Talk:St James's Theatre

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
WikiProject London (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Theatre (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject iconThis article is part of WikiProject Theatre, a WikiProject dedicated to coverage of theatre on Wikipedia.
To participate: Feel free to edit the article attached to this page, join up at the project page, or contribute to the project discussion.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Image facing[edit]

This article has seen some great work. My only complaint, a minor quibble, is faces should face into the page. Currently Dickens is giving proper and stern attention to the text, but Oscar Wilde is interested in the blank margin to his left and Vivien Leigh is fixated on the little blue [edit] button to her upper right. I'll try a slight re-arrangement for better facings (see WP:MoS#Images, bullet #4, Exception). -- Stbalbach 02:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I see what you mean, but this is not optimal either, because images should ideally alternate left and right in articles, beginning with the right side; and also the image should not move headings away from the left margin. -- Ssilvers 04:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Yeah it's a trade off - staggering and image facing are often trade offs, I find image facing more important aesthetically - the alternative is process the photos to change the facing, or find new photos. I added the hard break so the References header would be assured to be against the left margin, as you say. Was the break causing a problem on your screen? On my screen, without the break, the References header is up against the lower right corner of Vivien's picture. -- Stbalbach 06:05, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think that moving the heading to the right of the Leigh photo looks awful. I give up. -- Ssilvers 01:48, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Per WP:MOS#Images:
Do not place left-aligned images directly below second-level (===) headings, as this disconnects the heading from the text it precedes. Instead, place the image directly above the heading. For example...
-- Stbalbach 01:56, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

New files[edit]

Recently the files below were uploaded and they appear to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think they would be a useful addition, please feel free to include any of them.

Dcoetzee 12:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)

Assessment[edit]

I have decreased the assessment of this article to C-class. Years ago, we might have called this B-class, but it relies on only three sources, and large parts of it do not have in-line cites, so I think it should more properly be called C-class until the referencing is improved and the lead is expanded per WP:LEAD. -- Ssilvers (talk) 01:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

It's at least B-class now. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:52, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:St James's Theatre/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 23:43, 11 February 2019 (UTC)

Images[edit]

  • I think that "Vivien Leigh and Laurence Olivier" needs a tag explaining why it is free use in the US.
  • Will check and add or remove picture.Tim riley talk 17:22, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • I think the existing tag makes the copyright status clear. I am not expert in images, but I don't think anyone would think the picture is not free use in America. Tim riley talk 17:35, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • At ACR and FAC I have had comments which started "I know that it is obvious, but …" However, doing a little research it seems that you are right.
  • Optional: Centre the captions.
  • I don't usually. Is there an MoS guide on this? Tim riley talk 17:22, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • No. A matter of personal preference. Hence labelled "optional".
  • Optional: alt text.
  • Definitely. I am usually very particular about this. Tim riley talk 17:22, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

Prose[edit]

  • Note 5. Could you have a look at the punctuation?
  • Done. Comma added to close clause. Tim riley talk 17:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:25, 12 February 2019 (UTC)

  • "who mounted a series of revivals and a few new burlesques and extravaganzas, which failed to pay" Marginal for GA, but "failed to pay" may not make immediate sense as meaning 'failed to show a profit'. That is they "paid" in that money came in, just not as much as went out.
  • The quote towards the end of 1858-69 ("She had done nobly …") is fifty words long. MOS:BQ suggests that quotes of "more than about 40 words" should be block quotes. At GA fifty is acceptable to me, but I feel that for once adherence to the MOS may improve the article. Your choice.
  • There seems to be a lucuna in the text between 1871 and 1875
  • I think the quote box covers this. I am a bit reluctant to duplicate its content. Tim riley talk 17:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
  • For GA I am inclined to agree.
  • "She had made her name in management founding and running the Court Theatre" Should there be punctuation?

It is very pleasing and a little frustrating that I can find nothing apart from the minutiae above to pick at. Probably the easiest GAN assessment I have carried out and an article of a standard well above that of most GAs. If you could come back to me on the above points, I shall be delighted to pass it. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:19, 13 February 2019 (UTC)

All done, I think, except for the fourth bullet point, as explained. Tim riley talk 17:19, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose (Symbol support vote.svg) 1b. MoS (Symbol support vote.svg) 2a. ref layout (Symbol support vote.svg) 2b. cites WP:RS (Symbol support vote.svg) 2c. no WP:OR (Symbol support vote.svg) 3a. broadness (Symbol support vote.svg)
3b. focus (Symbol support vote.svg) 4. neutral (Symbol support vote.svg) 5. stable (Symbol support vote.svg) 6a. free or tagged images (Symbol support vote.svg) 6b. pics relevant (Symbol support vote.svg)
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked Symbol comment 2.png are unassessed