Talk:Curzon Street Baroque

Full citations needed
I've just removed Full citations needed from the top of the article page for the following reasons: If anyone thinks that there are further problems with the citations used in the article, please discuss them here, as slapping tags without discussion is rarely a productive means of improving articles. --RexxS (talk) 22:44, 20 August 2019 (UTC)
 * 1) The template documentation states "This is a banner template to flag an article as having numerous incomplete reference citations" – one reference has a missing page number. That's not "numerous" and I've flagged the cite with page needed.
 * 2) The template documentation states "It should usually be placed (or Sources, or Bibliography, etc. – whatever the section is named). It can also be used inside .  It is best not used as a stand-alone template at the top of the article, as it is a cleanup tag not a dispute tag. – the tag was placed incorrectly at the top of the article.
 * 3) The added hidden comment states "two Tinniswoods in references" – so what? One Tinniswood referred to the author of a source; the other was simply part of the title of an article by a different author. It's obvious that the former was the source cited.
 * 4) The added hidden comment states "citations needlessly split between citations and references". – I really do object to editors telling article creators how they must format their citations. If they have a problem with it, then start an RfC to overturn WP:CITEVAR, which is an established content guideline and guarantees the creator's right to use whatever citation format they choose as long as it is "sufficient to uniquely identify the source, allow readers to find it, and allow readers to initially evaluate it without retrieving it".
 * Absolutely right, & thanks for your help here. Johnbod (talk) 01:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I have found the missing page number for Sitwell and provided an inline citation with direct link to that page. Dr.   K.  03:26, 21 August 2019 (UTC)
 * it’s the same page number in the book too. However, I was using the ref there as the name of the poem rather than the book of the same name. Hence, no page number. Giano    (talk) 18:47, 21 August 2019 (UTC)

Stevenson and Tinniswood
Last year, Oxford University Press publish Jane Stevenson's Baroque between the WarsAlternative Style in the Arts, 1918-1939. It sounds relevant, and might be worth a mention in this piece – even if it's in a "Further reading" section. In fact I notice that the reference:
 * Stevenson, Jane (March 2018). "Adrian Tinniswood: Not a Straight Line in Sight (review)". Literary Review.

Has it the wrong way round. It is actually Tinniswood's review of Stevenson's book cited by me above. Cheers, —Noswall59 (talk) 07:49, 22 August 2019 (UTC).