Wikipedia:Peer review/Hearst Castle/archive1

Hearst Castle

"The quintessential twentieth-century American country house" has an interesting history. Designed by Julia Morgan, America's first independent woman architect, Hearst Castle was built for William Randolph Hearst, media mogul and the most hated man in America. Filled with an enormous collection of antiquities and art - "enough for ten museums, the loot of the world" - Hearst and his mistress, Marion Davies, played hosts at the castle for almost all of the stars of twenties and thirties Hollywood. Satirised by Orson Welles as Charles Foster Kane's Xanadu, the castle is now one of the most-visited tourist attractions in California. All comments/suggestions for improvement most gratefully received. KJP1 (talk) 09:37, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

SC

Good grief, what an eyesore! I'll need to do this in chunks to let me eyes get over the sheer gaudiness of the place. A fine example of money not buying taste. - SchroCat (talk) 17:07, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

SchroCat - Many thanks indeed for taking a look. Readers of a sensitive disposition may well be advised to take Mr Aslet's advice and view the castle from a distance! But its stones (concrete) do, I think, have an interesting story to tell. I shall get on to your excellent points soonest, but an immediate response on the, no-longer, double image. That did have a photo of Morgan to the left. We only had two, and one of those has been deleted for copyright infringement. The other, a carte de visite from 1926, is only tagged for fair-use and I've been told that doesn't allow its use here. Actually Nikkimaria thinks it's ok, but the Commons Praetorian Guard disagree. The saga can be found on the image Talkpage. If I can summon the enthusiasm, I shall try to solicit support from other editors for changing the tag. Otherwise, Wikipedia will follow the long, ignoble tradition of neglecting Miss Morgan, which will be sad. KJP1 (talk) 18:17, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

I'll start at the bottom – there are a few errors in the references that need sorting:

• FNs 14, 162, 182, 194, 213, 220, 222, 231 and 232 all point to Loe 1991, but there isn't anything in the sources for it. Is this meant to be Loe 1994?
• FN 27 points to Wilson 2007: is this meant to be 2012?
• FN 70 points to McBride 2013: no McBride listed in the sources
• FN 184 points to Morgan 2012: no Morgan listed in the sources
• FN 218 points to Everingham 2001: is this meant to be 1981?

 Done - Thanks for picking these irritating slip-ups up! KJP1 (talk) 09:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Lead

There are a lot of "Hearst"s around – a couple could be swapped out for "He".

• "Hearst himself called his castle": Just "Hearst called his castle"?
• "40,000 acre" should probably have a conversion
• "in the Theater": why the capital?
• Link for Charles Foster Kane?
• What is a "sumptuous swimming pool"? Surely they are all just holes in the ground full of water...?

A hole in the ground full of water

"The most sumptuous pool on earth"
"A gaudy, tasteless hole in the ground full of water"!

Just glancing down to the Morgan and Hearst: "a true collaboration" section, the image caption reads ""A true collaboration". Left:Julia Morgan in about 1926 Right:Hearst about 1910", although there is only one image...

 Done - All the above attended to as suggested, but still left the double image with a space, in the hope that I'll be able to fill it. Many thanks and look forward to the next batch. KJP1 (talk) 11:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

More to follow. - SchroCat (talk) 17:21, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

• And continuing

• Again there are a few "Hearts"s that could be swapped out for "he" or "his"

Early history

• "area, to evangelize" is the comma needed?

Buying the land

• "In the 1870s George Hearst: any reason for the full name? (And "he" would also suffice)
• "$18,000,000" and "$11,000,000": any reason why not $18 million?
• Link to YWCA?
• "Mrs Hearst encountered Morgan": this is the first mention of Morgan, so full name and link, I think

Morgan and Hearst

• "most recent biographer": "Most recent" isn't really needed, and could become out of date without anyone realising
• "twenty-eight newspapers, thirteen magazines ... and 31,000 employees" Someone will undoubtedly pick up on the mix of words and numbers, which runs counter to the MoS.

