Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Elgin Cathedral/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Elgin Cathedral edit

Elgin Cathedral (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): -- Aunva6talk - contribs 03:22, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it is currently A-class, and I can see no issues with it, appears to meet all the criteria. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 03:22, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Several Reformation captions need editing for grammar/MOS
  •  DoneCaptions that are complete sentences should end in periods
  •  DoneFile:Cathedral_churches_of_Moray.png: source for this map? Same with File:Diocese_%26_Deaneries_of_Moray2.png, File:Cathedral_floor_plan_1224_to1270_edited-1.jpg
  •  DoneFile:Elgin_Cathedral_reconstruct.jpg: double-check licensing - this doesn't appear to be a US work, when/where was it first published? Same with File:Elgin_Cathedral_main_entrance.jpg
  •  Done File:Chanonry_of_Elgin.jpg needs US PD tag, as does File:St_Giles_Kirk_Elgin.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:27, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
actually, instead of pd-us, they needed the 100yr pd. author died in 1907[2]. I'll see about the sources. there don't appear to really be any regular contributors... -- Aunva6talk - contribs 02:54, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
the three files appear to be what they say they are... creator-uploaded. cannot find them outside of wiki using google search by image. the entrance image is a british work... commons copyright is a real... cluster eff... but it's PD-80 at least, best I can do. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 03:17, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Support – A fine article, meeting all FA criteria, in my view. Unusual and effective use of illustrations towards the end. This article has been thought through very carefully. Two minor comments in passing:

  •  DonePrecenter or Precentor? – You have both; the second is the only one I know, and more to the point, the one the OED knows.
  •  DoneClearstory – the OED admits only the usual "clerestory"

I've corrected a few minor typos, but please check that you're happy with my changes. – Tim riley (talk) 18:56, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

pretty sure that's just British English vs American English. still, I will make it uniform -- Aunva6talk - contribs 19:41, 9 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments:

  • Nice article, and love the pictures!
  •  Done In the bibliography, OCLC searches are producing options for some of the missing location and publishers; e.g. "Early Travellers in Scotland" is coming up with New York as the location, "Elgin past and present" with Yeadon as the publisher, etc. - probably worth checking through any others with missing details.
  •  Done The capitalisation of the title doesn't quite match up with the MOS guidance (I think that " Medieval Church in Scotland: its constitution, organisation and law" should be " Medieval Church in Scotland: its Constitution, Organisation and Law" for example).
  • At least one of the web resources is missing its author details - "Investigating Elgin Cathedral" was written by Elspeth Mackay, for example.
  • ✗ Not done I'd usually expect the publishing location to give the country (e.g. "Edinburgh, UK") and for periodical articles to give the page ranges.
  • ✗ Not doneWorth considering giving OCLC numbers for books without ISBN details. Hchc2009 (talk) 17:12, 10 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't ever seen book sources give country initials. for example, at Angkor_Wat#References, you don't even get the publishing city. At Peveril_Castle, just the city. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 23:49, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Review by Lemurbaby:

  • General
 Done It would be good to add conversions for distances and lengths
 Done Double check consistency in capitalization for titles like king, bishop, pope etc. Sometimes you capitalize them when they stand alone, and other times you don't.
  • Lead
 Done Add wikilinks to more of the specialized terms (chapter, canon, manse, tracery, chanonry, precenter, parish church, burgh, bishop, diocesan, translation, episcopate, bishop, pope, see, prebendary, prelate etc). I see that some of these are linked, but not on the first use where it's needed. I'd recommend reading it through from the perspective of a non-Scottish, non-Christian person with limited knowledge of European history and make adjustments/add wikilinks as necessary.
To Do  Done The sentence "After the removal of the lead from the roof in 1567..." needs clarification (why was the lead removed, and how is that connected to collapse of the roof?).
well, the roof was made of lead, common for churches of that age. why it was removed, however, is unclear, but Billreid might know of an order or such. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 21:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Early cathedral churches"
To Do  Done It's unclear whether a cathedral was ever built at Spynie. Would you clarify this here and adjust the lead if needed?
rephrased. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 21:56, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To Do  Done The first paragraph of this section ("The northern dioceses of...") does not immediately link to the cathedral. Could you rework this section to make immediately clear to the reader how this information is relevant to the cathedral? I'd also recommend making it clearer what the relationship is between Moray and Elgin.
This is still not clear.
I'll see what I can do further. Elgin Cathedral was part of the Diocese of Moray, so the trick is explaining that without distracting the reader... -- Aunva6talk - contribs 21:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've re-written this paragraph which hopefully explains the antiquity of the diocese and leads to the next section with the relationship between the diocese of Moray and Elgin. I won't mark it as "done" yet. --Bill Reid | (talk) 13:18, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
This is looking better. I appreciate not wanting to distract the reader, but in this case more information helps the reader understand by putting the info into clearer context. Nice work
 Done "Henry, dean of Ross" - capitalize dean? wikilink Ross?
  • "Cathedral church at Elgin"
 Done The paragraph "Bishop David de Moravia (1299–1326) was the uncle ..." does not tie directly to the cathedral. Could you make the relevance of this section more immediately clear?
 Done "In 1325 he gave the lands of Grisy-Suisnes..." - Did David give the land away after he'd been excommunicated? (Did he have the authority to do that?) Please clarify.
text removed earlier
 Done "In 1408, the money saved during a vacancy was diverted to the rebuilding process" - It's unclear how a vacancy (of what?) saves money here. Please clarify.
Perhaps Billreid knows something about those. the first has been removed. If bill can't explain it, I would probably have to try to get the source via ILL, which would take awhile, if I even can get it that way. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 21:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The source doesn't say whether it was a dignitory or an ordinary canon within the chapter so I've described it as an ecclesiastical vacancy. --Bill Reid | (talk) 13:22, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Perfect.
Could you more explicitly tie the info in the section on rural deans to the case of this particular cathedral?
  • "Cathedral offices"
 Done "still lacking many of its manses. The chapter ordered..." - it's not clear where or when the order happened - was it written into the aforementioned document, or somewhere else?
It's still unclear where or when the order happened. At least give us the century or make it clearer that the order was immediate following x event.
Seems to have been taken care of earlier
  • "Post-Reformation"
 Done "Ross was assisted in this by the Lairds of Innes and Brodie..." - wikilink, or explain what a laird is.
I don't see a link or explanation of a laird.
Thanks for linking
  • "Building phases"
 Done "The Gothic pointed arch style first appeared in France in the mid-12th century was apparent in England around 1170 but hardly appeared in Scotland until the early 13th century and the round early Norman window design continued to be used in Scotland during the entire Gothic period..." - tie this more explicitly to this particular church.
Yes, done --Bill Reid | (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Done "Consolidation of the ruin and some reconstruction work began in the early 20th century" - what is meant here by consolidation of the ruin?
again, Billreid probably knows more than I do about this. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 21:02, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed --Bill Reid | (talk) 14:08, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Now I understand - I changed it to "structural reinforcement", which seems even clearer to me, but feel free to change back if you find it isn't suitable.
- That concludes my review. Nice work on this! Lemurbaby (talk) 05:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
thanks. I'll take a look at much of this, see what I can find... -- Aunva6talk - contribs 21:43, 26 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice work on these edits. This is a beautiful, fascinating and detailed article. You've really done this cathedral justice. There are one or two outstanding points above, but they aren't enough to keep me from supporting that this be awarded FA. Lemurbaby (talk) 17:01, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not here too often these days, but will look at outstanding issues from tomorrow and clarify. --Bill Reid | (talk) 16:35, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

thanks. you've written at least 90% of this article, so you're probably the only one here that really know much of anything about the cathedral. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 17:08, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support Outstanding read. If the references still need to be checked formatting-wise, I'd be glad to do that. ceranthor 19:03, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

all help is very welcome. shouldn't there be a script for such as this? or am I just an automatist (simialr to a deletionist)... -- Aunva6talk - contribs 19:20, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reference nitpicks from Ceranthor
  • Why do some sources use a comma between page numbers ("Cowan, Parishes, Medieval Scotland, pp. 217, 218") instead of an endash?
Done, thanks. --Bill Reid | (talk) 14:46, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • You forgot to include the publication named as "Barrow, Kingship and Unity, pp. 67–8". It's not in the sources. ceranthor 19:06, 2 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Added now. Thanks. --Bill Reid | (talk) 14:23, 3 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Since Billreid is the primary contributor, shouldn't he be listed as a co-nom, too? ceranthor 15:13, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    if he wants to be. doesn't matter to me. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 18:50, 5 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- Unless I've missed it among the reviewer comments, like to see a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of close paraphrasing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:55, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

