Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of scheduled monuments in Mendip/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:37, 3 June 2015 [1].

List of scheduled monuments in Mendip

Featured list candidates/List of scheduled monuments in Mendip/archive1

Nominator(s): — Rod ^talk 13:18, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This is final (of seven) and largest list of Scheduled monuments in Somerset. It follows the same format as the others except that vcite is used instead of cit as the number of templates was too great for the software to cope with. It covers sites from the Palaeolithic to World War II with images where available and supporting references. As ever comments would be gratefully received.— Rod ^talk 13:18, 27 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Keith D

Quick comments before I go on holiday.

There are a mixture of references to the PastScape website, some of the references mentioning English Heritage rather than Historic England, also some do not mention PastScape in the reference.
The code has a mixture of PastScape & Pastscape, the ones with the two caps do not appear to display. I think that the two cap version is what is generally used.
On a similar theme the lead has two instances of English Heritage should these now be Historic England?
Ref 223 is missing an accessdate.

Keith D (talk) 21:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I thought I had caught the change in publisher from EH to Historic England but obviously not - hopefully fixed now. I have also revised the capitalisation. Some references were to National Monuments Record rather than PastScape - hopefully fixed these as well. Accessdate added for ref 223. Have a good holiday.— Rod ^talk 07:34, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks had a good holiday - but catching up is a pain! Looks like you have addressed the issued I raised above. Had a look through and spotted some reference inconsistencies, especially the unusual use of square brackets. Some entries have square brackets round the accessdate and others do not. Also some references have the publisher first while others have the publisher later in the entry. Keith D (talk) 20:10, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The use of vcite rather than cite is explained below. A few still used cite which gave the inconsistencies - hopefully these are now resolved as all use vcite, but if there are more can you point them out?— Rod ^talk 20:20, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Try 182 where the publisher "Somerset County Council" appears later in the entry compared to 194. Also 193 uses "Somerset Government" rather than "Somerset County Council". Keith D (talk) 20:55, 14 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I hope I've now got those you pointed out and spotted a few other inconsistencies highlighted by the use of vcite.— Rod ^talk 07:12, 15 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Noswall Some drive-by comments on the Lead:

Not sure what relevance of the pronunciation of Frome has to this article.

Removed.— Rod ^talk 16:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think you need a comma after The Abbot's Fish House

I'm never sure about these but have added a comma.— Rod ^talk 16:59, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for dealing with the above. I also notice that the references are formatted unusually... I don't think it will get in the way of this nomination, but I've never seen square brackets used like that, and the format is noticeably different from the other lists in the series. Cheers, —Noswall59 (talk) 16:42, 7 May 2015 (UTC).[reply]

The reason for the differently formatted references (which still have the usual info) is because of the number pf template transcluded onto the article. If I use "cite web", "cite journal" etc on all entries the reference list at the bottom doesn't work. The only way I have found around this on a couple of other lists is to use "vcite web" etc.— Rod ^talk 18:36, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair enough. It's more a matter of style, and like I said, as long as its internally consistent, it's fine. Good luck with this one, hopefully we'll see a full set soon! Cheers, —.

Comments from Harrias ^talk

I've had a bit of a look through this pre-FLC, so I'm reasonably happy with it. One nit-picking point: for Ponter's Ball linear earthwork, the completed column has "Possibly 3rd century BC or post Roman", while the Notes has "probably 3rd century B.C., while others date it to the post-Roman". Try to be consistent in the formatting of BC/B.C. and "post Roman"/"post-Roman". (I said it was really nit-picky!)

Picky is good - when you are so close to an article it is difficult to spot things like this - hopefully now fixed (I also did some AD -> A.D. for consistency.— Rod ^talk 18:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Similarly, Bishop's Palace ruined portions, walls and well house has "c. 1280", while Rode Bridge has "c. 1777".

Found several of these.— Rod ^talk 18:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Should the final paragraph of the lead have some references in? Harrias ^talk 18:03, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The items in the lead all had citations within the list so I have reused these in the lead.— Rod ^talk 18:48, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support, another brilliant list, well done. Harrias ^talk 13:06, 1 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very resourceful list. Would like to see red links eaten up and more photographs eventually though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:11, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Support – A worthy conclusion to a remarkable series. Bravo! Tim riley talk 15:41, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from Seattle (talk) 00:20, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

The administrative centre of the district is Shepton Mallet but the largest town (three times larger than Shepton Mallet) is Frome. by size or population? Can you reference this exactly?

I have changed this to "more than twice" and added refs (actual figures (2011 census) Frome 26,203, Shepton Mallet 10,369).— Rod ^talk 08:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

also figure prominently in the list what does this mean? This seems like a PUFF phrase

Reworded.— Rod ^talk 08:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The most recent site on the list is a World War II bombing decoy complex and anti-aircraft obstructions on Black Down the highest point of the Mendip Hills. can you add a comma after "Black Down"? Do you have a year for this?

Comma added & 1940 added.— Rod ^talk 08:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The monuments are listed below using the titles given in the Historic England data sheets. Can you add this as "Note 1" for the "Name" column?

Notes have caused a problem in previous lists following this format as Notes 1,2 & 3 are autogenerated by the table header Template:EH listed building header row and numbering of separate notes is inconsistent and can lead to duplication of "Note 1" - therefore I have been previously asked to add this sentence to explain why specific phrases are included as the name.— Rod ^talk 08:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Names in the "Name" column shouldn't be in bold.

Again this is generated by Template:EH listed building row and changing it within the template would affect hundreds (? thousands) of other articles including the other 6 lists detailed at Scheduled monuments in Somerset which have already achieved FL status. I am trying to keep the formats as consistent as possible.— Rod ^talk 08:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The center-alignment of the text makes it hard to read in the "Name" and "Notes" section. Seattle (talk) 02:25, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- As above, the alignment is generated by the templates used. Thanks for all your comments. Perhaps a discussion at Template talk:English Heritage listed building header and/or Template talk:English Heritage listed building row would be appropriate for wider layout issues.— Rod ^talk 08:00, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the text align left attribute to Template:English Heritage listed building header and allowed ! scope="row" tags to display at Template:English Heritage listed building row, which seems to work throughout articles on which the templates are used. If those changes caused any tables to break, feel free to revert. Seattle (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't understand enough about the code in templates, or how they work, to go fiddling with them. For template issues I generally ask Any Mabbett for advice. As he has previously commented on those template he may have seen your edit anyway.— Rod ^talk 19:19, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the ping. The "more images" text, under centred images, should also be centred (It will jar, when the images are portrait format). Likewise, when there is a "no image" placeholder (see, for example, Grade I listed buildings in the West Midlands) Otherwise, I'm OK with this. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 19:53, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Changed. Seattle (talk) 00:20, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FLC/ar, and leave the {{featured list candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:28, 3 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.