Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Belle Vue Zoological Gardens/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 SandyGeorgia 19:30, 7 August 2010.

Belle Vue Zoological Gardens

 * Nominator(s): Malleus Fatuorum, J3Mrs, WebHamster 

Over its 140-year existence, this refined place of entertainment for the genteel middle-classes, offering formal gardens and open-air dancing, evolved into the third-largest zoo in the UK, one of the earliest and largest amusement parks in the UK, a major venue for sports such as boxing, speedway, and greyhound racing, the largest exhibition space in the UK outside of London, a large concert venue that was at one time the home of The Hallé Orchestra, the UK's oldest extant symphony orchestra ... the list goes on and on. Organising all of that material into an encyclopedic wikipedia article proved to be quite a challenge. I hope you think we made at least a decent fist of it. Malleus Fatuorum 15:48, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment—no dab links, no dead external links. Ucucha 16:01, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Oppose per criterion three:
 * File:Belle-Vue--main-entrance.jpg - No source (WP:IUP/NFCC#6/NFCC#10A), no purpose articulated by the rationale (NFCC#10C).
 * File:John-Jennison.png - Needs a verifiable source per WP:IUP.
 * File:Belle-Vue-Helter-Skelter-1906.jpg - Needs a verifiable source. I can't imagine the failure of logic that thought this comment was acceptable: "Copyright status is unknown due to the age of the photograph" (!!!).
 * File:Consul-the-chimp.jpg - Needs a verifiable source.
 * File:Consul-II-the-chimp.jpg - Needs a verifiable source.
 * File:Belle-Vue-guide-circa-late-1800s.jpg - Needs a verifiable source.
 * File:Belle vue zoological gardens plan 1892.jpg - Certainly PD in the US due to pre-1923 publication (should have a license to that affect), but who is the author? How do we know s/he has been dead 70+ years (what if, for example, a 32-year-old created this - i.e. born in 1860 - and then lived to 81 - i.e. died in 1941?)  Moving to en.wiki and using PD-US would resolve the issue.
 * File:Belle-Vue-Water-Chute-ad-1950s.jpg - No source, no purpose articulated by the rationale. What is the significant contribution to our understanding?
 * File:George-Lockhart.png - Needs a verifiable source. Nonsense PD rationale.  Эlcobbola  talk 16:20, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Replies
 * Ah well, I suspected that the licences for at least some of the images would be problematic. For starters, I've sourced and given a publication date for File:Consul-the-chimp.jpg, which ought to make it legitimately public domain in the UK at least. I've got no idea when File:Consul-II-the-chimp.jpg was first published, so I've removed it, at least for now; although it's clearly a photo from the 1890s, the source I have in which it appears doesn't give a publication date. Malleus Fatuorum 17:02, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * The PD-UK license works when the author is known and 70+ years have past since their death or when the author is unknown and 70+ years have past since creation. The wrinkle is that "unknown" doesn't mean "the source failed to provide that information", but that it could not be ascertained after "reasonable inquiry".  Thankfully, however, this is hosted on en.wiki, so we only need to worry about the status in the US, which is verifiably PD per pre-1923 publication.  I changed the license accordingly.  If the source, however, actually says "unknown" instead of merely saying nothing, I think that would be sufficient to support the PD-UK license, but that isn't something that's necessary.  Эlcobbola  talk 18:33, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks. Interesting distinction about "unknown" there. The source simply doesn't mention the photographer. I suspect it would have been an employee of the gardens, as the owners in those days liked to keep everything in house, but that's just speculation on my part. Malleus Fatuorum 00:43, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that File:Belle-Vue-Water-Chute-ad-1950s.jpg doesn't seem to add significantly to our understanding, so I've removed it. Malleus Fatuorum 00:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Removed or commented out File:John-Jennison.png and File:Belle-Vue-guide-circa-late-1800s.jpg until acceptable copyright licences can be provided, if they ever can, which I doubt. Malleus Fatuorum 02:16, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd really like to keep File:Belle-Vue--main-entrance.jpg in the infobox, and I've given it my best shot at a fair use rationale, but if it has to go, then it has to go. Malleus Fatuorum 04:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that the image has something to contribute (I don't question NFCC#8), but the rationale doesn't really articulate a purpose. I assume, from its use in the infobox, that something to the effect of "to provide visual identification of the no longer existent subject" is intended, but I'm sure you both know better and could better articulate than I what the significance of the image is and why that's necessary for a reader to more fully understand the topic.  Эlcobbola  talk 14:03, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Belle vue zoological gardens plan 1892.jpg copied to wikipedia and licence changed to PD-US as suggested.
 * I agree with you about the nonsense PD rationale on File:George-Lockhart.png, and as I don't think fair use can be justified except in his own article I've removed it. Besides, I found the picture slightly spooky anyway. Malleus Fatuorum 17:39, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * File:Belle-Vue-Helter-Skelter-1906.jpg has been removed. Malleus Fatuorum 20:22, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Image issues resolved. Thanks.  Эlcobbola  talk 20:52, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Sources comment
 * The narrative in Note 1 requires a source.
 * Consistency required over publisher locations in the bibliography (some books have it, some don't)

