Wikipedia:Peer review/Isabella Beeton/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Isabella Beeton[edit]

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review


Isabella Beeton was a remarkable woman. Although thought of as a cook, based on her 1861 work Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management, she was actually a publisher, writer and editor. A tragically short life—she died at the age of 28—her impact has lasted over 150 years and her book has never been out of print. This article has had a revamp recently, been through GAN and has had a further expansion since then. A push for FAC is considered, unless reviewers advise otherwise. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 19:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from the Dr[edit]

Lede

"although all the recipes were plagiarised" -in the lede. I gather you mean "though". I think I'd split it a bit, write it as "In 1857, less than a year after the wedding, Isabella began writing for one of her husband's publications, The Englishwoman's Domestic Magazine. She translated French fiction and wrote for the cookery column, though all the recipes were plagiarised from other works, or sent in by the magazine's readers."

  • " She gave birth to four children, two of whom died in infancy; she also had several miscarriages, and two of her biographers, Nancy Spain and Kathryn Hughes, posit the theory that Samuel had contracted syphilis in a pre-marital liaison with a prostitute, and had unwittingly and unknowingly passed the condition on to his wife." -too much in one sentence, try " She gave birth to four children, two of whom died in infancy, and had several miscarriages. Two of her biographers, Nancy Spain and Kathryn Hughes, posit the theory that Samuel had contracted syphilis in a pre-marital liaison with a prostitute, and had unwittingly and unknowingly passed the condition on to his wife."
  • "Several cooks, including Elizabeth David and Clarissa Dickson Wright, have criticised Isabella's work, particularly her use of other people's recipes, although her name has become associated with knowledge and authority on Victorian cooking and home management; the Oxford English Dictionary identifies that by 1891 the term "Mrs Beeton" had become used as a generic name for a domestic authority. She is also considered a strong influence in the building or shaping of a middle-class identity of the Victorian era." -again it's too long, try "Several cooks, including Elizabeth David and Clarissa Dickson Wright, have criticised Isabella's work, particularly her use of other people's recipes. Though her name has become associated with knowledge and authority on Victorian cooking and home management, the Oxford English Dictionary identifies that by 1891 the term "Mrs Beeton" had become used as a generic name for a domestic authority. She is also considered a strong influence in the building or shaping of a middle-class identity of the Victorian era."
Early life

"Benjamin died when Isabella was four-years-old,[c] and Elizabeth, pregnant and unable to cope with raising the children on her own while maintaining Benjamin's business, sent her two elder daughters to live with family members; Isabella was sent to live with her recently widowed paternal grandfather in Great Orton, Cumbria, although she was back with her mother within the next two years.[6]" -too long, try "Benjamin died when Isabella was four-years-old,[c] and Elizabeth, pregnant and unable to cope with raising the children on her own while maintaining Benjamin's business, sent her two elder daughters to live with family members. Isabella was sent to reside with her recently widowed paternal grandfather in Great Orton, Cumbria, though returned to her mother within two years."

