Talk:London Necropolis railway station/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: DavidCane (talk) 13:02, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

Lead

"distant enough that the dead could not contribute to the spread of disease" sounds like a zombie attack. Suggest add a bit that spread of disease was a problem in the existing overcrowded graveyards.

Background

In the second paragraph, might be useful to give an idea of the approximate north, east, south and west extents of urban London, perhaps in a note.

London Necropolis Company

"maximum projected size", sounds a bit as if there was a plan rather than an anticipation/estimate.
They are shown in the map, but I suggest that you mention the seven existing cemeteries (you previously mentioned "200 small sites") and link to the Magnificent Seven, London. Your diagram shows Victoria Park as a site, but that was not built as a cemetery.
June to October is a remarkably quick construction time. Had they done any preliminary construction work before the final design was approved?
"Unlike most railway stations of the period, the designs of the first, second and third class waiting rooms were identical other than superficial differences." I have rephrased slightly. This raises the question: what was the standard elsewhere? Note perhaps.
In note 9 about Eleanor Marx's cremation you use both "LNC" and "Necropolis Railway". The former seems to be the standard in the article.

Second station (1902–1941)

"South of the existing site" Do you mean the original station?
I have edited the site description to remove the ambiguity of an S-shaped entrance. "Perpendicular" properly means at right angles vertically from the horizontal rather than just at a right angle.
Was the final section to the platform a pathway (uncovered) or a passageway (covered)?

Destruction

"Axis bombing": probably should link Axis, but I don't think it was anyone other than the Germans.
Presumably the second "station" in the first sentence is the Necropolis station.
"berthed" usually applies to boats. The usual terms for rolling stock is parked or stabled.

Closure

What about the soil of the cemetery caused the branch to deteriorate?

None of this prevents the following Formal bit:

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

A few minor questions above, that need attention, but an easy GA pass as it stands

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
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:
Off to FAC next?--DavidCane (talk) 22:19, 6 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replies

The "spread of disease" one is a bit tricky to summarise. In the 1850s bacteria hadn't yet been discovered and miasma was still medical orthodoxy. In reality, while keeping rotting bodies lying around at ground level is still not a good idea, living near a graveyard isn't the hazard the Victorians believed. This is a subarticle-of-a-subarticle, and I've tried to keep the background down to the minimum necessary to establish why so many eminent people thought this patently hare-brained scheme was a viable concept; once I finish London Necropolis Company itself, that will go into far more detail on the thinking behind it. I've reworded it to "distant enough that the dead could not pose any risk to public hygiene".
I thought of it, but I found it surprisingly hard to find a source. "London" didn't yet exist—I've used it as shorthand rather than the contemporary "the metropolis" to describe the City of London/Westminster/Southwark conurbation—so which set of boundaries one uses depends on who you're reading. (The formal boundaries like the Metropolitan Burial District had been drawn up in anticipation of urban growth, and encompassed huge swathes of countryside.)
Changed "projected" to "anticipated" to make that clearer.
Victoria Park (cemetery) isn't the same as Victoria Park (big park in Hackney). Because of the (modern) "Magnificent Seven" term, people tend to forget that there were actually eight suburban megacemeteries, not the seven that exist today. Victoria Park (the cemetery) was in Stepney just north of the present day Queen Mary & Westfield College; it folded in 1876 and was subsequently landscaped into a public park and renamed Meath Gardens. (The gates are the only significant part to survive.) I've avoided linking to Magnificent Seven for just this reason, as it will prompt everyone else to ask the same question but I don't want to go down a long sidetrack into suburban v extramural burials and the relative decline of each.
No preliminary work that's mentioned anywhere, and the site was only bought in March so there's a maximum of seven months to opening even had they began work the moment the site was identified. Remember that a lot of the structure was making use of existing LSWR arches; remember also that they (presumably) could call on the LSWR's army of navvies where necessary.
Most stations of the period had magnificent first class waiting rooms, reasonably well-appointed second class waiting rooms, and abject shithole third class waiting rooms. The LNC was designing for segregation rather than with the intent of providing different standards of travel; other than the fact that the third-class facilities were communal, the designs of both the stations and the carriages were virtually identical for all classes and religions. I don't really want to give a "this was the standard elsewhere" as it would give the wrong impression that there was a single standard on the rest of the network; as today, the facilities at different stations vary wildly. The modern analogy would be airports; the bog-standard cattle-class facilities at Houston airport are of a higher standard than the club-class facilities at Gatwick.
That's an artifact of my trying not to repeat "Necropolis Railway" too often, while intentionally avoiding the acronym LNR as it's too similar to LNC. Feel free to reword it if you think it's confusing.
Reworded to "south of the existing station".
That's fine; it's a confusing building to describe, but needs to be explained as it's critical in understanding why multiple direct hits from bombing left some parts completely untouched. I considered adding a diagram, but thought it would be too much clutter.
Neither. The main circulating area opened directly onto one platform; a flight of stairs from the third class waiting room emerged directly at the end of the other platform. There was a screen between the stairs and the circulating area to prevent the third class oiks from mingling with their betters.
I'm personally sure it was the Germans, but unless someone can dig up a source that gives the makeup of the squadrons involved I don't want to say for sure. By 1941 the Italian contribution to the blitz had dwindled sharply as so many of their aircraft had been transferred to the Libyan campaign, but there were still a few Italians involved.
Clarified which station was missed.
Changed to "stored", which is just as accurate and easier to understand.
The deterioration caused by the soil in the cemetery is explained at London Necropolis Railway. I've tried to keep everything that's not directly about the London station to a minimum on this page; while there's necessarily some duplication, most people reading one of these three will also be reading the other two so I don't like to say the same thing three times except where it's necessary.
Possibly to FAC, but I want to wait until at least London Necropolis Company and preferably Brookwood Cemetery are finished. At the moment, this series is very unbalanced. – iridescent 16:58, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]