Wikipedia:Featured article review/Matthew Brettingham/archive2: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
AdamBlack89 (talk | contribs) |
AdamBlack89 (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
::::[[User:KJP1|KJP1]]? [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 03:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC) |
::::[[User:KJP1|KJP1]]? [[User:Nikkimaria|Nikkimaria]] ([[User talk:Nikkimaria|talk]]) 03:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC) |
||
:::::Nikkimaria - sorry, I'm no nearer getting back access to my books, I'm afraid. Delays in the building works mean they are all still in boxes. I think the main concern re. uncited text has been addressed, certainly Z1720 seems content. If that's not enough, I think it will probably need to go to FAR, as I just can't be certain when I will have access to the books again. I could definitely do more on it, but I just can't say when. [[User:KJP1|KJP1]] ([[User talk:KJP1|talk]]) 06:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
:::::Nikkimaria - sorry, I'm no nearer getting back access to my books, I'm afraid. Delays in the building works mean they are all still in boxes. I think the main concern re. uncited text has been addressed, certainly Z1720 seems content. If that's not enough, I think it will probably need to go to FAR, as I just can't be certain when I will have access to the books again. I could definitely do more on it, but I just can't say when. [[User:KJP1|KJP1]] ([[User talk:KJP1|talk]]) 06:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC) |
||
⚫ | :It remains a page which is fit for purpose: that is for anyone seeking info on Brettingham. I’m sure the original editor is grateful for those attempting to patch things up to retain FA status, but really that little star was never all it was cracked up to be. So let it go. Like all Wikipedia pages, it will be attacked/edited by pedants, idiots, infoboxobsessives and, occasionally, architectural historians. Who knows what will emerge from the ruins. [[User:AdamBlack89|AdamBlack89]] ([[User talk:AdamBlack89|talk]]) 20:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC) |
||
:It remains a page which is fit for purpose: that is for anyone seeking info on Brettingham. |
|||
⚫ | I’m sure the original editor is grateful for those attempting to patch things up to retain FA status, but really that little star was never all it was cracked up to be. So let it go. Like all Wikipedia pages, it will be attacked/edited by pedants, idiots, infoboxobsessives and, occasionally, architectural historians. Who knows what will emerge from the ruins. [[User:AdamBlack89|AdamBlack89]] ([[User talk:AdamBlack89|talk]]) 20:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC) |
Revision as of 21:01, 18 March 2024
Matthew Brettingham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
- Notified: Giano, DrKay, WikiProject England, WikiProject Biography, WikiProject Architecture, WikiProject Visual arts, 2023-08-13
I am nominating this featured article for review because there is uncited text, particularly in the "Legacy" section. I'm also curious if additional sources can be found to expand upon this article, although this is difficult due to the similarity with Matthew Brettingham the Younger. Z1720 (talk) 16:21, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Giano, the main author, has not been around for a long time. The uncited bits seem few and fairly trivial to me. Johnbod (talk) 20:41, 14 November 2023 (UTC)
- Giano may be inactive, but still appreciates notifications; User talk:SandyGeorgia/arch120#Harriet Arbuthnot. And we can hold out hope. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:12, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
- This one is certainly salvageable. I've added 'end-of-paragraph' cites and removed the tags. There's more that could be done, but unfortunately I don't have access to any of my book sources at present (all packed up and in store for a move). Let me know if more is needed. KJP1 (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- KJP1 If we put this on hold 'til after your move, would you be interested ? How long would that be ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Sandy - I'd be happy to pick it up. Like all of Giano's work, the content and prose is very high quality. But it is "cite-lite" by 2023 standards, and it could also do with a bit of updating - the London townhouses section ends with a reference to the 2007 state of Cambridge House, (although that development was still unfinished in 2021, [1] and I think it's incomplete now)! Unfortunately, my move is taking me quite a long way, and I won't see my books again until early 2024. Now, if you can put it on the backburner until then, I can commit to picking it up thereafter. KJP1 (talk) 16:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. KjP1 has dealt with most of the specific review points anyway. Johnbod (talk) 17:11, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hold: Nikkimaria would early 2024 be too long for a hold here ? KJP1 has restored other architectural articles at FAR. Maybe we could revisit in February or March ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:14, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me. KjP1 has dealt with most of the specific review points anyway. Johnbod (talk) 17:11, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Sandy - I'd be happy to pick it up. Like all of Giano's work, the content and prose is very high quality. But it is "cite-lite" by 2023 standards, and it could also do with a bit of updating - the London townhouses section ends with a reference to the 2007 state of Cambridge House, (although that development was still unfinished in 2021, [1] and I think it's incomplete now)! Unfortunately, my move is taking me quite a long way, and I won't see my books again until early 2024. Now, if you can put it on the backburner until then, I can commit to picking it up thereafter. KJP1 (talk) 16:20, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- KJP1 If we put this on hold 'til after your move, would you be interested ? How long would that be ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:47, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- This one is certainly salvageable. I've added 'end-of-paragraph' cites and removed the tags. There's more that could be done, but unfortunately I don't have access to any of my book sources at present (all packed up and in store for a move). Let me know if more is needed. KJP1 (talk) 14:04, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Giano may be inactive, but still appreciates notifications; User talk:SandyGeorgia/arch120#Harriet Arbuthnot. And we can hold out hope. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:12, 16 November 2023 (UTC)
- On hold until the new year. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:58, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks both - It’s on my list and I’ll pick it up as soon as I’m reunited with my books. KJP1 (talk) 05:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, thought I'd just note that a reference to this FAR came through my watchlist and I noticed the lack of a portrait for Brettingham. Having found one I've added it to the article with an infobox, but please feel free to change/revert/replace as you think appropriate. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:56, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks both - It’s on my list and I’ll pick it up as soon as I’m reunited with my books. KJP1 (talk) 05:42, 18 November 2023 (UTC)
- On hold until the new year. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:58, 17 November 2023 (UTC)
- KJP1, what's your timeline looking like? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Z1720, Nikki - sorry, this is all moving slower than I would like. The builders are due in early March, and all the books are remaining in storage until they are done, which I think will be around end March. I have, sans books, managed to get it from 28 cites when Z1720 sent it to FAR to 68. I agree there is more that could be done, but I wonder if they could have another look to see if their "cite-lite" concerns still remain? I am absolutely willing to continue to work on it as soon as I can access my books, but can't guarantee when that will be. KJP1 (talk) 10:02, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- The citation concerns have been resolved. @KJP1: are some of your books available at archive.org? Z1720 (talk) 16:25, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Z1720, Nikki - sorry, this is all moving slower than I would like. The builders are due in early March, and all the books are remaining in storage until they are done, which I think will be around end March. I have, sans books, managed to get it from 28 cites when Z1720 sent it to FAR to 68. I agree there is more that could be done, but I wonder if they could have another look to see if their "cite-lite" concerns still remain? I am absolutely willing to continue to work on it as soon as I can access my books, but can't guarantee when that will be. KJP1 (talk) 10:02, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- KJP1? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Nikkimaria - sorry, I'm no nearer getting back access to my books, I'm afraid. Delays in the building works mean they are all still in boxes. I think the main concern re. uncited text has been addressed, certainly Z1720 seems content. If that's not enough, I think it will probably need to go to FAR, as I just can't be certain when I will have access to the books again. I could definitely do more on it, but I just can't say when. KJP1 (talk) 06:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
- KJP1? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- It remains a page which is fit for purpose: that is for anyone seeking info on Brettingham. I’m sure the original editor is grateful for those attempting to patch things up to retain FA status, but really that little star was never all it was cracked up to be. So let it go. Like all Wikipedia pages, it will be attacked/edited by pedants, idiots, infoboxobsessives and, occasionally, architectural historians. Who knows what will emerge from the ruins. AdamBlack89 (talk) 20:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)