Wikipedia:Peer review/Frank Matcham/archive1

Frank Matcham

I created this last year before having an extended period of leave, and left it pretty much completed. I've returned and decided to carry on with it with a view to taking it to FAC. But before I do, I would like other opinions with regards to its completeness, together with thoughts about improving what is there, currently.

Thanks, Cassianto^Talk 19:52, 8 May 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

So pleased to see you back in action here. I thoroughly enjoyed this article, and learned a lot, too. I've no comments on the content, which strikes me as clear, balanced, well proportioned and appropriately sourced. A few minor points on the prose, some of which are no more than personal preferences:

• Lead

• "During his 40 year career" – I'd hyphenate "40-year"
• "father–in–law" – unless my aged eyes deceive me this has en-dashes instead of the normal hyphens

• They still look like en-dashes to me. Tim riley talk 20:56, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

• They were. Now swapped for hyphens - SchroCat (talk) 20:58, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

• I must've missed that one. KJP1 is usualy the expert on them. lol Cassianto^Talk 21:02, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

• "He took over Robinson's business upon his death" – theoretically ambiguous, though no-one will really mistake your meaning. Probably better to say "on the latter's death".
• "skilled craftsman who he used" – "whom", please.

• Early life

• "draw up estimations" – not quite clear what this phrase means. Are we talking about estimates of cost or something else?
• "Phipps' ability" – views vary, but I prefer to use ess-apostrophe-ess for plurals of names ending in ess – Jones's, Phipps's etc. You have used it for "Charles's" in Note 1.
• "it was not uncommon for an amateur architect to take up to six years to learn their trade" – If he was an amateur then it wasn't his trade, surely?
• "entrusted his apprentice" – former apprentice? Not sure about the use of "entrusted", either. I think "entrusted ... with helping" is the normal form, but others may disagree with me.
• "so he purchased the Fernham Estate" – Fowler does not countenance "so" as a conjunction. I'd make this "and" instead.

• Entry into the family business

• "incorporated into all his future designs" – not the Tower Ballroom and Leeds arcade surely?
• "which omitted draughts" – emitted?

• Work under the Revills

• "helped excel his reputation" – not sure about "excel". Perhaps "enhance"?
• "from the William Revill's son" – don't think we want the definite article here
• "St Helens, Merseyside" – St Helens is in Merseyside now, but was in Lancashire in those days.
• "on the 17 October" – another definite article I don't think should be there.
• "Bury and Rochdale, both in Greater Manchester" – these too were in Lancashire in Matcham's day (and until the 1970s).
• "an extended member of the Revill family" – I think this might be better as "a member of the extended Revill family"
• "which increased the possibility of him being able" – if we're being pedantic (and I am) this should be "his being able". The genitive pronoun is preferable in formal English, though "of him being able" is perfectly admissible in informal usage.
• "His last design for the family" – the last person named was Purcell: I think you need Matcham's name here rather than the pronoun.

Matcham & Co.

• "but he did work" – slightly unexpected construction: one might expect just "he worked"

• Theatre boom years: 1892–1912

• "Prior to variety theatre" – one of the many linguistic bees in my bonnet: I can't see what "prior to" has that a plain "before" hasn't.
• "working class communities" – I'd hyphenate working-class here
• "The boom required a need for competent architects who knew how theatres worked." – I'd omit "a need for"

• Association with Moss Empires and Oswald Stoll

• You could make the sub-header snappier by omitting "Association with"
• "Managing Director of Moss Empires" – not sure I'd capitalise the job title.
• "Simultaneous to his work" – not keen on the adjective: I think an adverb is needed here (or just "At the same time as...")

• County Arcade, Leeds

• "is rare inasmuch that" – I think the usual form is "inasmuch as", but I'd trim it either way, to a simpler "in that"

• Retirement and death

• "were already underway" – this is another case where opinions differ. I rather dislike "underway" as a single word, and would write "under way", which is the only form recognised by the OED.
• "Prior to the opening of the Victoria Palace" – another "prior to" you might perhaps make "before".
• "The interwar period" – the OED hyphenates "inter-war"
• "designed through Matcham's office" – unexpected preposition: "in" or "by" would seem more likely
• "bequeathed his company, equally, between Briggs and Chancellor" – I'm not sure you can bequeath between. I'd make this "to", I think.

• Personal life

• "St. James' Church, Pentonville" – The Survey of London gives the Saint his ess-apostrophe-ess here.
• "the Matcham's would stage" – no apostrophe wanted for a simple plural....

• Legacy

• "estimated the architects work" – ...but the possessive here needs one

• Notes

• "principle architect responsible" – wrong sort of principal.
• "a hard working entrepreneur" – this is another attributive adjectival phrase that wants a hyphen, I think.
• "lifesize carvings" – the OED hyphenates "life-size".