  • " Dorling was the first Clerk of Epsom Racecourse, and had been granted residence within the racecourse grounds, and the family, including Elizabeth's mother, moved to Surrey.[7] Over the next twenty years the couple had a further thirteen children, and Isabella was key in looking after her siblings—what she called a "living cargo of children";[8][9][d] in this work Isabella gained insight and experience in managing a family and its household.[12]" -could be better worded, try " Dorling was the first Clerk of Epsom Racecourse, and had been granted residence within the racecourse grounds. The family, including Elizabeth's mother, moved to Surrey, and over the next twenty years the couple had a further thirteen children. Isabella was key in looking after her siblings, whom she referred to as a "living cargo of children", and it gave her much insight and experience in managing a family and its household."
  • "Isabella became proficient in the piano and French and German; she also gained knowledge and experience in making pastry.[13][14][e] She returned to Epsom by the summer of 1854 and took further lessons in pastry making from a local baker.[9][16]" -would make sense to keep the pastry stuff together here. Try "Isabella became proficient in the piano and French and German. She began making pastry, and took lessons in pastry making from a local baker when she returned to Epsom by the summer of 1854."
  • I've left this final one as it was: the original clarifies that the pastry making started in Germany, which is lost in the suggested alternative. – SchroCat (talk) 11:54, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Marriage
  • " According to the twentieth century British cookery writer Elizabeth David, one of the strengths of Isabella's writing was in the "clarity and details of her general instructions, her brisk comments, her no-nonsense asides".[12] Margaret Beetham, the historian, sees that one of the strengths of the book was the "consistent principle of organisation which made its heterogeneous contents look uniform and orderly", and brought a consistent style in presentation and layout;[43] whereas Daly and Forman consider such an approach as "nothing if not formulaic", Hughes sees it as "the thing most beloved by the mid Victorians, a system.[44]" - I would start a new sentence after "layout".
  • "Hughes sees the miscarriages of further evidence" -"as" further?
  • "Hughes considers that as early as 1857 the Beetons had considered" -rep of considers/ed
  • "In September 1861 the Beetons released a new publication, The Queen, the Ladies' Newspaper,[h] which the historian Sarah Freeman, in her biography of Isabella, describes as a weekly newspaper, rather than a magazine" - just In September 1861 the Beetons released a new publication, The Queen, the Ladies' Newspaper, which the historian Sarah Freeman describes as a weekly newspaper" will suffice.
  • "they employed" -"they began employing?
  • All done, bar the last: I think "they employed" is probably better, given we don't follow up on anything to do with him later. - SchroCat (talk) 11:54, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Beeton book
  • "The food writer Annette Hope thinks that "one can understand its success. If ... young ladies knew nothing of domestic arrangements, no better book than this could have been devised for them." -this quote in the context doesn't sit well with me. I would alter this section:

"In its first year of publication, the book sold 60,000 copies.[72] The food writer Annette Hope thinks that "one can understand its success. If ... young ladies knew nothing of domestic arrangements, no better book than this could have been devised for them."[73] It reflected Victorian values, particularly hard work, thrift and cleanliness,[74] and Christopher Clausen, in his study of the British middle classes, sees that Isabella "reflected better than anyone else, and for a larger audience, the optimistic message that mid-Victorian England was filled with opportunities for those who were willing to learn how to take advantage of them"." to

"In its first year of publication, the book sold 60,000 copies. It reflected Victorian values, particularly hard work, thrift and cleanliness. Christopher Clausen, in his study of the British middle classes, sees that Isabella "reflected better than anyone else, and for a larger audience, the optimistic message that mid-Victorian England was filled with opportunities for those who were willing to learn how to take advantage of them". The food writer Annette Hope wrote that if "young ladies knew nothing of domestic arrangements, no better book than this could have been devised for them".