Done to the start of Having a ball: more to follow. - SchroCat (talk) 15:04, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

 Done to here. Many thanks. KJP1 (talk) 07:12, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

And continuing...

specter at the feast

• "originally entitled 'American'": the MoS says to italicise screenplay titles.

Depression

• "At American entry" jars a bit for me – I think you could probably make it more elegant
• "William Randolph Hearst died in 1951": Colourful writing, but "He" would suffice here
• "died, a virtual recluse, on February 2, 1957": I'm not sure we need the full dates, particularly as " Hearst died in 1951": I think we can cut to the year here too.

Design

• "architecture... (that) transcended": If the "(that)" wasn't in the original, the MoS advises a square bracket, rather than a round one (there are one or two further down that need looking at too)
• "forty-two bedrooms, sixty-one bathrooms, nineteen sitting rooms,[103] 127 acres (0.5 km2)": Again, someone will later complain about the mix of digits and words for numbers.

Costs

• "debts stood at over $87,000,000": $87 million?

Done to the start of the Assembly room. Very interesting reading and very little to pick up on. – SchroCat (talk) 21:26, 8 December 2019 (UTC)

Assembly room

• "'One of San Simeon's most magnificent interiors'": Says who...?

Refectory

• "'strikes a discordant note of horizontality among the vertical lines of the room'": Says who...?
• "serving ketchup and pickles in their original bottles with the labels still attached, and providing paper napkins, attracted occasional comment": you've told us part of this in the "Having a Ball" section

Cloisters

• "The Cloisters formed a grouping": Past tense? Did it all change?

That's my lot for now - ping me when you go to FAC and I'll give it another going over. I enjoyed your prose much more than the images of the rather garish interiors. It looks like a place that taste forgot. Thank goodness it's too far away to visit! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 22:47, 10 December 2019 (UTC)

SchroCat - Many thanks indeed. Appreciate the house isn't to everyone's taste! All comment  Done. I think I'll leave it in PR for a bit - I'd really like some American input and may try to rustle some up. When it swings round to FAC, I'll let you know. KJP1 (talk) 11:29, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Tim

First consignment. More to come.

• Lead
  • "her most renowned creation" – a bit value-laden, implying approbation (God save us!). I don't suggest 'most notorious' but 'best-known' would be neutral.
  • "Cary Grant and the Marx Brothers" – were they his backing group? The "and" looks very odd in the middle of this long list.
  • "George Bernard Shaw" – Shaw hated mention of "George" and it would be a courtesy to him to pipe this as Bernard Shaw.
  • "in the Theater" – why the capital letter? (SchroCat is ahead of me here, I see.)
  • "assemblage of ancient Greek vases was one of the world's finest" – not sure the main text substantiates this. One of the biggest, certainly, but best is not mentioned.
• Early history: to 1864
  • "a number of Spanish missions" – "a number of" isn't much help. A lot? A few? Some?
• Buying the land: 1865–1919
  • "during the reminder of her life" – "remainder", presumably, but "rest" is shorter and would be better, me judice.
  • "support for … including to" – an unwieldy tangle of prepositions
• Morgan and Hearst: "a true collaboration"
  • "America's "first truly independent full-time woman architect".[29]" – I have bored you before with my view that inline quotes deserve inline attribution.
  • "anybody...these" – spaces missing before and after the dots?
• Having a ball: 1925–1937
  • "Weekend guests were brought either by private train … or flew into Hearst's airstrip" – gets in a tangle midway. If you change "brought either" to "either brought" the sentence will work.
  • "Hearst's 7,000 bottle cellar" – needs a hyphen, I think.
  • "just prior to her death in 1993" – I'm with Fowler on "prior to". Why not just "before"?
• The specter at the feast: Hearst, Welles and Xanadu
  • "Orson Welles 1941 film" – you mean "Welles's"

More to come. Looking good so far.

