Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/London Beer Flood/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 31 August 2019 [1].

London Beer Flood

Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 12:14, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The London Beer Flood is something of a footnote to a footnote of history, even for London.one of the massive vats used to ferment porter burst sending a 15-ft tidal wave through the back wall of the brewery and into one of the London slums. It killed eight and hospitalised others. The brewery was situated in the centre of London, on the corner of Oxford Street and Tottenham Court Road. Any and all constructive comments are welcome. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 12:14, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Asking because I'm unsure: are anonymous History Press articles considered reliable? – Juliancolton | ^Talk 15:16, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Links, dablinks and redirects are fine.

I can't see why not. It's a publishing house that specialises in history. No self-publishing: it commissions only. - SchroCat (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Gog the Mild

How could I resist?

Do you fancy adding Alt text?
"rebate from HM Excise on the spilled beer" "spilled" seems inappropriate.
"The brewery moved away from the area in 1921" "away from the area" seems redundant.
"Why does note b convert to the nearest 10,000 units, and c and e to the nearest hundred? Especially as c is dealing with a larger base volume.
"Porter was left in the large tuns" Vat suddenly becomes tun for one mention only. An unusual word which may confuse readers, and led at least one, ahem, to think of the unit of volume, the tun of eight barrels.
"several hogsheads of porter" Any chance of a footnoted or inline (my preference) explanation of the volume of a hogshead?
"Crick said that hoops on the vats burst three or four times a year" This is the first mention of a hoop bursting; previously there has been a hoop slipping, and the vessel bursting. Is there any consensus, or even published lack of, as to what the point of structural failure was?
"As a result of the accident, large wooden tanks were phased out." It may be worth expanding this a little, as you do in the lead, to clarify that this was across the whole industry. Also, any idea of the timescale over which this happened?
- Sadly, no idea on the timescales involved for that, just that it happened. - SchroCat (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have. Very good. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:19, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Gog, all now sorted. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A late addition. In the title and the first four words of the lead, why the upper case B and F? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:22, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- That's how it's referred to in the sources. Having got into hot water over dropping the capital on Tottenham Outrage, I'm reticent about trying something similar here! - SchroCat (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It would be hot beer, rather than hot water... ——SerialNumber54129 15:16, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:10, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Gog. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:12, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from RL0919

An enjoyable read overall. I had so few comments beyond things already mentioned that I resolved half of them myself as simple copy edits (although as always you are free to take exception to those as well), so here's all that remain.

Lead:

"The resulting tidal wave" – The flood doesn't match any of the literal definitions of 'tidal wave', but using the term figuratively to describe something that was a literal wave seems confusing, so I'd just say "The resulting wave".
The direct quotation of "casually, accidentally and by misfortune" should be cited, even in the lead.

17 October 1814:

"The volume of liquid and its force destroyed the rear wall of the brewery" – I would think that it was purely the force of the liquid that destroyed the wall.

I ~~look forward to (presumably)~~ support~~ing~~ this for FA. --RL0919 (talk) 19:38, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks RL0919, all done. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Updated to support. --RL0919 (talk) 12:20, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Suggest adding alt text
File:Horseshoe_Brewery,_London,_c._1800.jpg: if the author is unknown how do we know they died over 75 years ago? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:35, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Nikkimaria - all done. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just passing through SC, but if you're lucky the WP:NOTMEMORIUM types won't notice! You should see the ding dongs on Talk:Bloody Sunday. Re. the two maps, how about the switcher template? ——SerialNumber54129 17:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks SN, I could do, but as we've got no other images, we're not pushed for space, so we don't need to. No need to pass through: you can stay and review if you want! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:15, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sources review

No spotchecks done
Links to sources all working
Formats: No issues
Quality/reliability: no issues – sources meet the requisite FA criteria

Brianboulton (talk) 21:27, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Brian, I am much obliged to you. Cheers- SchroCat (talk) 15:00, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support by caeciliusinhorto

Support. Good work as ever by Schro, I reviewed this at PR and a second look through finds no further problems. Prose is all fine, images are clearly out-of-copyright, and sources are reliable. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 18:55, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks again Caeciliusinhorto - your thoughts at PR and here are most welcome. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 19:33, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt

Sorry to have missed the PR; here are my comments.

If you mention in the second paragraph that the industry stopped using wooden vats, then you might want to mention in the first that the ruptured vats were wooden.
"The resulting wave of porter destroyed the back wall of the brewery and swept into the St Giles rookery, an area of slum-dwellings." I would reverse the ending "and swept into an area of slum-dwellings known as the St Giles rookery." The readers will likely not have heard of the area, and why distract them by puzzling them, if only briefly?
As you mention a 20th century move for the brewery, it might be worth mentioning whether the firm is still in business.
"Liquor-Pond Street (now Clerkenwell Road)" shame that.

I know- the original is so much better! -SchroCat (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Is it known what type of vats replaced the wooden ones? And were they widespread? You only mention those owned by father and son Meux.

That's about it. Very interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:11, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks, Wehwalt: all duly attended to. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support I raise a glass of porter to ... er, never mind.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:04, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

I took part in the peer review, and my (few and minor) quibbles were dealt with then. The article seems to me to meet all the FA criteria. I did momentarily wonder if the juxtaposition of brewers and liquidation was entirely felicitous, but it's the right word when all's said and done. Happy to support. Tim riley talk 19:27, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment from Reywas92

The lead ends with "Meux & Co went into liquidation in 1961." but Meux had not yet been introduced so this is unclear by itself. Reywas92^Talk 05:27, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent spot, Reywas92. It should have been in there originally, but now added. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 07:50, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 16:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.