  • " The critic for the London Evening Standard considered that Isabella "has succeeded in producing a volume which will be, for years to come, a treasure to be made much of in every English household", going on to say that the writer "has earned for herself by this volume a household reputation and a name—a sort of fame by no means to be despised"," -I think the "going on to say" affects the flow here, try " The critic for the London Evening Standard considered that Isabella had earned herself a household reputation, remarking that she had "succeeded in producing a volume which will be, for years to come, a treasure to be made much of in every English household".
The rest of the above paragraph on reviews I think in some places you could also paraphrase a little in places so it flows a little better and reads less monotonously.
  • "while the critic for the Saturday Review wrote that "for a really valuable repertory of hints on all sorts of household matters, we recommend Mrs Beeton with few misgivings".[77] The anonymous reviewer for The Bradford Observer wrote " -rep of "wrote"
  • "On her return to Britain she began working on an abridged version of the Book of Household Management , which was to be titled The Dictionary of Every-Day Cookery.[86][87] On 29 January 1865, while working on the proofs of the dictionary, she went into labour; her son—Mayson Moss—was born that day.[k] She " -too many shes and hers in here for my liking.
Legacy
  • "While the television cook Delia Smith admits she was puzzled "how on earth Mrs Beeton's book managed to utterly eclipse ... [Acton's] superior work",[94] her fellow chef, Clarissa Dickson Wright, opines that "It would be unfair to blame any one person or one book for the decline of English cookery, but Isabella Beeton and her ubiquitous book do have a lot to answer for",[95] although she also says that "there's no doubt, from a social history point of view, that Mrs Beeton is a fascinating source of information".[96][m" -a bit long, I would try to shorten or refactor if you can. "although she also says that "there's no doubt, from a social history point of view, that Mrs Beeton is a fascinating source of information"." for instance could simply be put as "though she considered Beeton to be a "fascinating source of information" from a social history viewpoint".
  • " In the meantime Spain published Mrs Beeton and her Husband in 1948, updated and retitled in 1956 to The Beeton Story; in" -I think you can drop the semicolon here and just start a new sentence.
  • " Isabella was ignored by the Dictionary of National Biography for several years; while Acton was included in the first published volume of 1885, Isabella did not have an entry until 1993." -128 years after her death is surely more than "several".
  • "In 1970 Margaret Tyzack portrayed her in a solo performance written by Rosemary Hill;[107] in 2006 Anna Madeley played Isabella in a docudrama;[108] and in 2006 Sophie Dahl presented a documentary "The Marvellous Mrs Beeton".[109]" -you can drop the semicolons here too, try wording as "In 1970 Margaret Tyzack portrayed her in a solo performance written by Rosemary Hill. In 2006 Anna Madeley played Isabella in a docudrama, and Sophie Dahl presented a documentary entitled "The Marvellous Mrs Beeton" the same year".

Looks good overall but I think you could paraphrase some of the quotes and further reduce the use of semicolons in places to perk it up a bit. When quoting somebody I tend to avoid saying "and further added" or "and further went on to say" and paraphrase in part so you can explain their opinion and then quote in one without the addition. It reads much better that way IMO. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:50, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cheers Doc - much appreciated. I think I've followed all your suggestions, except where I've comented otherwise. It's looking better already, so thanks for you help here and at the GAN. - SchroCat (talk) 11:54, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Cheers Chris, many thanks as always! I think I've covered all the points (but whether I've done it properly is another matter!) Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 13:47, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Tim[edit]

  • Lead
    • Great Orton wasn't in Cumbria in 1840. Cumbria was a creation of the botched 1973 reform of the counties; Great Orton (which, wholly irrelevantly, I drove past only last week) was in Cumberland in Isabella's day.
    • Schooling: a determinedly perverse reader (e.g. me) could read the text as saying that Islington is in Germany, which I personally would find extremely inconvenient.
    • "an upcoming publisher" – isn't "upcoming" usually used to mean "about to happen soon" rather than "ambitious", "rising"?
    • "in a pre-marital liaison" – the OED doesn't hyphenate the word
    • I think the lead should reflect the fact that the "Mrs Beeton's" known to generations of late-19th and early-20th century women had practically nothing to do with the version put together by Isabella – Driver's phrase "progressive debasement" seems pretty much spot on.
  • Early life
    • We usually italicise née, I think.
    • "four-years-old" – hyphens?
  • Marriage and career, 1854–61
    • "His family had lived in Milk Street at the same time as the Mayson family" – to avoid repetition you might possibly make this "His family had lived in Milk Street at the same time as the Maysons".
    • "and their relationship, both personal and professional, were an equal partnership" – "were" should be "was"
    • "unwittingly and unknowingly" – not absolutely sure you need both, though I could be persuaded otherwise.
    • "the thing most beloved by the mid Victorians, a system" – needs closing quotes.
    • "During the bitter winter of 1858" – for absolute clarity it might be better to say 1858–59.
    • "The print block for the whole series of the supplements were set" – either "blocks" plural or "was set" singular.
    • "the text of a sentence or recipe are split" – also singular noun with plural verb.
  • Legacy
    • "completion and publication was delayed" – plural nouns and singular verb.

