Talk:Leicester Square/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 21:39, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

"which eventually became converted" -which were eventually converted"

I've gone with "which were converted"; I think everything else can be worked out from context actually

" I think you still need to state century after mid 20th

It does mean "century" appears twice in a sentence, which always jars with me, is there any other way of doing this?

"towards the middle of the next century?"

Okay, I've gone with something like that

Geography

"about equal distances" -almost equidistant from the?

I've taken that bit out, I seem to recall it was in the prose and I just tacked a Google Maps cite onto it. I don't think being equidistant is important and it's borderline OR to suggest it is from just a map alone

History

"Leicester House was once the residence of Frederick, Prince of Wales" -do we know when?

Indeed we do

"In 1687, the northern part of the square became part of the new parish of St Anne, Soho. Leicester House was once the residence of Frederick, Prince of Wales[5] while the poet Matthew Prior lived at what is now No. 21 around 1700 and artist William Hogarth lived at No 30 between 1733 and 1764, where he produced some of his best known works including Gin Lane" -too long. I'd start a new sentence after 1700.

Done, though I split it at the Prince of Wales (which was rewritten per above comment)

"The magistrate Thomas de Veil, later to found Bow Street Magistrates' Court, lived at No 40 between 1729 and 1737; this location is now the Odeon West End.[6] The painter Joshua Reynolds lived " -rep of "lived", change one to "resided"

Done, though it would be nice to have some other synonyms to go with the other "lived" later on in this paragraph

"Towards the end of the century, the square stopped becoming a desirable address and began to serve as a venue for popular entertainments" -do we have any background info filling in on why it declined as a desirable address?

It was the royals moving out and Ashton Lever moving his museum in to Leicester House; amenities set up to cater for the crowds. I've added this

" as the royal patent, needed at that time to license a theatre, was refused." -commas not needed here

Every time you remove a comma, Eric Corbett cheers, so removing too is .... well!

"housed a giant scale map of the Earth." -could elaborate, perhaps a footnote with some details might help.

I've added the size, creator and general background in a footnote

"Several hotels were established around the square" -too vague for me, the hotel enthusiast. I want names and dates, they may potentially become articles ;-)

Alright Blofeld, you asked for it - I have expanded this as requested and there are now three redlinks for you :-P

"In the early 20th century, the theatre became a popular venue for ballet. " -new paragraph needed

Done (also split an earlier paragraph)

"wanted to demolish sections of it to accommodate more cafes, theatres and cinemas, and less nightclubs." -you can't accommodate less, try "wanted to demolish sections of it to accommodate more cafes, theatres and cinemas, in favour of less nightclubs.

I've accomodated this

"12,000 square metres " -use the convert|m2 tool

Done

Features

"This was originally Lammas land that was available for common use on Lammas Day (12 August) for washing clothes and herding cattle." -I don't think you need to repeat "Lammas" here, perhaps just something like "The land here was originally available for washing clothes and herding cattle on Lammas Day (12 August)".

copyedited

"In 1808, the garden was sold by the Leicester Estate into private ownership a" -any names?

Quite a few (at least up to 1849) - I've expanded this

" A statue of William Shakespeare surrounded by dolphins was constructed in the centre. The four corner gates of the park had one bust each of famous former residents in the square: the scientist Sir Isaac Newton; Sir Joshua Reynolds, the first President of the Royal Academy; John Hunter, a pioneer of surgery; and William Hogarth, the painter. The most recent addition was a statue of film star and director Charlie Chaplin in 1981.[23] On the pavement were inscribed the distances in miles to several Commonwealth countries, including Canada, Kenya and Jamaica.[25] After the Great Outdoors refurbishment of the square, only the statue of Shakespeare still remains." -some names of statue creators would be good here.

As far as I know, they were all James Knowles except Chaplin who was John Doubleday - all added

Is there no link for London Film Festival?

forgot :-/

"The Sex Pistols played one of their first gigs at the club." -date?

15 November 1976 - mere weeks before that TV incident

"formerly known" -are you certain you mean "formerly" and not "formally" here?

