Jump to content

Talk:Lytes Cary

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleLytes Cary has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Good topic starLytes Cary is part of the National Trust properties in Somerset series, a good topic. This is identified as among the best series of articles produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 28, 2014Good article nomineeListed
December 6, 2015Good topic candidatePromoted
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 6, 2009.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in 1907, the medieval Great Hall of Lytes Cary manor house (pictured) was being used as a cider store?
Current status: Good article

Article name

[edit]

Surely this page should be called Lytes Cary, plain and simple? At the moment, Lytes Cary is a redirect to Charlton Mackrell, which page has a few lines about the settlement at Lytes Cary and Lytes Cary itself. It seems a nonsense that the settlement that post-dates the chapel and manor - which is the originator of the name - is under Lytes Cary. I suggest that the house and grounds go under Lytes Cary and the settlement is Lytes Cary (settlement) or Lytes Cary (hamlet), which will be a redirect to Charlton Mackrell anyhow. None of the sources I looked at call it Lytes Cary Manor - it's Lytes Cary, plain and simple. I don't know how to change all this though. Stronach (talk) 16:37, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well done for all your editing on this article. Having checked a couple of sources I agree it is known as Lytes Cary not Lytes Cary Manor. This would involve "moving" the page to ensure the edit history & talk page move with it. I would suggest under the naming conventions the settlement should move to "Lytes Cary, Somerset" which would then be the redirect to Charlton Mackrell. I would suggest leaving it a couple of days to see if anyone objects and then I can do the move if needed. A few other resources which might be useful to expand the article include Lytes Cary at Somerset Historic Environment Record, Dovecote at IoE, Gate piers and walls at IoE, Lytes Cary at IoE, pair of gate piers at IoE and Outbuildings at IoE.— Rod talk 18:17, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Your move suggestion sounds very good. I added the above refs to the external links section when I was doing my edits yeasterday, but didn't refer to them as I wasn't sure about reliability of various sources - for eg, the Nat Trust guidebook says the dovecote is a water tank built by the Jenners to ape the dovecote at Avebury MAnor, whihc the IoE page says it's poss C18. Either the Nat Trust is wrong (which seems unlikely) or the Jenners made a fake good enough to fool the Eng Heritage architectural experts. Stronach (talk) 06:48, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Added interior architecture info, but some sources do contradict so I have tried to tread the middle ground. I swapped the lead pic to one that shows the whole house, rather than the (albeit pretty) squashed oblique view one of the south front. Stronach (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]

It has been suggested that this article move to Lytes Cary however the target page is currently a redirect to Charlton Mackrell so can not be completed except by an admin. A way forward would be to move Lytes Cary to Lytes Cary, Somerset and then move Lytes Cary Manor to Lytes Cary with Lytes Cary Manor then redirecting.— Rod talk 18:29, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've expedited the move. Drop me a line if there are any problems. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DYK?

[edit]

Just a thought - has this been expanded enough to qualify for DYK do you reckon? Stronach (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 09:12, 29 April 2009 (UTC). My page size tool says the page is currently (29 April 10.00ish):[reply]

   * File size: 68 kB
   * Prose size (including all HTML code): 14 kB
   * References (including all HTML code): 7469 B
   * Wiki text: 17 kB
   * Prose size (text only): 10 kB (1808 words) "readable prose size"
   * References (text only): 1088 B

& before your edits starting 28 April 14.39

   * File size: 60 kB
   * Prose size (including all HTML code): 3537 B
   * References (including all HTML code): 0 B
   * Prose size (text only): 2147 B (372 words) "readable prose size"
   * References (text only): 0 B

So it has gone from 372 words (2147 B) of readable prose to 1808 words (10kb) which is more than the required 5X expansion for DYK so why not propose it?— Rod talk 09:38, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okeydoke. How about '... that in 1907 the medieval Great Hall of Lytes Cary manor house (pictured) was being used as a cider store?' Stronach (talk) 11:10, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is no reference to support that statement so it would never get accepted at DYK.— Rod talk 11:16, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Okay I'll go through and add refs - its a bit sparse at the mo. Should have added them as I put in the text but the cite ref malarkey is such a fag I kind of left it ...Stronach (talk) 11:25, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What else is needed to get this article to GA?