This is a most enjoyable piece, and an excellent addition to the series on food writers and books contributed by other editors, notably Chiswick Chap. Perhaps one of these days you and I might work on getting Mrs David's article up to FAC? – Tim riley talk 21:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Afterthought: Riley brain catching up with Riley eyes. Has something like Isabella's original never been reprinted in our authenticity-obsessed era? If I went into Foyle's now and asked for a copy of "Mrs Beeton", what would I be likely to get? Tim riley talk 21:13, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many thanks indeed, Tim: your suggestions all adopted. I'd love to have a go at Mrs David - an excellent subject to bring up to speed (and I wouldn't mind chancing my arm with Eliza Acton too!) In terms of what is currently available, the answer at Foyles would probably be "which one?"! Ward Lock has been subsumed into Orion Publishing who several books of subject-specific recipes (cakes and bakes, soups and sides, etc). On the other hand, Amazon offer a wider range, including the original (which I picked up free on Kindle, for example), as well as abridged versions, updated versions, and reprints of goodness knows what edition! - SchroCat (talk) 09:13, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Tim, yes, I've brought a series of classic cookery books to GA, though Mrs B.'s hasn't made it there yet. Some of these may be worth mentioning. Chiswick Chap (talk) 09:35, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Further to the Foyle's exchange, above, I think it would enhance the article if we made clear, perhaps at the end of the first para of the Legacy section, just what is generally available today, as outlined by SchroCat, above. Tim riley talk 22:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Chiswick Chap[edit]

Elizabeth David's discussion of why Eliza Acton's Modern Cookery for Private Families was eclipsed by "imitators so limited in experience, and in capacity of expression so inferior?", (Ray, Elizabeth, ed. (1968). The Best of Eliza Acton. Longmans. pp xxiii–xxvii) might be worth mentioning - the comparison between the two women is I think interesting and relevant, given the conflicting judgements of sales and history. Chiswick Chap (talk) 11:00, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, CC: this is one bit I need to add to the article (along with Tim's publication history response), which should also go some way to dealing with JM's comment about it being "a little light on the criticism". Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 11:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from JM[edit]

What a great topic. I'm told that my great-grandmother was in service as a young woman and copied out some recipes from a battered old Mrs Beeton cookbook for my mother when she was a young woman. Probably a fairly typical story!

My father remembers being given a copy by his former headmaster as a wedding present. It was something the headmaster would do for all his old boys, which would have been a fairly expensive habit, I presume! - SchroCat (talk) 08:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "was based on the subsequent editions written by others" Editions of what?
  • "the Oxford English Dictionary identifies" A bit of a pet peeve, but this strikes me as undue personification
    • TR putting oar in: I respectfully disagree. I think the OED's wording can be reasonably represented thus. Tim riley talk 22:43, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the punctuation in footnote a in accordance with MOS:LQ?
  • "condoms tended to only be used prostitutes' clients" by?
  • "After a brief education at a boarding school in Islington, in 1851 Isabella was sent to school in Heidelberg, Germany" Do we not know the names of the schools?
  • I've checked Hughes, who doesn't (she nicknames them after the headmistresses), but I'll check the others this evening to see. - SchroCat (talk) 08:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Having checked the other sources there are no names for the instiutions. - SchroCat (talk) 12:19, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "She returned to Epsom by the summer" had returned?
  • "St Martin's church" Church?
  • "The Englishwoman's Domestic Magazine" or "the Englishwoman's Domestic Magazine"?
  • "the departure of the previous correspondent" Do we know the name of this person?
  • "consider that the plagiarism in the book makes" You haven't mentioned a book at this point- only the magazine
  • "because the production of the text from its own readers ensure it is a reflection of what was actually being cooked and eaten at the time" Complex; perhaps "ensures that" would be preferable to "ensure"?
  • "a family friend, who wrote, "Cookery is a Science" Is the "comma before quote" thing not an Americanism? Could you not change it to "a family friend, who wrote that "Cookery is a Science"
  • [I should note that I changed your "seasonal ability", which I assumed was an automatic correction from "seasonalability" (not listed in the OED), to "seasonality". Though this latter word originates from the US, it's apparently in more common use than "seasonableness", which is also listed.]
  • "The recipe for the soup was the only entry in her Book of Household Management that was her own." As the winter was prior to the book, perhaps you could shift the tense; something like "The recipe for the soup would be[come] the only entry in her Book of Household Management that was her own."
  • Footnote i: Is "made up of the monthly instalments" adding anything?
  • "they enjoyed relative prosperity during the year" Are you referring to 1863 or 1864?