That's my lot. A pleasure to read and review this article. – Tim riley talk 08:40, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Tim, all attended to and much obliged, as always. Cassianto^Talk 20:32, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

SC

Lead

• "the Elephant and Castle theatre" I have a feeling this should be "the Elephant and Castle Theatre"
  • Done. Cassianto^Talk 12:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Early life

• "educated in Babbacombe": "educated in nearby Babbacombe"? It will clarify a little and stop people having to search that it's very nearly the same thing as Torquay.
• "to a local architect called George Soudon Bridgeman" -> "to George Soudon Bridgeman, a local architect"
• You have "redesigns" in the lead and "re-design" here (re the Lyceum Theatre, Torquay)
• "unsuccessful and he purchased the Fernham Estate, in Torbay, instead, on which". This stumbles along a bit. "unsuccessful and instead he purchased the Fernham Estate, in Torbay, on which" would smooth it out a little
  • All Done. Cassianto^Talk 12:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Entry

• "familiar with, what the" comma not needed
• "Metropolis Management and Building Act in 1878 which" -> "Metropolis Management and Building Act (1878) which" is the normal way for Acts of P
• "the rules to be problematic; because of it, the Elephant and Castle" you have because of IT (singular) against "the ruleS" (plural)
• "Mile End, London": East London a shade better
  • All Done. Cassianto^Talk 12:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Revills

• "The layout was problematic for Matcham as it had no ground floor and he had to make a series of adjustments." I have an image of a first floor and a basement into which people fell a they walk through the doors! Is the "series of adjustments" what follows in the next sentence?
• "St Helens, Lancashire, in 1884.": I'm not sure we need the "in 1884" – a bit superfluous in the scheme of things
• Link to [[pilaster]]s?
  • All Done. Cassianto^Talk 12:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

County arcade

• "Together with a handful of public houses in London": do we know which ones, and are they still going? A footnote with details for those of us who like to mix beer, architecture and history
  • There's this which forms part of the London Hippodrome, but nothing that stands on its own. I'll double check though. Among the other buildings not usual for this architect, is this. Not in the least bit notable in terms of its architecture or standing, but a rare wander out of his comfort zone, which ironically, kind of makes it notable. Do you think this should be added? Nothing on it, book wise, just the NLHE entry above. Cassianto^Talk 22:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)
    • It may be worth adding them as a footnote, just to cover the fact they still exist (as there isn't much else of his still standing). It'll ensure you cover everything and no-one will try and shoehorn them in badly at a later date. - SchroCat (talk) 10:46, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
      • Footnotes added. Cassianto^Talk 13:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

That's it from me. Easy on the eye, well laid out and a pleasure to go over - rather like me. I think this is ready for FAC. Another good review or a proofing by you and all should be well with it. - SchroCat (talk) 20:43, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay, so much easier doing it from a balcony in Spain than it is juggling RL with peer reviews. All attended to, much obliged. Cassianto^Talk 13:14, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

No probs. I'd like to support, but as it's still at PR, I'm not sure what impact that would have... - SchroCat (talk) 13:45, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Comments and support from Gerda

After dealing with architects more than usually - one died, and a critic died - I come to learn. Thank you for this one. Comments as I read.

Lead

• "he was responsible for the design and construction of over 90 theatres and the redesigns and refurbishments of a further 80 throughout the United Kingdom" - consider to have UK sooner?
  • To avoid repetition, I've given it its full title here with the "UK" being given in the Bennett quote. Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
• "According to the dramatist Alan Bennett, there was a Matcham theatre in every corner of the UK." - That says more or less the same, unless you know without study who Bennett is, - perhaps later?
  • Do you mean by "later" to give this at the end of the article rather than in the lead? Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
    • That would be fine, but what I meant was later in the lead, as kind of a short summary, - not two sentences in a row which say more or less the same. --GA
• "was perhaps best known" - perhaps not my most beloved phrase, - we know "best known" for sure, or perhaps word it differently, + it's no surprise that the works in the capital stand out.
  • Ive removed "perhaps". Was that what you were thinking? Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
    • yes, feel understood ;) --GA
• "who was later to become his father-in-law" - do we need "later" there?
  • Good catch. Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
• "and enlisted skilled craftsman whom he used on his future projects." - everything after "craftsmen" seems redundant.
  • Again, makes sense. Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
• "headed by Edward Moss and run by Oswald Stoll. Under Moss and Stoll, he completed 21 theatres", - do we need the names twice?
  • I've reworked this entire sentence. Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
• "Brian Mercer Walker" - if no link, can we describe why we should listen to his notes?
  • He was Matcham's biographer, which I've gone on to say. Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Early life

• I find the image caption with many names a bit confusing, - "left" in brackets, "right" not - perhaps I'll understand after reading.
  • Has this aided your understanding of the image now?
• "of London's buildings, of varying ages" - not a familiar phrase to me, but probably just me
  • Tweaked. Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

.... family business

• It's not clear if he married before his father-in-law died, - untangle the sequence of events, perhaps?
  • Done. Cassianto^Talk 12:51, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

To be continued. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:48, 31 May 2019 (UTC)

Theatre boom years

• "The restrictions were brief, chiefly because of the dwindling effect it was having on audiences." - not sure what "it" refers to.
  • Reworked. Cassianto^Talk 14:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
• The lavish image doesn't go well with the safety requirements for older buildings, - would there be a better place?
  • Ive removed it as it didn't really fit anywhere (and wasn't even spoken about). Cassianto^Talk 14:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Personal life

• "Matcham was a devoted if frequently absent husband and father." Could he perhaps first get married, then described like that ;)
  • I'm not sure I understand this. Could you elaborate when you get a minute? Cassianto^Talk 14:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
    • We get this sentence first, and only then whom he married. I'd swap that. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:24, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Fine reading, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:55, 1 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for adopting suggestions, not much left, I'm ready to support. (Off travelling.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:42, 12 June 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time to review this, much appreciated. Cassianto^Talk 14:03, 12 June 2019 (UTC)