[edit]

What else do people think would be needed to get this article to meet the Good article criteria?— Rod talk 18:21, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Lytes Cary/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 23:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator:Rod talk

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. --Seabuckthorn  23:12, 26 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]


1: Well-written

Check for WP:LEAD:

  1. Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section:  Done
  2. Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE):  Done
  3. Check for Introductory text:  Done
    • Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO):  Done
    • Check for Relative emphasis:  Done
    • Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN):  Done
      • Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE):  Done
      • Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE):  Done
      • Check for Proper names and titles:  Done
      • Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
      • Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
      • Check for Pronunciation: None
      • Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK):  Done
      • Check for Biographies: NA
      • Check for Organisms: NA
  4. Check for Biographies of living persons: NA
  5. Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT):  Done
    • Check for Non-English titles:
    • Check for Usage in first sentence:
    • Check for Separate section usage:
  6. Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH):  Done
  7. Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER): None
 Done

Check for WP:LAYOUT:  Done

  1. Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY.  Done
    • Check for Headings and sections:  Done
    • Check for Section templates and summary style:  Done
    • Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS):  Done
  2. Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX):  Done
    • Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER):  Done
    • Check for Works or publications:  Done
    • Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO):  Done
    • Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR):  Done
    • Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER):  Done
    • Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL):  Done
    • Check for Links to sister projects:  Done
    • Check for Navigation templates:  Done
  3. Check for Formatting:  Done
    • Check for Images (WP:LAYIM):  Done
    • Check for Links:  Done
    • Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE):  Done
 Done

Check for WP:WTW:  Done

  1. Check for Words that may introduce bias:  Done
    • Check for Puffery (WP:PEA):  Done
    • Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL):  Done
    • Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL):  Done
    • Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED):  Done
    • Check for Editorializing (MOS:OPED):  Done
    • Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY):  Done
  2. Check for Expressions that lack precision:  Done
    • Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM):  Done
    • Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM):  Done
    • Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME):  Done
    • Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
  3. Check for Offensive material (WP:F***):  Done

Check for WP:MOSFICT:  Done

  1. Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world):  Done
    • Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI):  Done
    • Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT):  Done
 Done


2: Verifiable with no original research

 Done

Check for WP:RS:  Done

Cross-checked with other FAs: Chew Valley Lake, Chew Valley, Mendip Hills, Buildings and architecture of Bristol, Chew Stoke, Exmoor, Somerset, Bath, Somerset, River Parrett, Kennet and Avon Canal

  1. Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING): (not contentious)  Done
    • Is it contentious?: No
    • Does the ref indeed support the material?:
  2. Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING):  Done
    • Who is the author?:
    • Does the author have a Wikipedia article?:
    • What are the author's academic credentials and professional experience?:
    • What else has the author published?:
    • Is the author, or this work, cited in other reliable sources? In academic works?:
  3. Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING):  Done
  4. Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):
 Done

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF:  Done

  1. Check for Direct quotations:  Done
  2. Check for Likely to be challenged:  Done
  3. Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP): NA
 Done
  1. Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY):  Done
  2. Check for synthesis (WP:SYN):  Done
  3. Check for original images (WP:OI):  Done


3: Broad in its coverage

 Done

Cross-checked with other FAs: Chew Valley Lake, Chew Valley, Mendip Hills, Buildings and architecture of Bristol, Chew Stoke, Exmoor, Somerset, Bath, Somerset, River Parrett, Kennet and Avon Canal

  1. Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
    1. Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
    2. Check for Out of scope:
  2. Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
    1. Check for All material that is notable is covered:
    2. Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
    3. Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
    4. Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
    5. Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):
b. Focused:
 Done
  1. Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
  2. Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):


4: Neutral

 Done

4. Fair representation without bias:  Done

  1. Check for POV (WP:YESPOV):  Done
  2. Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING):  Done
  3. Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE):  Done
  4. Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE):  Done
  5. Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS):  Done
  6. Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID):  Done
  7. Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV):  Done
  8. Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL):  Done
  9. Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE):  Done
  10. Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV):  Done
  11. Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV):  Done
  12. Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI): None
  13. Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV): None


5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images  Done (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license) (PD)

Images:
 Done

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:  Done

  1. Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS):  Done
  2. Check for copyright status:  Done
  3. Check for non-free content (WP:NFC):  Done
  4. Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR):  Done

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  Done

  1. Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE):  Done
  2. Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE):  Done
  3. Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION):  Done


I'm glad to see your work here. As per the above checklist, I do have some insights that I think will be useful in improving the article. Can you provide inline citations for the following?

  • "Only the older parts of the house are open to the public.".
  • "The Jenners had a garden staff of four.".
  • "The main border is 35 metres (114.8 ft) long and at its best in midsummer. The flowers grade from blues and yellows, through creams and apricots to pinks, mauves and reds. There is a restful White Garden beyond for contrast.".
  • "It is a plain grassed walkway connecting the Raised Walk with the Pond Garden.".
  • Is it possible to move inline citations in the Paintings subsection to the end of the sentences? They are inhibiting the flow.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. Rod, please feel free to strike out any recommendation you think will not help in improving the article. All the best, --Seabuckthorn  23:31, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I have added and moved references as suggested.— Rod talk 18:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks --Seabuckthorn  21:48, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting the article to GA status. --Seabuckthorn  21:48, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Inhabitanrs of Lytes Cary

[edit]

A family of farmers lived at Lytes Cary between 1865 and 1903, headed by John and Lucy Eades and 8 children and two servants (from the censuses of 1871, 1881, 1891). John Eades died in 1903. In 1871 owned 218 acres with 3 labourers and 3 boys. Pietro69blue (talk) 14:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]