Pausing for now- back shortly. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:41, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Addressed all but a couple down to here (where otherwise noted). Excellent comments and I thank you for them. - SchroCat (talk) 08:30, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "while the Oxford University Press considers Beeton's book a "founding text"[111] and "a force in shaping" the middle-class identity of the Victorian era." The OUP's web-blurbs strike me as rather weak sources for these kinds of quotes.
  • "Dr Sarah Richardson" I assume that lots of the other people quoted have doctorates; is there a particular reason that Richardson's needs to be mentioned?
  • You claim in the lead that "Several cooks, including Elizabeth David and Clarissa Dickson Wright, have criticised Isabella's work, particularly her use of other people's recipes, although much of their evaluation was based on the subsequent editions written by others." I am not convinced that this is an accurate reflection of what it claimed in the article proper. In some ways, I'd almost be inclined to say that you're a little light on the criticism, but I don't know what the correct level would be.
  • Possibly, although the criticism is only a modern development (from David on), and she still has some defenders, such as Bee Wilson, who thinks that "It has recently become fashionable to disparage Mrs Beeton." (My OR is that the criticism seems to focus only on the fact the recipes were copied from elsewhere, rather than much more substantive. Clarissa Dixon Wright is the only one who goes beyond that criticism, but hers is more a snobbish stance against the burgeoning nouveau riche middle class at the time than anything else.) Still, the criticism is covered in the article, and it covers the main points of the denigration. - SchroCat (talk) 12:43, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few edits; please double-check them. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:21, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many thanks Josh - hugely appreciated. I've covered nearly all your points, hopefully satisfactorily. There are still a couple that I need to look at a little more closely, post-PR, including the additional sources you list in the final point. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 10:44, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from BB[edit]

Mainly fairly minor prose issues; I've also made a few tweaks myself:

Lead
  • Some over-detailing. For example, I don't think the inconsequential infancy years in Cumberland are leadworthy, let alone the stuff of first paragraphs. Suggest omit "after her father died when she was four, she moved to Great Orton, Cumberland, and then to Epsom, Surrey shortly afterwards".
Early life
  • "sent her two elder daughters ... Isabella was sent to" repetition
  • "of his own" – redundant?
  • I'm not sure what is meant by "Dorling was the first Clerk of Epsom Racecourse". The course had been established for 200 years, and according to our WP article a clerk had been appointed in 1684. Any indication from the source?
  • "Isabella was key in looking after her siblings"; Clear enough, but not particularly elegant phrasing. Perhaps "was much involved"?
  • "it gave her much insight..." As "it" is undefined I suggest "she gained much insight..." etc
Marriage and career
  • "Samuel had unknowingly contracted syphilis" – I think I'd specify Samuel senior here.
  • "The Beetons partly followed the layout of Acton's recipes, although with a major alteration, and whereas..." In my reading, the ", and" should be replaced by a colon.
  • "the season ability" should presumably be the "seasonability"
  • "the Beetons had considered using the columns to publish a book of the collected recipes and homecare advice". Needs a bit of polish; suggest: "the Beetons had considered using the magazine columns as the basis of a book of collected recipes and homecare advice"
  • "In June and July 1860 the Beetons travelled to Killarney" – they travelled in June and July? I guess you mean they travelled in June for a stay that extended into July?
  • "which the historian Sarah Freeman, in her biography of Isabella, describes as a weekly newspaper": is it really necessary to wheel out and cite Sara Freeeman for this purely factual description of the paper?
Mrs Beeton's Book of Household Management and later
  • "The anonymous reviewer" should not be referred to as "they". Since we don't know the revier's gender it would be better to rephrase, e.g. "the reviewer also praised ..."
Obiter dicta: I spotted this but wimped out from mentioning it. Only pedants and old fogies object to the singular "they", and as a paid-up p. and o.f. I happily line up in BB's attack shadow. Let us keep the flag flying quam diutissime. Tim riley talk 22:43, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If a singular "they" or "their" is good enough for Jane Austen, it should be good enough for us. Chiswick Chap (talk) 12:56, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Financial difficulties brought on by Samuel's hubris..." This comment needs more explanation. There's no earlier evidence of hubris or financial indiscretion. Likewise the "financial problems" mentioned later in the paragraph are unexplained.
  • "She began to feel feverish the following day..." This is a reference to Isabella, so the pronoun needs to be replaced.
Legacy
  • The sentence that begins "While the television cook Delia Smith..." follows Delia's critical comment with what seems to be a similarly critical summary from Dickson Wright. The opening "While", however, suggests opposing views. I would begin: "The television cook Delia Smith...", and insert "while her fellow chef..." etc. You might also consider splitting this turbo-length sentence.
  • "In the meantime Spain published..." Confusing without the "Nancy"
  • General prose point (it occurs in this and other sections): is the phrase "the same year", without a preceding "in", an example of creeping Americanisation in English usage. I fear I may be guilty of this myself – I'd like a Riley view on this.
    • I've just combed the new (and wonderful - buy it at once) edition of Fowler, and found nothing on this. I have a horrid suspicion that BB is correct, and yet I must confess the existing construction reads well enough in BrEng to my eyes. Still, SchroCat, I think you might do well to follow Sir B's suggestion, and I'll make a note to do likewise in my contributions elsewhere, Tim riley talk 22:08, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • In what form or forum did the "Oxford University Press" express its views?

