Talk:John Douglas (English architect)

Assessment Report

1. The article should make use of sections.
2. Images would be helpful - the architect if possible and some of his works.
3. References and Citations are crucial for wikipedia, and so these must be added as the article is expanded. Make sure that as many as possible are "in-line" citations.(See WP:References, WP:V, and WP:CITE for guidance.) Peter I. Vardy 17:21, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

• Above criteria met. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 10:11, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Pre-GAC comments

Lead

• "and practised throughout his career in Chester, Cheshire": this sounds like he practiced only in Cheshire, how about saying he was based in Chester instead?
  • I have added "from an office" and hope that this is OK. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
• "alterations to and restoration of existing churches": would "restoring and renovating existing churches" be a bit more concise while still accurate? It would also prevent the repetition of "alterations" and "existing buildings".
  • Done; tidied an awkward sentence. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Biography

• How about changing "His younger sisters were Mary Hannah, who was born in 1832 but died in 1834, five months before the birth of Emma, who died aged 14 in 1848" to "His younger sisters were Mary Hannah and Emma, who were born in 1832 and 1834 respectively. Mary Hannah died five months before Emma's birth, and Emma herself died in 1848." I think the first sentence is trying to cram in a bit too much information, and it would be better split.
  • Done. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
• Do we have any information on how Elizabeth and John met?
  • The sources give no information on this. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)
• On a different note, what kind of name is Sholto Theodore?? No wonder he resorted to drink.
  • A family name! I have added a footnote about this. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2009 (UTC)

Nev1 (talk) 21:57, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Douglas (architect)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 20:51, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

---

A comprehensive, wide-ranging article, very easy to read and to assess.

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   Well and appropriately Illustrated.

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

   Well and appropriately Illustrated.

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   This is a fine example of what a GA-article should be, comprehensive, easy to read and easy to assess. Possibly an FA-class article, but I can only award GA.Pyrotec (talk) 21:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Congratulations on the article, it is well deserving of a GA-class.Pyrotec (talk) 21:17, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Wow! Thanks. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 22:25, 5 June 2009 (UTC)

Spoken version added

I have added a spoken version of this article; see the link above and under "External Links" in the article itself. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 20:15, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

TFA aftermath

The net change from the article's day in the sun doesn't appear to be much. There are a few more links and some minor formatting changes, but overall I think the article emerged intact. Opinions? Nev1 (talk) 23:29, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

I suppose I am naive (I am certainly a novice at TFA) so perhaps I did not expect much harm to be done - it is, after all a pretty uncontroversial ("safe") subject. There was quite a bit of vandalism during the day, but the vandal watchers (including Nev1) did a splendid job, almost always beating me to the reversion. As for the changes. they're all minor; a bit of overlinking; n-dash replaced by – (which I would have done if I were writing the article today); s' -> s's, (which is merely a matter of style, and both are acceptable in the MoS, as I told the editor who did it). I also enjoyed a day of glory for the Cheshire Wikiproject - and early risers will have seen a Cheshire article as the "top" (with image) item in DYK - Sir Thomas Grosvenor, 3rd Baronet at the same time! Now to get Norton Priory to FA!--Peter I. Vardy (talk) 07:59, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Perhaps you noticed that a translation of the article was a DYK article on the German WP on sunday (and still is today, since we've a batch of two a day and they remain two days). --Matthiasb (talk) 16:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

It's only usually controversial articles that are damaghed by TFA, but sometimes the rate of vandalism on an article can mean that some changes slip through the net so it's a good idea to check at the end of the day. That's how I noticed someone had changed Douglas' middle name to Carter. Certainly a good day for WP:CHES with over 15,000 views over 4days (the counter seems to have not been working for two of them) and a noticeable spike of interest in Cheshire. Also good to know that it made DYK on the German Wikipedia. Nev1 (talk) 13:02, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Das englische Haus

Peter, happened to have this to hand for something else, so added it as a source, and as two cites. Hope I've followed the style used and that it works for you. All the best. KJP1 (talk) 07:52, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

That's great. Many thanks. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 13:50, 13 September 2017 (UTC)