Wikipedia:Featured article review/Belton House/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 6:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC) [1].

Belton House[edit]

Notified: WP Architecture, WP Lincolnshire WP Historic sites Lajmmoore, Guerillero, Giano, talk page notice 2018 and 2022-01-10

I am nominating this featured article for review. There are two talk page notices. The first discusses a lack of coverage by The National Trust. The second is a more extensive list of problems that I will list below.

  • There has been some coverage of the library in the academic literature over the past decade [2] [3]
  • WP:LEADCITE issues
  • Severe need for additional citations or trimming of uncited material
  • MOS:BOLD issues
  • Sourcing problems
    • Anon. The National Trust Belton House 1984
    • Moondial at IMDb.
    • "ALVA - Association of Leading Visitor Attractions". www.alva.org.uk. Retrieved 27 October 2020.
    • Christie's catalogue
    • Belton Park Golf Club
    • "History of the Royal Air Force Regiment"
    • John Harris, English Decorative Ironwork (1960)
    • Henry Williamson's Chronicle of Ancient Sunlight
  • Mixture of using a date and not in the SfNs
  • Footnote 2 provides no page numbers
  • Prices are not as of a date

Having read the article I think most if not all of the problems listed above are still present. In addition the article history does not discuss Belton House's links to the slave trade. So it is also failing coverage. Desertarun (talk) 21:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Desertarun see the instructions at WP:FAR. Please notify all of the WikiProjects listed at Talk:Belton House by using {{subst:FARMessage|Belton House}} with a section heading (something like Featured article review for Belton House). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
KJP1 have you interest in helping out at this article? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sandy, hope you are keeping well. Much as I’d like to, and much as Belton House merits FA coverage, I’m afraid real life is just too busy at present. Hopefully someone will pick it up. KJP1 (talk) 05:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image layout needs work. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:57, 23 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will see what I can do to save this Featured. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 09:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent - I should be able to help out with references, if needed. I've some of the books currently cited, and a range of others, Pevsner etc., that have good coverage of Belton. KJP1 (talk) 10:17, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It would be my pleasure to work with you; I dread on account of my own inability (and dialect) the replication of Giano's prose. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 10:25, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’m afraid I can’t commit working on a full redraft. As I mentioned to Sandy G above, real life is just too busy right now. But if you need cites for anything, I should be able to find them. As you say, Giano wrote beautifully, and their content is generally super-sound. But citation requirements were looser then than they are now. With Palladianism, I tried to keep the prose as far as possible, and focussed primarily on finding cites/sources, tweaking the text to match where required. I’ll watch this page, and chip in when/where I can. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 10:45, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Godspeed. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 11:25, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Could you tell me what Pevsner has to say about the house in Lincolnshire? The best Google Books has for me is a preview and I can't find this tome on the Internet Archive. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 14:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Vami IV if you're going to work towards a save, you can conduct the regular editing and questions on article talk, and keep this page updated weekly on progress. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Progress report, 1 February 2023 . The rewrite is more or less complete. The only section that hasn't seen rewriting, rearranging, and reordering wholesale now is #Interiors. It probably needs it, but I am burnt out. In the course of rewriting this article I have noticed a lot of failed verifications and removed or substantiated text as available sources allowed. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 22:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've copied over Vami IV's update from the article talkpage for ease. We've gone from 70 cites and 14 published sources to 141 cites and 21 very sound published sources. As detailed on the talkpage, I think the specific issues raised in the FAR have been addressed. Vami's done the heavy lifting, but I they are now "burnt out" - understandably! If there are any remaining concerns, I'm happy to look to address them. Otherwise, this could be closed without the need for FARC. KJP1 (talk) 07:45, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I will have time for a read-through in a few more days, but I noticed this unsightly section, which is ugly reading with all those interspersed citations. Would a table format work better there ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:39, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I know what you mean, but I'm not sure a table's the answer. They do contain important information about the sheer number of listed features on the estate, and basically listing = importance in this context. I'll see if I can group them in a more pleasing way. KJP1 (talk) 12:06, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have had a go, which hopefully makes it slightly less jarring to read. See what you think. KJP1 (talk) 12:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ack! How about using a bundled citation with a list of what goes to what ? See citation 452 here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:43, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy - this is making my head hurt! I think I can see from the example how to do it with a standard cite, e.g. take <ref>{{NHLE|num=1298447|desc=Two Garden Urns at the N end of the Italian Garden NW of Belton House|grade=II|access-date=28 January 2023}}</ref> and make it * Two Garden Urns: {{NHLE|num=1298447|desc=Two Garden Urns at the N end of the Italian Garden NW of Belton House|grade=II|access-date=28 January 2023|ref=none}}, all bundled with a <ref></ref>, but I don't know what to do when it's a shortened, repeat reference, e.g. <ref name="auto2"/>. Can you advise. KJP1 (talk) 14:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC) [reply]
I've tried one, 118, where there's no truncated referencing and it looks ok. But I still need to work out the shortened one. KJP1 (talk) 14:56, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Think it's now sorted. Hope you like it, coz it was painful! KJP1 (talk) 15:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, that is indeed beautious. If you think that was painful, imagine how Giano feels :) I will try to get to a read through, but can't make any promises, re my own current pain level. Thank you so much for digging in yet again. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't know what is going on here, either grammatically or in terms of the duplicate wikilinks:
