Talk:UK Holocaust Memorial

Adding an image of the proposed memorial

It would be great if someone could add an image. Jontel (talk) 08:36, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

Would or will

User:Ivan007 Thank you for sharing a grammar resource i.e. [[1]]. From it, I note that 'Would is also a conditional verb. It indicates an action that would happen if certain circumstances were met.' In this case, the memorial will go ahead as described if the minister approves it, taking into account the inspector following the public inquiry. As the resource says, would can be used in other ways. According to the resource, 'Will is a modal auxiliary verb, where it describes an action that is expected to take place in the future.' However, the memorial cannot be 'expected' to take place, i.e. regarded as likely, given that the inspector has yet to make a recommendation and the minister has yet to make a decision. It may go ahead or it may not. You may feel that either the process of making the decision will be corrupt or that those advocating the project will find a way of overcomming a negative decision but these are simply opinions. I am interested to understand your view of why will is more appropriate than would in this context. Jontel (talk) 05:42, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

User:Jontel Thank you for engaging with my concerns. My initial feeling is just that 'would' seems strange. I did start to consider that there may be places where would works and others where will works, but I thought down that route lies madness. I essentially take the view that 'will' is commonplace usage in this sort of circumstance. I' not a grammar specialist and don't really have the technical language to describe this, but I would say that it is shorthand for 'following the assumption that this planned thing comes to fruition the following will be part of it'. The alternative would be (see how 'would' comes naturally in that circumstance) a shorthand for 'if we were to create the circumstances in which this happened then this would be part of it).

I'd also point out (though I can see the easy counter to this) that the language of the Government uses 'will' rather than 'would' in talking about this project. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/jenrick-announces-free-admission-to-the-proposed-uk-holocaust-memorial

Anyway, I feel now I'm close to discussing what can dance on the head of a pin, but I would be intrested in taking this out to a professional writing community for a straw poll to see what third parties think. Thanks, Ivan007 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 10:32, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

I like the idea of engaging professionals, though I am not sure of the mechanism. Yes, the government is promoting the proposal so naturally wish to create the impression of inevitability. As a first step, can I ask editors watching this page whether they have a view on the use of would vs. will in describing details of the yet to be finally approved project. (n.b. British English)? Thanks. Jontel (talk) 10:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Response to third opinion request:

Dear fellow editors. I am Springnuts; by no means a professional, but simply an editor who has not previously edited this article (though in researching the 3O I made a very few grammatical/typo corrections, which I was bold enough to mark as WP:minor; something I rarely do!). Afaik I have not previously interacted with either of the editors involved. Thank you for the courtesy you have shown each other: I commend you both. I feel that there are deeper currents than the purely grammatical or style issues in play here, so you are very sensible to tread warily. However it does feel as if the project won't go the way of the Garden Bridge: something will be built, though the form and location are not yet clear. Therefore I suggest: In the lede: The UK Holocaust Memorial is a proposed memorial and learning centre, intended to preserve the testimony of British Holocaust survivors and concentration camp liberators, and to honour the Jewish victims of the Holocaust and other victims of Nazi persecution, including Roma, LGBT, and disabled people.. It is currently being planned to be built in Victoria Tower Gardens, a Royal Park next to the Houses of Parliament. The proposal has become contentious because of the popularity and nature of the location and because the memorial would take around a quarter of the green space in the park. (The ref should work on the page) In the section headed: Memorial and Learning Centre The learning centre is to be a facility giving visitors ... (as the feel of "is to be" is just slightly less definite than "will be") In the section headed: Architectural competition sculpture with an underground learning centre that will help to educate visitors about prejudice and discrimination. (ie unchanged: the provisionality is built into the fact that this is a design) In the section: Redesign and response ... it is not clear that the revised designs will significantly reduce the impact that the proposed structure will have on this much-loved public amenity space, ... (ie unchanged: the provisionality is built into the fact that these are designs) In the section: Opposition and concerns ... stability of the flood defence [meaning that] surrounding areas will be highly susceptible ... (ie unchanged: it is part of a quote) Anyway, these suggestions are my opinion of what would read well and communicate clearly. References Springnuts (talk) 21:13, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Springnuts Thank you for responding so quickly and giving this your attention. I am happy with your proposed changes. User:Ivan007, what do you think? Jontel (talk) 06:42, 10 February 2021 (UTC)

Springnuts Jontel Springnuts, thank you so much for your careful consideration and response. I'm actually really impressed as I had the feeling that there might be a way to phrase everything around the contended verb. (I also think that your comment on possible 'deeper currents' is very astute!). I'm more than happy to take your proposals on lock, stock and barrel. Ivan007 (talk) 18:10, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Great, I've made that change. Jontel (talk) 19:09, 11 February 2021 (UTC) thanks Ivan007 (talk) 01:27, 12 February 2021 (UTC)