Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Baden-Powell House

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Baden-Powell House

After an interesting previous nomination of the article, many good recommendations for further improvements, notably by TheGrappler, have been with his help (thanks!) included in the article. The perception is that it is at high quality now, and therefore I hereby re-nominate the article.

• Support, self-nomination. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 21:14, 15 July 2006 (UTC).
• Strong support. Much better than first time, and a very quick turn-around too.! Rlevse 21:26, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
• Only a comment at this point. The use of the Elizabeth II quotebox is contrary to the proposed WP:QUOTE guideline. It draws "special attention to the opinion of one source, and presents that opinion as though Wikipedia endorses it". Tuf-Kat 00:53, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Response to the comment. The mentioned WP:QUOTE explicity states: quoteboxes may be acceptable in certain circumstances, especially when the quote is itself notable, and a major part of the article's topic. Considering that the HM The Queen's address at the opening of the house does not pose a controversial opinion, I don't think that endorsement of it will be relevant. And the subject of the speech is the prime subject of the article, so I propose to keep the quote on that ground, unless others support Tuf-Kat's comment. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:34, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

• Object—2a.
  • The first sentence is not long, and IMV should also tell us where the House is (in South Kensington, London, not in Manchester or Toronto.)
  • Rather than saying that refurbishments "take place", it would be more natural to say "Over the years, there have been several refurbishments ...". Later in that sentence, does "it" refer to "the Scout Movement itself", "the largest part of the cost", or (somewhere a long way back from this clause), the House? "Costs" better as singular here.
  • "Upon": yes, this is a matter of personal style, but why would you want to be old-fashioned? "On" please, to be plain and simple, the way most readers like it. It's like "whilst" and "amongst".
  • "to build a hostel for Scouts to stay at a reasonable cost while visiting London"—well, you need "at at" to be correct, don't you. Reword. In any case, the second "a" is redundant.
  • "For this the committee purchased"—A few commas would make it smoother to read (e.g., after "this"). But in any case, you need "For this purpose,".
  • Can you say an empty site of a property?
  • We don't need to be told again that it's in London.

I won't go on; that's the first three paragraphs. The entire text needs auditing for poor expressions and redundancies by someone who is not familiar with the writing of the text. Tony 01:51, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment worked your comments to assist submitter. Rlevse 04:03, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

• Response to objection and comment See below. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:25, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

• Support --evrik 02:15, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

• Object for now, based on prose problems (2a). The article appears to be well referenced, so if you can solve the prose problems, I will change to Support.
  • I picked a random paragraph from the middle of the article, and found copyedit issues: This painting was a personal favorite of Baden-Powell, and has been used as typical picture of him on numerous articles and publications throughout the scout movement.[8] I shouldn't be able to find a typo on the first sentence section I pick to examine, as this gives rise to concern about the overall copyedit status.
  • Here's another random sentence I had a hard time winding my way through: Run by The Scout Association, Baden-Powell House continues to provide the envisioned base for Scouts visiting London, and a Scout conference centre, in the middle of the London visitor area, actually neighbouring the Natural History Museum, Science Museum, Royal Albert Hall and the Victoria and Albert Museum.
  • By the way, please put categories in alphabetical order. Why do you have a red link in See also? Sandy 02:24, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Support Objection removed, prose corrected, nice work ! Sandy 02:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment copyedited the two paras you mention. Rm'd the parent cat. Don't know about the red link (just helping here). Rlevse 03:54, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
    • Response to objection and comment Thanks Rlevse and Danaman5 for stepping in here. I'm in another timezone and cannot act as quickly as you did, and you're English is better as well. I have re-edited a few sentences to get the intended meaning into it. All red links have been created. The red (now blue) wikilinks are to subjects of note, worthy of an article of their own, which I therefore simply created. The prose improvements pointed out both by Tony and by Sandy have in my humble opinion been taken care of. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 19:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

Do you mean that the whole article has been copy-edited, or that merely the examples here have been addressed? Tony 01:19, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• The examples pointed out have been given prime attention in copy-editing, and other improvements have been made as well, as I interpreted the comments to be regarding the prose of the whole article. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 14:17, 18 July 2006 (UTC).

• Comment - Why do most of the images, such as this one, have text indicating they are public domain, but a tag indicating that they are GFDL licensed? Two images are claimed under fair use without rationale. Pagrashtak 06:02, 16 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Response to comment Thanks for pointing out: all texts have been adjusted to better reflect the intention of the image producer. And proper fair use rationales have been added to the two pictures and the article. Wim van Dorst (Talk) 20:22, 16 July 2006 (UTC).

• Support Canadianshoper 00:44, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

• Well, I have to say that this is now a lot better: well done, contributors. However, I still found a few glitches, and see WP's policy on not starting titles with "The". Objection removed. Tony 02:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Thanks for you kind words, and your assists in this, Tony and Sandy. And for your support on the nomination. The said section is retitled, now, of course. 07:11, 19 July 2006 (UTC).
• Support:Although I have contributed to the architecture section. However the remainder of the page is vastly improved since it was last a candidate. Giano | talk 12:16, 19 July 2006 (UTC)