    For about three centuries until 1984, Belton House was the seat successively of the [[Brownlow baronets|Brownlow family]], which had first acquired land in the area in the late 16th century, and of its heirs the [[Earl Brownlow|Cust family]] (in 1815 created [[Earl Brownlow]]). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:19, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Fixed that myself; please check. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Which "above"? (There are several similar.) "John Egerton-Cust, 2nd Earl Brownlow (1842–1867). Grandson of the above." SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:23, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why do we give dates on one image caption (Alice Brownlow, née Sherard (1659–1721) by John Riley) but not on another (Adelaide, wife of the 3rd Earl Brownlow, in a portrait by Frederick Leighton)? Whichever is chosen, be consistent throughout. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:29, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Now parallel. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is this citation commented out ? Although the 3rd Earl preferred to live at Ashridge or at [[Carlton House Terrace]] in London, he spent the rest of the 19th century reverting Belton House to its 17th-century appearance.<!--{{sfn|Tinniswood|1992|p=30}}--> SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:33, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Answered below. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This statement is begging for attribution; since it makes it into the lead, begs even more ... At the same time, the main façade of the house is reputed to have been the inspiration for the modern British motorway signs (HH icon.png) which give directions to stately homes.[37] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:39, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not done yet, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SG - Had a go at this one. Unfortunately, I've not got the book, but it is clearly cited, down to the page number. KJP1 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I had to skip down and read the body of the article to understand why the word significantly was used here, and why windows and staff were mixed in the same sentence. It's clear after reading the body, but needs to be better sorted in the lead. "The new house was fitted with the latest innovations such as sash windows for the principal rooms, and more significantly, with completely separate areas for the staff." SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Not done yet. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 11:25, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
And had a go at this one. It's wrapping two concepts into one sentence - the use of innovatory designs, such as sashes, and the use of innovatory planning, which split the servants from the masters, in contrast to the early period where they all mucked in together in the great hall. I hope the re-wording works. KJP1 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Desertarun might you continue reading from this point to pick up any miscellaneous copyedit needs and to check whether all the issues you raised have been addressed? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:49, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Overall the article is in pretty amazing shape considering how it started. All of the issues I mentioned were addressed; regarding the library, from [4], it would be interesting add that the books were lent to the wider community - this wasn't a private library. I will have a read through for other issues, but I'm more of BOLD editor, the details of copyedit often go over my head. Desertarun (talk) 20:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Well, I am not known as a copyeditor, so we need others to read through. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:39, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    I'll have a read through tomorrow and see what I can find. Desertarun (talk) 21:09, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Re. the above point, I've put in a footnote referencing the journal article. KJP1 (talk) 18:10, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@KJP1 and Vami IV: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:56, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have made some more copyedits according to your comments above. The reference to Tinniswood 1999, p. 30 is commented out because the following citation is just more Tinniswood; I commented it out in case someone found another citation to stick there and break up the page spread of the following Tinniswood citation. At some point this week I'll dig up the energy to finally tackle #Architecture. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 02:39, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts below, will add more later. Desertarun (talk) 09:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • The lead needs updating to reflect changes to the body in this FAR
  • I updated the lead, it looks acceptable to me now, although others may want to alter/spruce it up
  • Is it usual to call a section "interiors"? to me this means decor and furniture, but that section also discusses the room design, would something like "Room design and interior decor" be better?
I think this is fine. It's a pretty standard way of distinguishing between the inside and the outside of a building. But don't take my word for it - Pevsner's section on the inside of the house is titled "The INTERIOR". (p=136) KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The interiors section starts: "The plan of the rooms at Belton was outdated for a grand house of its time." That paragraph then goes on to argue the house should have been designed to suit infrequent VIP guests. This is a negative architectural judgement and the owners doubtless didn't want to build the house for others.
I take the point here. I think the original author is likely quite right, but they wrote at a time when Wiki was less source-focussed than it is now. I've not been able to find a source to fully support it, so have trimmed what can't be supported. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC).[reply]
  • "The principal room is the large Marble Hall (1)" , what is special about the hall?
It's the main room of the house which, as was common, was designed to impress from the outset. Hence the marble, and hence the elaborate carving. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The word "principal" is overused.
Have trimmed. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The second of the principal reception rooms" is contradictory, I'd think there should be only one principal reception room.