Otherwise, all sources look OK. Brianboulton (talk) 23:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Replies
 * Thanks Brian. The source for the narrative in Note 1 was the one immediately following the note tag in the body of the article, but I've now repeated that in the note itself. I've also removed all of the locations in the bibliography, so it should be consistent now. Malleus Fatuorum 00:35, 29 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Support on the basis of criteria 1, 2 and 4. Good read; I thought I might struggle to read the whole article at first but it was surprisingly interesting, and easy to read. Couple of things though:
 * "John, William, Angelo and Richard Jennison Jnr obtained sufficient shares to be appointed directors." - I don't understand this; how many shares do you need to be appointed a director? Its my understanding owning shares is not a prerequisite to being appointed to a board of directors, am I wrong?
 * In footnote 99, shouldn't "Manchester Evening News" be in italics, since it is a print source? Tom (talk) 13:59, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Replies
 * Thanks for your support. I think the whole paragraph about directors is referenced to Nicholls, (which I don't have) so I changed it to "were appointed to the board of directors ". I have tweaked the citation for footnote 99 to italicise "Manchester Evening News".--J3Mrs (talk) 15:13, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Support. I made a few nitpicky comments (all now resolved), but other than that see no problems. I leave the matter of the images to those better qualified to comment. – iride  scent  22:06, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Support. I've been awaiting this FAC. Small niggling concerns, none of which would lead me to oppose.
 * "Before moving to Belle Vue, Jennison, a part-time gardener, had run a small aviary at his home, which was the beginnings of the zoo; over the years, Belle Vue grew to become the third-largest zoo in the UK." The interjections make this sentence quite choppy. Perhaps move "a part-time gardener" to another sentence? Consider "The brainchild of part-time gardener John Jennison,"
 * I don't understand the use of "continued" here: "Music and dancing continued to be popular attractions in Belle Vue's various ballrooms." Perhaps "were continuously popular attractions?" Also, wouldn't the ballrooms be the attractions, and not the music and dancing?
 * "Catering for visitors at Belle Vue was on an industrial scale, ranging from the late-19th century hot water rooms, which accommodated up to 3,000 diners each, providing crockery and hot water for those who brought their own picnics, to more up-market themed restaurants." confused me. Perhaps "Catering for visitors at Belle Vue was on an industrial scale, ranging from the late-19th century hot water rooms, which accommodated up to 3,000 diners each and provided crockery and hot water for those who brought their own picnics, to more up-market themed restaurants."?
 * I personally find a general overuse of commas, but I've been known to be mistaken about such things in the past.

Cheers. ɳ OCTURNE ɳ OIR ♯ ♭ 15:19, 5 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Reply Hi, many thanks for supporting. I made some edits which I hope address the issues you raised. Not sure about the commas though.--J3Mrs (talk) 16:30, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I suppose on a re-read that my "Catering for visitors at Belle Vue" comment is largely irrelevant since the sentence can only function as written and any changes to the structure would alter the meaning. I defer to the judgment of others regarding commas. ɳ OCTURNE ɳ OIR  ♯ ♭ 17:36, 5 August 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.