 Done - but could you have a look at my attribution to Wilson of the "first truly independent full-time woman architect" quote. My wording reads a little clumsily to me. KJP1 (talk) 10:03, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Looks fine to me. But while I was looking, another thing caught my eye (apols for missing it earlier): "demise" in the lead is a mimsy word: why not "death"?

No apology necessary. Death it is. KJP1 (talk) 11:56, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Second and concluding batch from TR

• Depression, death and after: 1938–present
  • "finally ending in 1947. In early May 1947" – perhaps "early May of that year" to avoid the repetition?
  • "The next year" – next after what? Morgan's death in 1957? Possibly best to give the actual year here.
• Design
  • "Hearst's original idea" – "His" rather than "Hearst's" would flow better, I think.
  • "re-thinker … re-design" – I can't speak for AmE, but the OED doesn't hyphenate either
  • "designed by another female architect C. Julian Mesic" – is her sex relevant?

Tim riley - I think it may be. You wouldn't guess it from her name, and I think that Hearst patronised not one but two woman architects in a time when they were really quite unusual, has some importance. But it can come out if others don't share this view. KJP1 (talk) 12:17, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Point taken, by me anyway. If others don't take it you can reconsider, but I'm content. Tim riley talk 18:30, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

• Assembly room
  • "the 3rd floor" – don't we usually use words for numbers below ten?
• Refectory
  • "seating for twenty-two" – as above, but t'other way about.
• Celestial suites
  • "awkwardly squeezed" – says who?
• Collections
  • "The university has embarked on a digitization project which will ultimately see the 125 albums of records, and sundry other materials, made available online." – WP:DATED looms. Best put in an "as of". There's another of these at footnote b.
• Estate
  • "The agreement reached between the state and the family has not been without controversy." – This needs a word of explanation, I think. As it is, it raises questions it does not answer.

That's all from me. An exhaustive article, thoroughly researched and documented. I look forward to seeing it at FAC. Tim riley talk 15:36, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Tim riley - Many thanks, as ever. I shall move to address your excellent suggestions post haste. One day, I shall look for a delightful Georgian rectory to try to turn into an FA - just for you. Madresfield Court (probably next on my list), despite its many interesting literary connections, does not fit that bill! All the best and thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 18:25, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Fair enough, as I am a delightful Georgian (born in the reign of George VI, adjective negotiable). Tim riley talk 21:36, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

 Done - All done except for the attribution of "awkwardly squeezed". I need to look up where that came from. Many thanks indeed for the view - greatly appreciated. KJP1 (talk) 12:57, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm content and will look forward to renewing my acquaintance with this remarkable erection at FAC. Tim riley talk 18:32, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Epicgenius

Binksternet asked me to have a look, so I will leave some preliminary comments. My comments aren't really about grammar - I think we have that all covered, but are mostly just queries about style.

• The lead section paragraphs are pretty long, at about 5,000 bytes. Not a bad thing in itself, but...
• Some paragraphs are extremely long, exceeding 2,000 bytes. I think these can be split up.
  • Maybe consider splitting the subsections as well, e.g. the "History" subsections.
• Have you considered creating sub-articles to elaborate on some of this info?
• Architecture section: The first three sections (Design, Construction, Costs) are general design features, but the rest have to do with specific parts of the estate. Have you considered splitting this section? E.g. a general architecture section for the first three subsections, and "specific elements" for the later sections.
• Very good use of footnotes. Some of these are pretty long, though.
  • "June 3rd 1927", should be "June 3, 1927" per MOS:DATEFORMAT.
• Check that everything is capitalized correctly/consistently. I see "San Luis Obispo county" and "native American", both of which are proper noun phrases and often capitalized.