99% of the sources are physical books. not something that can really be spot-checked. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 06:02, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well I notice one of the reviewers above is Mr Tim Riley, who has often been a life saver in this regard, and may prove so yet again... Timbo? ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:09, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to oblige on Monday when the British Library is open. More thereafter. Tim riley (talk) 15:29, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References – I have ordered three of the main book sources at the BL and will report back tomorrow afternoon. Meanwhile, now I come to look with a source-checker's scrutiny at the references I notice some internal inconsistency in the referencing:

  • Cant, Historic Elgin and Cathedral
  • Cant, Historic Elgin and its Cathedral
  • Cant, Historic Elgin
 Done now consistent --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cowan & Easson, Medieval Houses
  • Cowan, Medieval Religious houses
 Done now consistent --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cowan, Medieval Church in Scotland
  • Cowan, Parishes, Medieval Scotland
These are ok as separate publications but well picked up as I had omitted the reference entirely but now rectified, thanks --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fawcett, Elgin Cathedral Guide
  • Fawcett, Elgin Cathedral
This one is ok as separate publications --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
So they are. Mea culpa. Tim riley (talk) 18:50, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shaw, Gordon, History of Moray
  • Shaw, History of Moray
 Done now consistent --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see there is still inconsistent use of Precenter/Precentor. The Oxford English Dictionary allows only the latter. Chambers – an appropriately Scottish dictionary – also gives only Precentor, and not Precenter. Collins too allows only Precentor. Tim riley (talk) 10:00, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. i changed all precenter to precentor. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 20:59, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Spot-check of sources

No sign of any close paraphrasing. Sources correctly represented. A few minor quibbles.

  • Cowan and Easson
    • 65 – fine
    • 66 – fine
  • Fawcett (2001)
    • 26a – fine
    • 26b – fine (but in passing, why "17" and "twenty five" in the same sentence?)
 Done - corrected 17 to seventeen --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • 26c – fine
    • 46 – fine
    • 47 – fine
    • 78 – fine
    • 79 – should say p. 11, not p. 12. Final sentence of para is also covered by p. 11, but ought to say "probably during Reid's tenure", as the source does.
 Done - re-jigged sentences and re-positioned ref--Bill Reid | (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • 83 – fine
    • 84 – fine
    • 87 – fine
    • 88 – fine
    • 90 – fine
    • 91 – fine
    • 94 – fine
    • 95 – fine
    • 98 – fine
    • 99 – fine
    • 100 – fine
    • 101 – fine
  • Dowden
    • 28 – fine
    • 33 – fine
    • 41 – should be p. 73 not p. 72
 Done - corrected. --Bill Reid | (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • 42 – fine
    • 44 – fine
    • 45 – fine
    • 50 – fine
    • 51 – fine
    • 58 – fine

The article is, in my view, very carefully and scrupulously sourced. I enjoyed revisiting it: it's a pleasure to read. – Tim riley (talk) 10:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - This is an amazing informative article. I love the referenced images section, great pictures, great explanation. I don't see any problems that stand out, and I am satisfied that this article meets the FA criteria.--ColonelHenry (talk) 21:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments given I am in Scotland, will take a wee look at it now. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 06:15, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • If it were possible, it'd be good to somehow reduce mention of the fire dates in the lead's second para...but I don't think it is after looking at it, so this isn't an actionable item (I think...) - lead reads well overall.
  • I'd link precentor as I have not encountered the word before and it is hence not a common one.
 Done - didn't think there was an article for precentor, but there was --Bill Reid | (talk) 11:25, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd link mark (currency) for the same reasons above
 Done --Bill Reid | (talk) 11:34, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm pretty sure that if we linked precentor, it'd just be a redlink, which defeats the purpose of linking. -- Aunva6talk - contribs 06:42, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment -- Given the length of time this has been open, the support for promotion and the fact that all checks have been made, I'm going to close this now. Cas, if there's anything still outstanding I expect it's of a minor nature that could be taken care of on the talk page? Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:09, 20 September 2013 (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_candidates/Elgin_Cathedral/archive1&oldid=1086353809"