Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of scheduled monuments in Maidstone/archive1

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

The list was promoted by Giants2008 23:04, 5 March 2012 [1].

List of Scheduled Monuments in Maidstone[edit]

List of Scheduled Monuments in Maidstone (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): DavidCane (talk) 01:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This is a complete list of the Scheduled Monuments in the borough of Maidstone, Kent. Scheduled Monuments are sites of historic importance that are protected by legislation against change. The lead explains the meaning of the Scheduled Monument and describes the borough and provides a description of each of the monuments.DavidCane (talk) 01:41, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Resolved comments from The Rambling Man (talk) 09:47, 10 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Comments
  • Two dab links, "Loose" and "Nettlestead".
  • Table needs row and col scopes (see MOS:DTT) for WP:ACCESS.
  • Grid Ref -> Grid ref
  • "nationally important" needs attribution (I'm guessing English Heritage state this?)
    • It's in the second paragraph of reference 1. I have rephrased so it is a direct quote--DavidCane (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image captions that are complete sentences need a full stop.
    • Done
  • I would say "The borough of Maidstone..." because I was slightly confused (knowing Maidstone as just a town, rather than a borough!)
  • "The importance of the River Medway and its tributaries to the district's economic and social history is reflected by the inclusion of seven medieval stone bridges on the list." picky, but who said this was true? Reads like WP:OR to me.
  • "9.8×5.2×2.3" vs "160 × 98 ft" be consistent with the spacing.
    • Done. The convert template which is what I used for the n x n ones does it differently to convert/3 used for n x n x n. I've changed to convert/2 which is consistent with convert/3.--DavidCane (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • No need for "Moot" to be capitalised.
  • "and rag-stone and " format problem.
  • Isn't "Archaeological sites in Kent" a better category than the England one?

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:26, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks.--DavidCane (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not sure about the legitimacy of "Scheduled Monument" in capitals since sources and our own article seem to imply it's simply "scheduled monument".

Leaning support

  • I notice that List of Scheduled Monuments in Cheshire (1066–1539) (a Featured List) has a note which explains where the term "schedule" comes from and it may be worth adding here (relevant bit in italics): "A scheduled monument is a nationally important archaeological site or monument which is given legal protection by being placed on a list (or "schedule") by the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport." I think I'll do the same at List of Scheduled Monuments in Greater Manchester.
  • As "scheduled monument" is lower case, shold "Scheduled Ancient Monument" also be lower case for internal consistency? (I've seen both terms using either form so I don't think it's a case of being right or wrong, just aiming for consistency.)
  • Should "18th century mortuary" be "18th-century mortuary"?
  • "Remains of buildings associated with a undiscovered Roman villa.": I know what's meant, but this may strike readers as odd, because how can a villa be undiscovered if we know there was one. Perhaps change it slightly to something like "Remains of buildings associated with a Roman villa, the main structure of which is undiscovered."
  • In the descriptions for Boxley Abbey and Leeds Priory I think it would be worth mentioning when they were demolished.
    • Neither of the Pastscape sources for these give demolition dates. My other usual source (www.british-history.ac.uk), also comes up with nothing. I'll see if I can find anything elsewhere.--DavidCane (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know there are only decently four lists of Scheduled Monuments (aside from this one), and this is consistent with the format and layout of those. The main difference is they covered counties (Cheshire and Greater Manchester) but I think this list's approach of using a local government district works. The GM list was as far as I know the first of its type and doesn't have that many, hence why a single list can handle an entire county. There are over 200 in Cheshire so a single list was less practical, especially with detailed descriptions as seen here. The coutny's SMs aren't evenly distributed between its districts (not even close) because they're different sizes: two small and two much larger. Dividing by district wouldn't have been useful so instead time period was chosen. I don't know how SMs are distributed in Kent but the 13 districts don't seem as varied in size as those of Cheshire which might help create a more even distribution, and conservatively assuming there are 15 per district a list for the entire county would probably be too long to be user friendly. In conclusion, this list's format has my full support.

  • Kent has 417 scheduled monuments according to the National Heritage List for England (NHLE), including 73 in Medway (a unitary authority in its own right).--DavidCane (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Having put together this kind of list before sorting the date column can sometimes be tricky, but it seems to work here. The descriptions are illuminating while keeping brief and to the point. Overall I'm impressed with the list. I'm not sure if it counts as a spot-check, but having taken a peek at the sources on the castles I can confirm the article matches what the sources say and there were no concerns regarding plagiarism. Nev1 (talk) 22:07, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • I've manually forced the sorting of the date column using {{Hs}} to get it in the right order.--DavidCane (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would also note that when I was putting together the Greater Manchester list part of the challenge was ensuring no site was missed. As DavidCane uses this site a lot I assume he used the search tool to double check the results, and it makes life much simpler than checking the individual counts on local government websites (while weren't always easy to find). Nev1 (talk) 22:41, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • The NHLE includes a definitive consolidated list of various heritage classifications including scheduled monuments. I obtained the list for Maidstone Borough by doing an advanced search with location district set to Maidstone and Heritage Category set to scheduling. The items included in the list on the NHLE don't often include the descriptions of the monument, which is why I cross referenced to PastScape as the main source for these. I've also used it to prepare Grade I listed buildings in Maidstone for which I am gradually working through the redlinks before it comes here for review.--DavidCane (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've switched to support as the one outstanding issue (demolition date of the religious houses) aren't deal breakers. I look forward to seeing the Grade I listed buildings at FLC. Nev1 (talk) 15:08, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Quick comment – No need for two English Heritage links in the lead; one will suffice. Giants2008 (Talk) 01:26, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I havn't done a full review, but like it and consider that it satisfies the criteria for FL as it stands. Some suggestions:
I should like to see where Maidstone is geographically in the first sentence, ie that it is in Kent and that Kent is in England (for overseas readers).
Done.--DavidCane (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As you mention the different listing grades, a key would be helpful. You could copy one, say from here.
As most of the scheduled monuments are not listed buildings, I don't think the key is necessary, but I have added an explanatory note into the text (note 1) on what listing means.--DavidCane (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The {{GeoGroupTemplate}} adds to the interest of the list, but I don't know if it works with GRs; (I usually use coords). --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:54, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've seen that since I nominated the list and it doesn't work with Grid Refs. I would like to add it and, if I get time at the weekend, I will do the necessary conversion to make it work.--DavidCane (talk) 22:30, 16 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--DavidCane (talk) 23:41, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support The list is fine as it stands; with the template would be even better. --Peter I. Vardy (talk) 09:08, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review: All used images appear to be free and are properly tagged as such. Goodraise 04:26, 17 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support after a quick revisit I'm more than satisfied that this is good to go. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:19, 28 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Not going to effect my support, but any reason why the font size is reduced? NapHit (talk) 22:23, 4 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I hadn't noticed. It must have been carried over from the page I borrowed the layout from. I've set it back to standard size.--DavidCane (talk) 03:20, 6 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_list_candidates/List_of_scheduled_monuments_in_Maidstone/archive1&oldid=1089076975"