Wikipedia:Peer review/Kennington Park/archive1

Kennington Park edit

This extensive article shows the historical development of this Park in South London. It has been enriched by comtemporary photographs. A good example of a local history with a national dimension.

Reviewers should consider the usual elements, and whether an international audience would interested in an open space in South London that measures a few blocks in each direction today. LoopZilla 08:28:14, 2005-09-04 (UTC)

NOTE: I know the principle authors personally LoopZilla 08:31:39, 2005-09-04 (UTC)

It has potential, but an important aspect of a features article is brilliant prose, so the article would need to be trasformed from a list in to prose. Also it is very important to cite the references that have been used to write the article.--nixie 11:47, 4 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Can a principle author reply to criticism? Here goes anyway... Surely Wikipedia of all places should be able to accept the classic format of a 'time line' The text of a timeline had to be as concise as possible. Szczels 16:16, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Parks are a important part of the development of London, so I'm sure it's a valid topic (internationally speaking). Apart from the fact that the article needs to be prose-ified and given a reference section. I believe it would benefit from an image in the lead which shows its location within London on a map. - 131.211.210.12 11:55, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I also know the principal authors and in July stood in at short notice for one of them to lead a guided tour of the Park as part of the Lambeth Riverside Festival. The date sequence is a perfectly good way of introducing the history given all the links, including the full prose text of the previously published pamphlet. Given the history is on-going this article will be any case be updated and any additional information, like that I found when preparing for the walk, can also be added. The importance of this article about a Park both in Britain and internationally is that it illustrates a continual problem over social and political control of open spaces and activities that seem to threaten the establishment or that conflicts with other users. See the Public Space section of my website www.seancreighton.co.uk.

A timeline does not meet the criteria of a featured article.--nixie 13:55, 8 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Maybe a re-write then? LoopZilla 16:16:36, 2005-09-08 (UTC)

What are the advantages of being featured that could offset the considerable work in a complete rewrite / restructure? Szczels 16:31, 9 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

The article could really use a nice map of the area, preferably in SVG format (if you put in a raster one I'll just whine about it not being SVG :) ). Requests for larger images are a common question asked in the wikipedia mailbox, since our software autoscales you should always use the larges images possible. Generally I like to see images at least 1200 pixels in their largest axis, and preferably larger.

All of the photos on the article were scaled before uploading and are too small for good rendition in print. Considering the number and that they are all free, the editors of this article still get my applause.. but since it seems the photos were by wikipedians, we really should request they upload larger images. I think the listy nature of the article isn't very encyclopedic, but at the same time I think it's approiate for the sort of material covered... Why should we pad our trivia with lots of prose? :) Some in-article citations would be good. And Um, could we consider another name for the first external "cum diary" because US readers will read it as a short U and wonder if it's some kind of odd vandalism. --Gmaxwell 04:20, 13 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's too chatty and bits are irrelevent. We don't need people referred to by their first name, nor the date of the release of Nelson Mandela. We don't need all the recent local politics either - will any remember Ecadorian volleyball in 18 months time? Does the Job Centre Plus really need a photo? It reads like a local history pamphlet. The history is lost amongst lots of trivia. The photos can be replaced by anyone as the site is totally accessible. Secret london 00:32, 27 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

You are missing the points Secret London - there is no trivia every entry has been carefully thought about esp. the Ecuadorian Vollaeyball. Szczels 21:19, 1 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]