Trimmed. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Tyrconnel Room (10), was transformed into the principal or state bedroom during the occupancy of Lord Tyrconnel in an attempt to create a more fashionable suite of Baroque state rooms on the first floor. After his death in 1754, it became a Billiard Room, until the 3rd Earl Brownlow had it refurnished more than a century later." What did it change into? It looks a bit of a tease to not say.
Neither Pevsner nor HE say. Tinniswood will. I shall check. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Great Staircase to the east of the Marble Hall is unusually placed at Belton, as in a house of this period one would expect to find the staircase in the hall" could this be reworded?
Have tried. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is a "procession link"?
I've re-worded and changed it to processional route. It basically means "the way the great and the good moved from one room to another". I'm slightly suprised there's not a bluelink, but there you go. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Great Dining Room, now the Library, has been greatly altered and all traces of Carolean decoration removed, first by James Wyatt in 1778 when it was transformed into a drawing room with a vaulted ceiling, and again in 1876, when its use was again changed, this time to a library." Can this be reworded?
Have tried, and put in a cite. KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the Windsor Bedroom (directly above the School Room), so-called following its use by Edward VIII during the 1936 abdication crisis. Today, Belton has a permanent exhibition devoted to that event". Why is there a permanent exhibition other than the obvious, are there any interesting stories?
I've not seen it, but the Abdication Crisis was a big deal and Perry Cust's part in it reasonably major. Hence the exhibition. We could expand on it - I've just been rereading the section in Philip Zeigler's Edward VIII biography. Basically Cust fell badly between two stools, supporting Edward until the Abdication, and then refusing to go to his wedding afterwards. Edward and Mrs S never forgave him for the latter, and George VI and Queen Elizabeth hated him for the former, and he was abruptly sacked as a Lord in waiting by the new king. Do you think it needs more? KJP1 (talk) 17:35, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think from what you've said there is enough to warrant any more being added. Desertarun (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've finished reading through the article and can see no other problems. Its a very nice read apart from the interiors section and the lead. Desertarun (talk) 10:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Apart from the few points above i'm ok to keep and close this. Desertarun (talk) 19:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Desertarun - Profuse apologies for reverting earlier. That, and the Previous button, are just too close when I try to edit on the iPad. Glad you found the article a better read, and thanks for your comments and input which have definitely brought it closer to current FA standards. I'll look to address SandyG's two outstanding comments tomorrow and then, if it can be closed as a Keep, that will be a good job of work. KJP1 (talk) 22:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
While I've got you, I noticed you have an interest in slave ships. I don't know if you do GA, but I have Penrhyn Castle up for GAN. It's quite a powerful example of the links between the British country house and the slave trade, and I've tried to cover it in some more depth than is perhaps usual. It might be of interest. KJP1 (talk) 22:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I was there a few years ago on an amazingly sunny day, the views from the walls were spectacular. I was aware of its links to the slave trade. I'll have a read tomorrow. Desertarun (talk) 22:50, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KJP1 when you get to it, there are still two not yet done things in my list above. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've been busy! But I'll get to them. KJP1 (talk) 18:27, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sandy - now had a go at rewording these two. Let me know what you think. KJP1 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Those two look good. Vami IV mentioned somewhere wanting to expand something, so I'm unclear if we are done here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to look over this during the weekend. Hog Farm Talk 14:09, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "built between 1685 and 1688" - the body indicates the interior was finished in 1687, so it's not entirely clear to me why 1688 is given as the completion date
Done - by correction. KJP1 (talk) 09:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Cust died in 1751, because of the "unusual fatigues" of his office," - how did Cust die in 1751 if he was still Speaker in 1770?
Done - by correction. A clear error. KJP1 (talk) 09:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the home depôt"- I don't think the diacritic in depot is needed, especially since depot is used without the diacritic later in the article
Done - by correction. KJP1 (talk) 09:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ready for the architecture section, will resume later this afternoon. Hog Farm Talk 17:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "The principal room is the large Marble Hall (1) at the centre of the south front" - the paragraph beginning with this sentence I can't tell what it's sourced to - the wording of the footnote suggests that it may only be supporting the quote from Winde
Done - by addition of a Pevsner cite. KJP1 (talk) 09:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is Wyatville or Wyattville the correct spelling? Both are used
Done - by correction. It's the former, and I hope it's now right throughout. KJP1 (talk) 09:55, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sources look fine, I think this is very close to being keepable. @Vami IV and KJP1: Hog Farm Talk 21:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hog Farm - Thanks very much. I hope I’ve addressed everything and that it may be possible to wrap this up. I think Vami may have been planning to do a bit more on Architecture but, for the purposes for this FAR, I think the criteria are met. It’s always capable of further improvement, of course, but in terms of whether it should keep the FA status, I think we’re there. KJP1 (talk) 11:25, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If Vami thinks the additional work is non-essential, than I think this one is good to close. Hog Farm Talk 14:07, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'd have composed that section differently, but it's perfectly functional now. I no longer think I need do any more work to this article. If reviewers disagree, though, Giano helpfully sent me some pieces of books he used for this a little while ago. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 21:57, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Close without FARC Hog Farm Talk 23:43, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/Belton_House/archive1&oldid=1142911332"