Talk:Wells Cathedral

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Somerset, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics connected with Somerset. If you would like to participate, you can visit the WikiProject Somerset project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
B	This article has been rated as B-Class.
Mid	This article has been rated as mid-importance on the importance scale.

Someone has got to clean this up and cite sources. I can tell just from reading the "present structure" section that this was copied word-for-word from the official cathedral website. This is unacceptable. --Criticalthinker 20:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

You were right. Large sections were a direct copy & paste from the cathedral web site. I've now reworded these & added more content from a range of other sources. I'd be grateful for any further edits or comments as I'd like to get this article up to GA.— Rod ^talk 18:05, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Bringing it up to GA

There's quite a lot of problems here. As has been pointed out, most of the info has been lifted from the cathedral website in its entirety, except for the Introduction which has been lifted from what I wrote, elsewhere. The intro has a signifcant error. The dates are in conflict, and no-one has fixed them.

The History on the Cathedral page is not very well written. It contains this statement which has obviously been written by someone who hasn't thought through what they meant. It's all perfectly true, just confusingly written: 'he built the south-west tower of the West Front and designed the north west, which was built to match in the early 1400s..

This tells us that the towers match. In other words, the designs are the same. So to say that he "built one" and "designed one" is simply confusing the issue. What it should say is: "He designed the western towers, of which the northwest tower was not completed until the early 1400s."

This type of confusing language is used at various other places. It could all be simpler and more readable.

I would not feel at all happy about putting up for promotion any article which is largely lifted from another website. It's plagiarism, and we can't take any credit for it. I'll see what I can do, but WARNING its likely to be radical.

Amandajm (talk) 07:39, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you about the plagiarism issues. As discussed above I have been through & re worded large chunks which were directly copied from the Wells cathedral web site & have found a variety of alternative sources - as it had almost no references when I started working on it a few weeks ago. I did copy some of your text for the intro - but take that as a compliment & if its already on wikipedia surely that is allowed? Some of the convoluted text may be mine & I would welcome "radical" editing.— Rod ^talk 09:52, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] West Front

I think this subject deserves a sub-section of it's own. I have seen detailed descriptions of the different levels of the scultures and will try to find those references and add material. Recently i saw a tv show (buildings of britain - i think) where they talked about a row of holes from where trumpets were blown. These can be seen high up in the center of the picture of the west front. Elsewhere are places for choristers to stand and sing. Derek Andrews (talk) 13:30, 21 March 2008 (UTC)