Important article on a significant personage. Brianboulton (talk) 21:26, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Many, many thaks Brian. I've covered off the straightforward grammatical and prose changes as suggested, but will work a little more on adding the bits of extra info you mention (financial hubris, etc). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:42, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Crisco[edit]

  • Agree with Brian about the lead. A bit of bloat to trim
  • Oxford English Dictionary identifies that by 1891 the term "Mrs Beeton" had become used as a generic name for a domestic authority. - Is "Identifies" correct in this context in BrE? Strikes me as a bit odd
  • the building or shaping - building or shaping? Is this an either/or choice?
  • The sources vary slightly on her role in such an ephemeral process, and both are mentioned, without any consensus as to where the line should (or even could) be drawn. - SchroCat (talk) 14:54, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • by translating French fiction for publication as stories or serials. - since she was accused of plagiarism later on, curious: did she or the editors get translation rights?
  • It's not covered in the sources I'm afraid. - SchroCat (talk) 12:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "an important index of mid-Victorian and middle-class society" because the production of the text from its own readers ensures that it is a reflection of what was actually being cooked and eaten at the time" - Curious how they consider the recipes taken from printed recipe books; do they mention a distinction?
  • No. I think with the mix of readers' recipes and already-published recipes there is a wide spread which gives it the reflection of what was there, but the sources don't differentiate between the origins of the recipes. - SchroCat (talk) 15:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hughes believes that as early as 1857 the Beetons had considered using the columns to publish a book of the collected recipes and homecare advice, and in November 1859 they launched a series of 48-page monthly supplements with the Englishwoman's Domestic Magazine. - By using a simple "and", it is implied that "Hughes believes" applies equally to both clauses. However, I doubt that's what you mean, as "48-page monthly supplements" is clearly something traceable.
  • The couple enjoyed the sightseeing, - this implies that little Samuel didn't join them. Did he/didn't he?
  • Isabella included an "Analytical Index" in the book. Although not an innovation—it had been used in The Family Friend magazine since 1855—the Book of Household Management had an extensive 26-page index which Hughes considers "fabulously detailed and exhaustively cross-referenced". - I get the strong impression that these two sentences could easily be combined/reworked
  • few misgivings - and what were those misgivings?
  • Not expanded upon in the source, unfortunately. - SchroCat (talk) 14:28, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mayson Moss - If he was knighted, is he notable enough for an article?
  • I don't think so (although I may be very wrong on his notability); there is no entry on him in the DNB, which is one measure. - SchroCat (talk) 12:18, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • the term "Mrs Beeton" - per Wikipedia:WORDSASWORDS, Mrs Beaton should be in italics
  • There have been several television broadcasts about Isabella. - This paragraph is considerably shorter than the others. Anything worth adding? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:22, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's nothing I can find, but I'll have another look at the sources to see if there is anything else there I can use. - SchroCat (talk) 15:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Chris. As always your comments have proved most useful. All covered, except where I've commented otherwise. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:03, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cassianto[edit]

