Talk:Penrhyn Castle

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

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008[edit]

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 20:31, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

National Trust pilot[edit]

Hello! During late June, July and some of August, I'm working on a paid project sponsored by the National Trust to review and enhance coverage of NT sites. You can find the pilot edits here, as well as a statement and contact details for the National Trust. I am leaving this message when I make a first edit to a page; please do get in touch if you have any concerns. Lajmmoore (talk) 15:50, 4 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Slavery and slate-mining content[edit]

In response to this discussion on my talk page, I've been signposted by the pilot manager to two NT articles, which might be useful to expand sections of the article:

I'm not sure there is capacity in this pilot, but I hope the sources are useful for other editors. Lajmmoore (talk) 09:32, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is also a useful source. KJP1 (talk) 09:44, 1 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion[edit]

I’m undertaking a bit of an expansion to the article. Not yet sure as to the extent of this, but I intend to cover the links to colonialism and historic slavery, and its recent appearances in the ongoing culture wars, as well as a more traditional focus on the building’s history and architecture. I appreciate that aspects of this may be somewhat controversial and will, of course, be pleased to discuss any aspect of the expansion here. KJP1 (talk) 12:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That sounds like a good approach. The later reception of a place and its associated history is certainly relevant, though sometimes harder to navigate. Richard Nevell (talk) 12:12, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Richard Nevell - much appreciate the interest. I know it's not a real castle, but it is a very good example of a fake one! And you're right - its history, wound up in a number of movements including colonialism/slavery/trade unionism and 21st-century culture wars - will require some careful navigation. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 13:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
KJP1, the lead, history and slavery sections look good at first reading. I have added a sentence and paragraph break to the history section about the acquisition of the estate as I found it confusing without it. TSventon (talk) 16:08, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Glad you like it. And thanks for the edit, which does indeed make it clearer. The habit of families alternating the first names of the first-born sons, George/Edward/George/Edward etc. can indeed make teasing out the lineage very confusing. KJP1 (talk) 17:55, 4 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

B class MILHIST review[edit]

