Talk:Pall Mall, London/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:10, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Will review. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 06:10, 19 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

General

No dablinks [1]
No copyvio detected [2]
External links check out [3]
Here are a few duplicate links. Feel free to keep any you think would be appropriate there, say if the last link was ages ago.

"17th- and 18th-century buildings": tennis court (para 4)
"Late history": Marlborough House, Schomberg House, Thomas Gainsborough, Institute of Directors
"Cultural references": Piccadilly, Whitehall

With the article only about 12K of prose, I think these can all go. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

in the 19th I think most articles would add "century" after "19th"

In this case, there had been a previous clause "in the 18th century". Dr. Blofeld, do you have any views on this one? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:29, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

History and topography

Evidence suggests a road What type of evidence?

The Survey of London source used for this paragraph says, "No evidence has been recorded to suggest that this highway was a Roman road but, as the westward continuation of the Strand, it was probably in existence in Saxon times" which cross-references Royal Commission on Historical Monuments (England) and Roman Roads in Britain. Let's try "historical research" Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:29, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Good. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure if you should use so many direct quotations, this is a new style I am seeing.

I think this was done by earlier work on the article - the quotations are reproduced from the Survey of London verbatim from the original manuscripts quoted in turn by that source. I think it would be better if these were just paraphrased from the article. Have a look now. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:48, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, loads better now. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:28, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Any idea who Lumsden was?

Archibald Lumsden appears to be a completely non-notable person who draws up a blank on historical sources, so I've trimmed him out. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Link these at first mention: St James's Street and St James's

Done - there seems to be inconsistency between articles using the full stop (eg: St. James's Park) and not (eg: St James's Street); that's the sort of thing that'll need an RfC to nail down one way or another. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The prose reads quite well, I find no problems here.

Cultural references

It might be good to add "novelist" before Thackeray, I like identifying people when I mention them first, just to save readers clicks. May be do the same for other such persons?

I've done Thackeray as it's not obvious from the context, but from the rest I think it is self-explanatory that the bookseller Robert Dodsley ran a bookshop and the architect Charles Barry designed a building, and adding those would make the prose a little redundant, I feel. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:26, 21 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all the fixes. The one point where you mentioned Dr Blofeld was just a suggestion, so this can be promoted now. Great job! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 01:53, 22 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]