I will probably leave some specific grammatical queries later. I think this is a good quality page, but as a general reader, I'd like to see somewhat smaller sections that I can read at one go. Currently the page stands at just over 60,000 bytes of readable prose (excluding footnotes, wiki-code, etc.) and for such an important topic, it's essential that the readers can peruse the text comfortably. epicgenius (talk) 01:20, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

epicgenius - Thanks very much indeed for taking a look, and for the very helpful suggestions. It has grown a bit since I started! At 117,602 bytes overall, it stands up against, say, Sissinghurst Castle Garden at 114,456, with comparable numbers of cites and footnotes. The issue, as you say, is that you're trying to cover the history, the castle and its secondary buildings, and the collection. I like the idea of splitting up the Architecture into the General and the Specific and shall try this over the holidays. I'm sure I can also break up some of the unwieldy individual para.s. I'm a bit less keen on sub-articles. I've never really tried these and like to attempt to give readers a full overview within a single article. But some judicious trimming never goes amiss! Any further thoughts much appreciated. I'm sure there's a stray Br:Eng in there somewhere. Enjoy the Holidays and thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@KJP1: No problem, I'm happy to help. I can understand if you aren't comfortable with sub-articles - I rarely create these as well, unless the sub-article contains enough details to also make it notable as a standalone topic (e.g. Construction of Rockefeller Center). I might look into the article some more over Christmas. Happy holidays to you as well. epicgenius (talk) 17:55, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

Sorry to be so slow to this.

While some of these are taken from the lede, please check the body for similar usages.

• "I would speak of "camping vacations" rather than "camping holidays"
• "the Second World War" World War II.
• "to evangelize the native American population.[11] " I might say "to convert ..."
• "Hearst achieved considerable success as a miner," I might make it clearer what the nature of the success was by saying something like "Hearst struck it rich as a miner". Then, you can eliminate "His activities brought great wealth, " and slightly modify what's left.
• "George Hearst's wealth enabled him to undertake some development of the estate, including the introduction of beef and dairy cattle, the establishment of extensive fruit orchards, and the expansion of the wharf facilities at San Simeon Bay. He also undertook the breeding of racehorses.[21] " I don't think you need either undertaking, and we know Hearst was wealthy. Just simplify to "George Hearst developed the estate somewhat, introducing beef and dairy cattle, planting extensive fruit orchards, and expanding the wharf facilities at San Simeon Bay. He also bred racehorses on the estate."
• "Phoebe Hearst had the cultural and artistic interests inherited by her son," Can this be put in terms of "shared"? It is odd to see this in terms of "inherited". Also, this sentence is a bit long.

More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:51, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

Wehwalt - Absolutely no apology necessary. Just really appreciate your taking the time. And no hurry either. I’ve been sitting on it for ages. Shall address the comments as they come through. Thanks again. KJP1 (talk) 16:35, 20 January 2020 (UTC)

• "Certifying in 1902" Certifying?
• "she certified in the California state examination" More US would be "she passed the California licensing examination" or similar.
• I would more likely use the word "office" rather than "practice" for where an architect works, i.e. "architect's office". "Architectural practice" sounds a bit overformal to me.
• "This led to work at Wyntoon and to a number of commissions for Hearst himself;" Should "for" be "from"?
• " California Polytechnic State University" My impression is that this institution is more commonly referred to in shortened form and with the campus location appended, thus "Cal Poly San Luis Obispo" (as opposed to Cal Poly Pomona). Then again, you might want to avoid the whole thing. The reader does't absolutely need to know inline where the papers are.
• "draughtsman" draftsman
• "Thereafter, Millicent Hearst". Introduced in lede, not in body. Not sure of your practice on this.
• "Weekend guests were either brought by private train from Glendale Station in northern Los Angeles, and thence by car to the castle, or flew into Hearst's airstrip, generally arriving late on Friday evenings, or early on Saturdays.[47]" I would change "thence" to "then" and make singular "Friday evenings" and "Saturdays". Also, Glendale is not technically "in" Los Angeles.
• In the Beaton quote, I am getting a line break between the opening quotation mark and the next character, a parenthesis. Not sure if you can do anything about this.
• Your use of the serial comma seems inconsistent between the Coolidge-led list of guests and the activities available to them in the following paragraph. Also, I might change "riding" to "horseback riding".

N - Not done the former. Need to check my grammar!

