Wikipedia:Peer review/Manor House, Sleaford/archive1

Manor House, Sleaford

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Hopefully, this is the right topic area to list this in. It is a grade II* listed building in an English market town with some interesting owners (including an aunt of Cecil Rhodes, who spent his summers at the house as a boy) and a classic tale of Victorian disinheritance. I've done as much as I can in the way of finding source material (short of sifting through Lincolnshire Archives) and so I am hoping to take it to GA. Any comments would therefore be greatly appreciated, many thanks, — Noswall59 (talk) 10:33, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Rodw I don't have much time tonight, but a couple of immediate thoughts:

• You say "English Heritage declared the group a Grade II* listed building," - it has been pointed out to me in the past that technically the secretary of state makes the decision (even though EH does the assessment, recommendation & recording of the decision). User:Peter I. Vardy has developed a form of words which seem to achieve the same sort of thing without the (minor) technical inaccuracy ie "It is recorded in the National Heritage List for England as a designated Grade II* listed building".
  • Okay, thanks, I will bear that in mind for the future. I think I have corrected it now.
• Because of the split of English Heritage into 2 different bodies some of the links to their sites are breaking (eg Ref 2). Ref 4 (and similar) redirect to Historic England (with the same UID) but a different publisher (I don't see this is an immediate or major issue).
  • I saw something about this a few days ago. Urgh, it is a pain. I have now repaired ref 2 and updated the publisher information.
• There is a redlink for a category "Grade II* listed buildings in North Kesteven" - this either needs creating or using a parent cat.
  • I've used the parent category.
• isbn numbers could be updated to the 13 digit format
  • Done.

I will try to take a better look tomorrow (or by the end of the week).— Rod ^talk 21:39, 25 March 2015 (UTC)

• • As a result of the English Heritage change suggest using {{NHLE}} for the references to pick up the new web site and name as this future proofs against any further changes as it keeps all instances of web site in one place. Keith D (talk) 22:14, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
    • Thanks, Keith. I've only recently learnt of the template and I'd started using it another article. I've now used it in this one too.

Comment by Keith D

• The use of short referencing without a linkage to the full reference is not really helpful. Would be good if linkage could be provided. Keith D (talk) 22:34, 25 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Okay, I think I've done what you're suggesting, but let me know if I've misunderstood.
    • Looks OK. Thanks for change. Keith D (talk) 17:27, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
      • Thank you for your comments, Keith. —Noswall59 (talk) 20:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC).

@Keith D:, @Rodw:. Thanks, Keith and Rod, for your comments. I have replied above and (hopefully) corrected each of the issues raised. Kind regards, —Noswall59 (talk) 10:58, 26 March 2015 (UTC).

A few more from Rodw

• I have expanded some of the references to newspaper stories to include URLs for archive versions (if don't have access you can request a free subscription - start at WP:BNA

• Thank you, I have repeated this with as many of the sources as possible.

• I assume from ref 7 that the "Cragg Map" is a map drawn by someone called Cragg rather than being a map of rocky outcrops, but maybe another form of words would clarify

• Yes, It think Cragg was a person, but I cannot find any more information about him. I have reworded in the article to remove his name and added the original document's catalogue name to the reference.

• Is all the stuff about Moore & Forbes solicitors relevant to the house?

• Removed.

• Any details of the old buildings use for stone by Elizabeth Cross?

• Unfortunately not, this is based on a newspaper article discussing the house when it came onto the market after her death and it goes into less detail than I would have liked. I have added quotation marks around "ancient buildings" as well, because I guess that's a subjective term.

• Petty sessional division could be wikilinked

• Done.

• It would be beyond my skills but a plan of the layout of the different parts of the building might be useful to help the reader understand how all the bits fit together. There are also a few more suitably licenced photos here which might help to illustrate it.— Rod ^talk 18:48, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

• @Rodw: That would probably be beyond my skillset too... is there somewhere I can request this sort of thing? As for the photos, I will take a look - Geograph is very useful for these sorts of articles, though it's a shame that people seem to be averse to taking photographs of Sleaford when it's sunny... Once again, many thanks for your comments, —Noswall59 (talk) 20:26, 26 March 2015 (UTC).

• If there is nothing suitable currently available you could visit Wikipedia:Graphics Lab where one of the volunteers may be able to help.— Rod ^talk 20:31, 26 March 2015 (UTC)

Thanks to those who commented: I've incorporated pretty much all of the suggestions, although I am struggling to find a detailed plan to work from regarding the last point made by Rodw. I've decided to take the plunge and nominated this for GA, so I am closing this review. —Noswall59 (talk) 18:02, 1 April 2015 (UTC).