Jump to content

Talk:Chester Cathedral

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 99.244.187.112 (talk) at 20:13, 7 April 2008. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Assessment Report

  1. The article needs to be expanded.
  2. It should continue to make use of sections.
  3. References and Citations are crucial for wikipedia, and so these must be added as the article is expanded. Make sure that as many as possible are "in-line" citations.(See WP:References, WP:V, and WP:CITE for guidance.)

Peter I. Vardy 13:50, 10 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Moved from mainspace

I moved this paragraph - the work of a rather opinionated editor. We need some references for this is we're going to put it back in.

"Due to the tapered shape of the tower, the very elevated location and steep angle of the louvers, the fact that the bell frame is placed directly on to the concrete support girders, and the two concrete floors between the bells and bell ringers, the acoustics of the bells are very poor, both outside for the general public and inside for the ringers.[citation needed] Outside the bells are deafening in the close vicinity of the tower, yet barely audible at the grand west doors of the Cathedral.[citation needed] Inside, the bells are very indistinct due to the concrete floors and the lack of padding between the frame and concrete girders."

--Mcginnly | Natter 17:19, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm also moving the organist's roll-call - WP:NOT a directory.

Organists

--Mcginnly | Natter 17:26, 17 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I'm on an ongoing programme photographing Chester cathedral - I'll post them here for selective inclusion in the article. --Joopercoopers (talk) 13:42, 20 March 2008 (UTC) (legit sock of user:mcginnly)[reply]

  • 14th century choir stall with canopy, note misericord and the delicately carved bench ends.
    14th century choir stall with canopy, note misericord and the delicately carved bench ends.
  • The vaulted ceiling of the choir
    The vaulted ceiling of the choir
  • I intend to reshoot this from further back (when the lecturn has been moved)
    I intend to reshoot this from further back (when the lecturn has been moved)
  • The Cathedra
    The Cathedra
  • Choir carving 1 - Elephant and castle - note the feet of a horse, demonstrating that the carver had learnt of elephants by word of mouth.
    Choir carving 1 - Elephant and castle - note the feet of a horse, demonstrating that the carver had learnt of elephants by word of mouth.
  • Choir carving 2 - Dean's chair?
    Choir carving 2 - Dean's chair?
  • Westminster window - Modern stained glass from the south aisle of the nave
    Westminster window - Modern stained glass from the south aisle of the nave
  • Glass from the south transept
    Glass from the south transept

If anyone's interested the restoration of the chapter house glass can be seen in real time here - although I've been watching it for 3 days and have yet to see any work being done - perhaps they're on holiday :-) --Joopercoopers (talk) 15:11, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Chester Cathedral again

I think that there's lots to like about this article, and the interior photos are simply great. It's obviously not a million miles away from a credible GA nomination, but if I was the reviewer I'd be critical of two things. First of all I'd say that there were too many short sentences - yes, I know what you're going to say, but bear with me. ;-) Secondly I'd say that the short sentences result in there being no real flow in some of the prose, making it read a little bit disjointedly; this, then this, then this. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:54, 19 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that. I'll have a go. I suspect I am stronger on content than on style! Cheers. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:01, 20 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a bit of copyediting on this article, but there are one or two places where I don't feel certain enough about what's being said to make any changes. For instance: "The organ was later re-erected in its present position at the front of the north transept. In 1910 William Hill & Son of London extensively rebuilt and revoiced it, replacing the Cavaillé-Coll reeds with new pipes of their own. The choir organ was enlarged and moved behind the choirstalls on the south side. The instrument was again overhauled by Rushworth & Dreaper of Liverpool in 1969, when a new mechanism and some new pipework made to a design drawn up by Roger Fisher was installed." Are we talking about two organs here, the organ and the choir organ, or just one?