Changed to "originally". Don't ask me when - I haven't got a source! :-/

Italicize Armageddon

done

Emmanuelle -place year in brackets. Coincidentally I had intended watching that within the next day or so as I'm having a mid 70s run at the moment, but I don't think of it as a pornographic film, more "erotic" or "soft core" I think as it was reviewed by Roger Ebert and he doesn't review real porno films! I'm not sure if it is that graphic but I'll let you know when I've seen it ;-)

I've seen it now and a porno it aint, it's barely "erotic". It's actually very well shot with some beautiful footage of Thailand.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:38, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That almost sounded like Alan Partridge, "fascinating ladyboys from Bangkok..." anyway, back to Emmanuelle either "a scene in which a dancer lights a cigarette and puffs it with her vagina" is family viewing these days or our own article is made up (it's unsourced). I'll add erotic film to the prose. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:33, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, well there was that, but the vast majority of the film was rather mild I thought! I'm sure pornographic films shown at the theatre for the most part are an accurate description. 70s London in parts must have been very sleazy!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:00, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Place years in brackets on the other films too, though the "sing along" version of Sound of Music may not be 1965.

As far as I'm aware, the "sing along" is just playing the film while the audience sings along. (Off topic, when the first "user friendly" help systems on Windows first appeared in the mid-1990s, we typed in questions like "how do you solve a problem like Maria?" for a laugh)

"The Chinese New Year. The celebrations are organised by the London Chinatown Chinese Association and include music, acrobatics and dancing. In" -elaborate on the Chinese New Year celebrations.

I've dropped in a bit more from a press release, but the Chinese New Year stuff covers the West End generally rather than specifically Leciester Square, though it is still marked as a key hub of the event.

OK/

Cultural

" including the Rolling Stones' notorious "Cocksucker Blues",[45] "Jeffrey Goes To Leicester Square" on Jethro Tull's album Stand Up,[46] "Emit Remmus" on the album Californication by the Red Hot Chili Peppers,[47] and "Leicester Square" on Rancid's Life Won't Wait.[" -more years in brackets would be good here.

Done

" by Premier Inn" -the Premier Inn

I don't think so, the context here is a report by the franchise called "Premier Inn", rather than a specific instance of it

Good attempt @Ritchie333:, adequate for GA, but there really feels like something is missing here. I don't know quite what. Aren't there any restaurants in the vicinity worth mentioning? I think you could go into more detail on what changed during the renovation, even give the renovation or maintenance its own section. Has the square ever been involved in demonstrations?♦ Dr. Blofeld 22:18, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well during the review we've added about 2K of extra prose (taking the size up to 18K). Significant restaurants are more in nearby Coventry Street and Gerrard Street rather than Leicester Square itself, and while there have been demonstrations, it's not exactly Trafalgar Square or Speaker's Corner and I'm concerned citing one or two would fall foul of WP:NOTNEWS and WP:RECENTISM. Two things to look at are the early 21st century renovation, and World War II damage. I'll have another look in The London Encyclopedia and Survey of London and see if I've missed anything. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:45, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A photo on the left in entertainment of the theatres or whatever would be quite useful.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:08, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I've added one.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:45, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I know, you edit-conflicted with me as I was adding several :-P Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:51, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Excellent work! You may still want to add more though, but it looks fine for GA. School of English was once located on the square, you might add a bit on that, you can see it next to the Odeon in the photo. Also I see a lot of photos of the Bella Italia. [1] some mention there of a chemist before and further down the Archbishop's Tennison School. Ref 12 looks like it has an error.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:45, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for the review - good to see one that makes suggestions to add stuff, which really does make for a better article. Regarding the School of English, I'm struggling to find a good source beyond libcom.org, why hasn't BBC News, The Guardian or the Telegraph at least picked up one page on it? And on bars, I have noticed a bit of POV in the London Encyclopedia, the authors don't rate the square much from the early 20th century onwards, and gloss over things a bit. Another thing I've struggled to find is a good source about WWII damage, at least one building got bombed, maybe more. Perhaps we should take this conversation to the main talk page? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:02, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It's decent enough for GA, don't worry about it. The top two sources, though tabloids mention it here. Just that there was an English school on the square should suffice. That source should be fine to reinforce it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:09, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry, I've mentioned it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:15, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]