@KJP1: B class. Excellent article. You are on your honor to fix the introduction sentences listed below. The introduction is not usually cited because it summarizes the article. However, the introduction should only contain material that is included and cited in the article. Djmaschek (talk) 03:56, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • "It was originally a medieval fortified manor house, on an estate founded by Ednyfed Fychan." (Fychan is not mentioned under Early owners.)
  • "In the 15th century Gwilym ap Griffith was granted a licence to crenellate and built a stone castle and added a tower house." (Licence to crenellate, stone castle, and tower house are not mentioned under Early owners.)
  • Please fix by (1) adding the missing material (Fychan, crenellate, etc.) under Early owners, or (2) changing the two introduction sentences to something like: "In the 15th century Gwilym ap Griffith came into possession of an estate on which he built a fortified manor house."
Djmaschek - Very much appreciated, and understood. Shall sort that issue today. Thanks again for taking a look. KJP1 (talk) 04:52, 16 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Penrhyn Castle/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Desertarun (talk · contribs) 10:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review this one. Desertarun (talk) 10:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "On the eventual emancipation of slaves in the British Empire, by the Slavery Abolition Act 1833, Dawkins-Pennant received significant compensation." could this be changed from the passive?
Done - I hope, never been that hot on the active/passive. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He, and his son and heir, George Douglas-Pennant, 2nd Baron Penrhyn, continued the development of their slate interests at Penrhyn Quarry, and of the supporting infrastructure throughout North-West Wales. Firmly opposed to trade unionism at their quarries, their tenure saw bitter strikes over union recognition and workers' rights, culminating in the Great Strike of 1900-1903, the longest dispute in British industrial history." Looks tangential to the house, ok for the body but not convinced about it in the lead
See below.
  • "he massively expanded the activities", the word massively always sounds too informal to me, others may disagree
Done - replacement with "greatly"?
  • "West India Committee" is mentioned in the body, but the lead writes West India Association, are these the same?
Done - yes, standardised as Committee, and found a blue link. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He continued the approach adopted by his second cousin: development and expansion of the Penrhyn Quarry; strong opposition to the abolition of slavery; service in Parliament; and building at Penrhyn" would look nicer in regular prose
Done - I think. Have a tried a slight re-write. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Hugh Douglas-Pennant, 4th Baron Penrhyn, who inherited in 1927", should be clearer what was inherited
Done. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Trust has held custodianship of Penrhyn Castle", starts a new subsection, so should be The National Trust
Done. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Slate section; could the links with the house be strengthened, i'm not failing if that doesn't happen, just interested to know
See below.
  • "The Blitz", is The capitalised? I'm not certain
Done - it doesn't appear to be in our main article, so I've changed it here.
  • "donjon or keep", could "or keep" be added to the first instance rather than the third
Done. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link "masonry"
Done. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • ""a strikingly inventive piece of architecture"" can this quote be attributed?
Done - to Pevsner. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The room is named for its ebony panelling and furniture, although much is in fact ebonised rather than real." This is a short sub section, could it be incorporated elsewhere? Not a fail if you want to leave it
Done - Yes, too short for a section, so I've wrapped it into the Drawing Room. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "home farm" is double linked
Done - De-linked the second. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for picking this up, and for the prompt and helpful review. I hope I've addressed all but one of the concerns. The issue is Slate and Strikes, both in the lead, and in the body. What I was trying to do here, as with Slavery, was to write an article about a house that gave greater consideration to its context than I normally do. I thought Penrhyn would be a good place to try this out, firstly because it is so striking an example; "there is no building which illustrates so graphically the role which slave plantation profits played in the growth of British economic power"; and secondly because the house achieved some prominence during the NT's culture wars episode. In the time I've been writing buildings articles on here, I've come to think that we, myself included, do underplay the social/economic context in which they were created and existed. Penrhyn, and the life that its lords led there, were made possible by their profits from slaves and slate. I think there are strong, implicit, links between these two aspects and I've tried to make them a bit more explicit in the article. Very happy to discuss, of course, but I hope this makes clearer what I was trying to achieve. KJP1 (talk) 14:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I understand now, and I'm actually in full agreement with the sentiment above. So i'll mark this off as acceptable. Desertarun (talk) 15:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass:
  • I read and reviewed the article. I opened all of the images and checked their licenses. I checked for copyright violation in earwig. I checked the article history for edit wars. This article has passed as a Good Article. Well done! Desertarun (talk) 15:36, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Desetarun - Much appreciated, and I hope you found the article of interest. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 17:32, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Cielquiparle (talk) 12:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
The Grand Hall of Penrhyn Castle
The Grand Hall of Penrhyn Castle

Improved to Good Article status by KJP1 (talk). Nominated by Bruxton (talk) at 21:52, 22 February 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Penrhyn Castle; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

  • GA, in time, long enough, neutral, adequately cited, no apparent copyvios. KJP1, can you please provide the line from Hussey 1988 that backs up Alt0? From Google Books snippet view, I see the term "mock castle" only once, on page 223. Please also provide the line supporting Alt1. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:13, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Usernameunique: Thanks for the speedy review. I can add another source to the article- there are also other sources which call it a "mock castle". The links are paywalled so here are archives. 1, 2. Bruxton (talk) 00:41, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Usernameunique: I added another source for Mock castles. Bruxton (talk) 02:44, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, Alt0 approved. For Alt1 I would want the full line supporting it, but Alt0 is interesting in any event. Two nits. First, you might move up the source you just added to the semicolon, since it supports only the first half of the sentence. Second, some of the sources contain duplicative links (both the title and OCLC link to the same WorldCat entry). --Usernameunique (talk) 02:59, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Penrhyn_Castle&oldid=1213003625"