I've got a suggestion to make as well. I found the Cathedral section a bit difficult to follow without having any idea of the layout of the cathedral. Would it be possible to include a floor plan of the cathedral? --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 22:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It shows the value of a pair of outside eyes. Although what I said about the organ is what the source says, in fact the choir organ is a division of the main organ (and I can verify that from attendance at organ recitals); text amended accordingly. Your idea of a plan is excellent (maybe essential) but I have a problem with including one. I do not have the expertise to produce one myself and to copy one may run into copyright difficulties. The best plan I have found is at Chester Tourist but I am pretty sure this is under copyright, and I have no clue how to satisfy the obligation of a fair use rationale. The one at National Image Library I think demands a fee. There are older, probably out of copyright, but much less clear plans such as Intaglio Fine Art and Ash Rare Books and, perhaps the best "oldie" (dated 1893) at Images of Medieval Art and Architecture. What do you think? Thanks for the contributions made so far. Oh, and I should like to use the image of the exquisite choir canopy and a misericord on Talk:Chester Cathedral - but how do you fit it all in (maybe swap it with the one of the ceiling)? Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:43, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Chester Tourist plan looks perfect. My understanding is that we draw an image ourselves, based on that one, then there are no copyright problems. I'll have a go at producing one if you like. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 16:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, that would be ideal. Hope it does not take too much valuable time. Peter Peter I. Vardy (talk) 16:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've made a start on the plan, and I'll hopefully be able to upload something tomorrow, but Monday at the latest. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 02:21, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No rush. I meant to say "too much of your valuable time"! Peter I. Vardy (talk) 08:34, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I've finished it, and added it to the article. If you see any errors, let me know. I wasn't sure whether to draw it in the same east-west orientation as the graphic on the cathedral's web site, or north-south as in most of the older maps, but I settled on east-west in the end. It would be very easy to rotate the graphic 90 degrees to produce a north-south orientation though, if there's some convention to do so. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 15:39, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's excellent; many thanks. I prefer the orientation the way you have done it. I visited the cathedral this morning and have a bit more information which I will add when time allows. I was wondering about replacing the image of the choir ceiling with that of the choirstalls and misericord - these are well worth demonstrating (and to have both would be too crowded). What do you think? Peter I. Vardy (talk) 17:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Swapping the images sounds good to me. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I find it easier to do copyediting in bursts, coming back with a fresh eye from time to time, so I may make a few more suggestions, but I'd say that this article is definitely worth a punt a GA now. You've done a great job with it. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:38, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done a bit more polishing and submitted it as a GAC. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. What an excellent job you've both done on the article - no Peter I've no problem with you swapping the images, however from a photographic point of view, the choirstall photo could be improved - I'm going to return soon and take a panoramic shot of the choir and rood screen, which might be a better alternative - I have a few shots of some of the carving there also - the 'elephant' with horses legs which is mentioned in the audio guide and also the erm....I think it's called the Deans chair....I'll have to check, I think it's in the guide book. I'll upload them and make a bit of a gallery on the talk page. I made a few alterations this morning - Pevsner had his dates muddled regarding when St John's was a cathedral - His dates related to when St. John was the sole cathedral - it then became a co-cathedral, but for simplicity in our article it seems better to say St. John's was the cathedral until the dissolution. Personally I wouldn't waste your time with GA and pitch straight at FA. From a style point of view, I hope you don't mind me saying, it is a little dry with description of the building and its contents - I'll see if I can dig up some blood and guts to spice it up a bit - perhaps a new section, the cathedral in history. I seem to remember a member of Chester cathedral's clergy was involved in a very public debate and mini media storm (a media squall?) a few years ago - I think she was born with a cleft palate and she objected to the right of parents to terminate pregnancies if this malady was detected.

I think your plan is pretty good Malleus, so I'm sorry to suggest this as I know you spent quite some time on it but......this plan confers better information regarding the various phases of the build, and the inclusion of the vaulting lines is really useful for architectural nerds such as myself. You actually picked me to the post regarding the plan - Although the plan I just linked to is actually in the public domain, my view is it needs a fairly extensive overdraw to make it sufficiently legible - colour etc. The other issue with your plan Malleus is that it might be better to exclude the text in english and just use numbers. That way we can still link the text in the image caption - but the plan can easily be trans-wiki'd to other languages. Kind regards --Joopercoopers (talk) 12:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you or Peter want to replace my plan with something else that's fine with me. I'm not wedded to it. :-) If we're going to stick with my version, then I'll be quite happy to remove the text, if there's general agreement to do that. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 12:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll have a stab at another and we can make our minds up then. PS. seems the Rev. Joanna Jepson was the curate of St Michael's Church, Chester and so nothing to do with the Cathedral. --Joopercoopers (talk) 13:21, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I like the clarity of M's plan. The older one (see my comment above) is the best I have found out there in the public domain. As it is, it's rather overcrowded and, because of the constraints of Wikipedia, would not look good on first glance. But if it can be clarified, that might be a better option. I await the actions of the experts!
I agree about the dry style: with the content it's a bit difficult to cheer it up. Let's see how it gets on as a GAC and then if there's a will towards going for FAC, see what we and other editors come up with. What do you think? Oh, and is it possible to have the images (thanks J for even more) also on Commons? I think people will be more likely to see them there via the commonscat link than to realise they are on the talk page. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 14:32, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'm a little wary of uploading to the commons - they seem to have odd ways of doing things over there sometimes - no fair use etc. I was also hoping to do the plan in a similar way to the clickable map here, but linking directly to the images. --Joopercoopers (talk) 15:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The photos are too good to languish just on this page so I have incorporated them into a gallery in the article. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A little spice

Ok I had a bit of a delve for some blood and guts to spice the text up a bit - my thoughts are here. I think the bwpics site will prove to be a questionable reference at FAC - so we'll need to independently verify those bits. Plan on the way.......--Joopercoopers (talk) 14:32, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that really is some work you've done! I've put my comments on the same page, interspersed with your ideas. Sorry some of them are a bit negative. If you think there's anything reliable and relevant to be added to the article, please do so. Cheers. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 12:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extra bits of information that could be added to the article

I've come across these bits of information, but I'm not sure how best to incorporate them in the article:

  • There are Norman columns in the cellars that support the abbot's great hall (Home, p. 15)
  • Home p. 18 says that "the men of Hanbury fled to Chester in 1875, taking with them in a litter the body of St. Werburgh, which the chronicler avers "was then for the first time dissolved into dust". Her body was laid in the Church of St. Peter and St. Paul, which was afterwards rededicated in her honour as the Church of St. Werburch and St. Oswald". Note that the date disagrees with [1] by some 32 years...

More to come when I have the time... Mike Peel (talk) 22:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

GA Passed

This article has passed the GA noms. Further suggestions for improvements would be to add a section on the cultural significance of the church in its local community if possible. This article is otherwise well organized and well referenced and has potential to be FA-class. If you feel that this review was in error, feel free to take it to WP:GA/R. Thanks. Tarret talk 20:09, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chester_Cathedral&oldid=204060267"