipedia CD Selection, see Benjamin Mountfort at Schools Wikipedia. Please maintain high quality standards; if you are an established editor your last version in the article history may be used so please don't leave the article with unresolved issues, and make an extra effort to include free images, because non-free images cannot be used on the DVDs.
 

Discussion[edit]

Just read the article... its brilliant!

DiamondVertex 07:32, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Nice to know you think so. Thanks Giano 09:04, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I also find it well-written and illuminating. One thing that could improve it: colour, up-to-date photographs of the man's works. That's my only suggestion to boost this excellent article. Radagast 04:22, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words, regarding the images when I started to write this I would have agreed with you, I only used the Victorian black and white photographs as they were the only ones I could find out of copyright. Having now stared at them for the three weeks or so I was writing this, I now think they add a certain nostalgia and originality to the page, they also have a certain clean clarity that new ones may not have, especially as many of the buildings are now in heavily developed areas. However I suppose this is a modern encyclopedia, and that is not a very encyclopedic view, and colour would brighten the page up, but in the meantime I quite like the old ones. Giano 15:22, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Yes, it's true that the monochrome imagery adds something of a general theme to the article; however, I like to appreciate all aspects of a structure when it comes to architecture, and a crisp colour image or two would make a lot of difference, IMO. Radagast 17:13, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Proposal to remove date-autoformatting[edit]

Dear fellow contributors

MOSNUM no longer encourages date autoformatting, having evolved over the past year or so from the mandatory to the optional after much discussion there and elsewhere of the disadvantages of the system. Related to this, MOSNUM prescribes rules for the raw formatting, irrespective of whether or not dates are autoformatted. MOSLINK and CONTEXT are consistent with this.

There are at least six disadvantages in using date-autoformatting, which I've capped here:

Removal has generally been met with positive responses by editors. I'm seeking feedback about this proposal to remove it from the main text (using a script) in about a week's time on a trial basis/ The original input formatting would be seen by all WPians, not just the huge number of visitors; it would be plain, unobtrusive text, which would give greater prominence to the high-value links. Tony (talk) 08:30, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

I understand the disadvantages, Tony, but I'm rather busy with the FAR right now. Feel free to remove them yourself if you like - just drop a note on the talk page or the FAR after doing so; we don't want contributors accidentally adding more autoformatted dates after the original ones' removal. Nousernamesleft (talk) 18:00, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
Ah, thanks, Nouser—I hadn't realised it was in FAR. Shall do. Tony (talk) 02:12, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
You're very welcome. Note to self: I need to get rid of the templated accessdates and replace them with manual non-autoformatted ones once the sourcing of the article is finished. Nousernamesleft (talk) 01:51, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

St Luke's[edit]

It says in the article: "Cyril Mountfort was responsible for the church of St Luke's in the City, which was an unexecuted design of his father's." This is referenced with this source. What it says in that source is: "[Cyril's] two most important ecclesiastical designs were for St John's, Hororata and St Luke's" and further: "The design of St Luke's is closely related to two of Benjamin Mountfort's churches of the 1880s - The Church of the Good Shepherd, Phillipstown, begun 1884, and St John's Cathedral, Napier, 1886." So it would appear that the statement in the article is not backed up by the source. I'm a bit reluctant to make big changes to FA class articles without giving others the chance to discuss this first, hence this post. Schwede66 22:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)