Can I start off by saying sorry to everyone above. I have come into this late, but thought it was a recent PR. As such, I conducted some fixes to the first section, but I'm unsure if any of these compromise any of the comments made by my friends above. If they do, call me an interfering git, and please feel free to revert. I will provide some comments shortly, some of which, I envisage, will be me asking Gavin to attribute some of the quotes, particularly in the first few sections. CassiantoTalk 22:21, 7 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Cheers Cass. You're not too late - we've not been running a week yet. I look forward to your comments when they come in. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:54, 8 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During the bitter winter of 1858–59 Isabella prepared her own soup that she served to the poor of Pinner, "Soup for benevolent purposes"; her sister later recalled that Isabella "was busy making [the] soup for the poor, and the children used to call with their cans regularly to be refilled". The recipe for the soup would become the only entry in her Book of Household Management that was her own."
  • That's a lot of "soup". It could be reduced by one where you say: "The recipe for the soup..." to "The recipe...".
  • ""Soup for benevolent purposes" is wrapped in quotation marks, but why? I see a note here, but it doesn't tell us who said this or if this was a name of sorts. Do you know where this came from or if this was an unattributed name for something?
  • Could all winters, by their very nature, be considered as "bitter"? "Particularly bitter" would stand out better.
  • "The print block for the whole series of the supplements was set from the beginning so the break between each edition was set at 48 pages.." -- was set/was set
  • "The first edition carrying the new feature..." → "The first edition to carry the new feature..."
  • "For the newly redesigned magazine..." -- Does this need repeating?
  • "The position was more than a title, and the couple were equal partners." -- Firstly, I'm not to keen on the first half of this sentence and the conjunction fits badly. Maybe: "As well as being co-editors, the couple were also equal partners."
  • "...where her presence caused a stir among overwhelmingly male commuters." → "where her presence caused a stir among commuters, most of whom were male."
  • "In September 1861 the Beetons released a new publication, The Queen, the Ladies' Newspaper, a weekly newspaper". -- Any need for the last part? At the very most you could say: "In September 1861 the Beetons released a new, weekly publication called 'The Queen, the Ladies' Newspaper' ", I would think. CassiantoTalk 18:56, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The reviews that followed were positive." -- A new para would require a new noun; like wise here, so I think a mention of the book would only be fair.
  • "The anonymous reviewer for The Bradford Observer..." → "An anonymous reviewer for The Bradford Observer..."
  • "...their son was born on New Year's Eve 1863, and they named him Orchart". → "their son, who they named Orchart, was born on New Year's Eve 1863, and they named him Orchart"; Or even "their son, Orchart, was born on New Year's Eve 1863"; or maybe "their son was born on New Year's Eve 1863; they named him Orchart" .
  • "In the middle of 1864 the couple again visited the Goubauds in Paris—the couple's third visit to the city—and Isabella was again pregnant during the visit" -- Again pregnant or again pregnant whilst in Paris?

Everything looks great! I enjoyed that a lot! CassiantoTalk 19:20, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Cass - much appreciated and all tweaked accordinly, I hope. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Many thanks to all who took part in this hugely useful and constructive PR. The article is much changed from ten days ago and is tighter, stronger and in much better shape than it was previously. Thanks again and I'll take a few days to re-read for any futher points before going on to FAC. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:18, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Isabella_Beeton/archive1&oldid=1138562293"