• Did Chaplain write "Mrs Hearst" or "Mrs. Hearst"? (I assume he did not mean Davies)

N - Need to find/check the quote. And I've not cited it!

• "since the visit of President Calvin Coolidge and his wife in February 1930.[61] " You link Coolidge as if he had not been introduced two paragraphs previously. He was not president at the time and some link should probably be afforded his wife Grace.
• "bobsleigh": we would say "bobsled" or "bobsledding"
• "Having made his name with the Mercury Theatre production of The War of the Worlds in 1938, Welles arrived in Hollywood in 1939, to make a film version of Joseph Conrad's novel, Heart of Darkness for RKO Pictures.[71] The adaptation did not progress " I might cut the comma after 1939. I don't think you'd say "did not progress" in America English in that way, I might say "was not made" or "was never made" or "was delayed" or even "was put on the back burner".
• "aspirant" aspiring
• "Apprised" told.
• "his friends, the gossip-columnists Hedda Hopper and Louella Parsons, also his employee, having attended early screenings" I would lose the hyphen in "gossip-columnists". What does "also his employee" refer to?

To Parsons, who was on his payroll as well as being a pal. She was a syndicated columnist on Hearst papers from 1925. But I agree it's confusing, so out it comes.

• " 1 June 1941" Surely "June 1, 1941"? I note a similar usage late in the paragraph.
• "building work(s)" (two usages) "Construction" sounds more American.

More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:59, 21 January 2020 (UTC)

Wehwalt - Many thanks. All your excellent suggestions actioned, except for two noted above which I need to check. I knew it would still have too many bloody anglicisms! Really appreciate your taking the time, and sorry it turned out to be such a long article. KJP1 (talk) 11:08, 26 January 2020 (UTC)

• " she left her San Francisco office on Friday afternoons and took an eight-hour train journey the 200 miles to San Luis Obispo, followed by a fifty-mile drive to San Simeon." I would suggest making "afternoons" singular and adding "to travel" after "journey".
• "The issue was addressed by the construction of three reservoirs and Morgan devised a gravity-based water delivery system that transported water from the artesian wells to the reservoirs, including the main one on Rocky Butte, a 2,000-foot (610 m) knoll less than a mile southeast from Hearst Castle.[115] " I would cut the "the" before "artesian" as you have not mentioned them.
• "until a mains supply was connected by the San Joaquin Light and Power Company in 1924." "mains supply" sounds British, suggest "until the San Joaquin Light and Power Company began service to the castle in 1924" or similar.
• "eventually settling on that quarried from the mountain top " "the" implies a specific one.
• "lorry" truck
• "and Morgan built a compound of warehouses for storage and accommodation for workers in the bay." I would say "by the bay" or "near the bay"
• "until his sacking by Hearst in 1932," "firing" for "sacking"
• "is flanked by twin bell towers modeled on the tower of the church of Santa Maria la Mayor in Ronda, Spain." This is stated as if you had not mentioned Hearst's liking for the Ronda church.
• "to the fore" perhaps, "to the front".
• "major staircases" maybe "grand staircases"
• "and ran under the exclusive call sign 'Hacienda'." call sign or exchange? I associate call signs with things that are broadcast.
• "The refectory was the only dining room for the castle," "in the castle" sounds more AmEng to me.
• "the Orchid Vase lamp, made by Tiffany & Co. for the Exposition Universelle held in Paris in 1889. " I might pipe Tiffany and Co. to simply Tiffany. Could go either way on this one.
• "as a tribute to his mother" Maybe "in tribute to his mother"?
• "which was once the property of the architect Stanford White." I would cut the "the" before "architect" for more US.
• " the boiler plant which heats the main house, and a barbers, for the use of Hearst's guests.[206]" Is the present tense intended on "heats"? "barbers" if intended to mean an establishment for cutting hair, shaving, etc, then possibly should be "barber shop".
• "terminate the castle" Terminate?
• "in 1925 Morgan was obliged to write to Arthur Byne, "Mr Hearst accepts your dictum – cash or nothing".[u][190]" As Morgan was American, she likely would have written "Mr." rather than "Mr". Please check for similar usages that may have gone British-style inadvertently. (St Donat's for example, 2x)
• "Main terrace" I'm struck by the partial capitalization. You do not use this phrase elsewhere. Ditto "Morning room". Is the latter described by another name?
• "Assembly room" You are inconsistent in capitalization. Ditto "Billiard room". Similar "Doge's suite"
• " Nathaniel Burt, the composer and critic" I would give him the false titles just for a more American feel.
• "The gardens are unified with Casa Grande, and the main house with the guest cottages, by the Esplanade, a curving, paved walkway which Hearst described as giving "a finished touch to the big house, to frame it in, as it were".[248] " This feels awkward, possibly "The Esplenade, a curving, paved walkway, connects the main house with the guest cottages; Hearst described it as going "a ..."
• "Morgan designed the pedestrianized esplanade with great care, " I would suggest capping esplanade or else changing the word to avoid appearing like an inconsistency.
• If Hearst is going to say "herms", who are you to say "hermae"? (my spellcheck does not like the latter word)
• Just as a note, the pool is what I remember the most from my tour of San Simeon some ten years ago.
• "meet Hearst's wants" maybe "fulfill Hearst's desires"
• "Bernard Shaw". I'd include the George. I don't recall seeing his name shortened on first usage in American sources.
• Possibly a few words could be said under "Estate" about tourism, that (as I recall) visitors are shuttled in, and the sorts of tours that are available. You touched on this at one point with the mention that visitors may stay to stroll the grounds, something I do not think you could do when I was there. Also anything on the history of tourism to the estate, numbers etc.
• I would increase the use of false titles in the American fashion. The "Appreciation" section is in particular need.
• I would get more American comment on San Simeon. There is a high proportion of British.
• If the armor is staggeringly important, why have you not mentioned it?
• "and, also posthumously, an obituary in The New York Times as recently as 2019.[ad][297] " Aren't most obituaries posthumous? Except Twain and Poirot, perhaps?
• "740BC" should there be a space here? Please check your BC/AD for consistency and MOS compliance.
• "In 1956, the group was purchased by the Forest Lawn Memorial Park but was destroyed in a pier explosion at Brooklyn docks in 1956." I would cut one of the dates.
• "publicising" You must have forgotten this one.
• There's a British feel to the writing, but I'm hoping it will pass for formality if shorn of obvious Briticisms (of which I probably did not catch all). I think it will do OK at FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:05, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

Wehwalt - Greatly appreciate the time you've taken. Most of the above are done, all as per your suggestions. I need to spend a little more time on consistency; Doge's suite / Mr. / Mr etc.; think about a bit more on the visitor experience, the freedom to stroll in the gardens is a 2017 innovation, I think; and compose a little on the armour. That was important but it was actually the only major collection he had that was not predominantly sited at San Simeon. Some was kept at his, large, New York apartment, and some at St Donat's. Much was sold in the 30s/40s. I'll also look for a bit more US commentary for the Appreciation section - I get what you mean about too much Aslet and John Julius. Then, in the absence of any more comment, particularly from American editors, I think I'll push it on to FAC and see how the cards fall. Now the only one I really hesitate over is George Bernard Shaw. You and I both know there's one editor, Tim riley, who will not be pleased if I call him GBS! You will have to explain the AmEng need. Sincere thanks. KJP1 (talk) 19:28, 31 January 2020 (UTC)

If you hold to the view that a chap is entitled to be known by the style he chooses you must call Shaw "Bernard" and not "George Bernard", which he detested and forbade his publishers to use. Also, almost all reputable Shaw scholars call him Bernard, tout court. I do not think Wikpedia should pander to the addiction to unnecessary double-barrelled forenames. It's bad enough having to put up with Hans Andersen being foisted off on us Europeans (until midnight, hinc illae lacrimae) as Hans Christian Andersen. Let poor Bernard Shaw remain unmolested. Tim riley talk 19:38, 31 January 2020 (UTC)