Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Smithfield, London/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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 16:28, 11 April 2009.

Smithfield, London

 * Nominator(s): DarTar (talk) 16:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because it was significantly expanded and improved since it obtained GA status and was peer reviewed. The article covers the history of one of the most prominent historical sites in Central London. In 2008 the market was at the center of a violent debate on demolition and redevelopment, that opposed developers, architects, the Corporation of London, several British heritage associations and the UK Ministry of Culture, and received a major coverage in the press. DarTar (talk) 16:22, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments by User:Nev1
 * For an article of this size, the lead needs to be expanded.
 * I started expanding the lead, feel free to modify it as needed. --DarTar (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I suggest changing the reflist template at the end from to , as explained in the template documentation: "Using  will create a two-column reference list, and  will create a three-column list. Three-column lists are inaccessible to users with smaller/laptop monitors and should be avoided".
 * done, thanks --DarTar (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There may be a need for some copy editing:
 * "At once a trading event for cloth and other goods and a pleasure fair, the four-day event drew crowds from all classes of English society": I understand that by "at once" it means the event was all those things, but it feels clumsy.
 * "Geoffrey Chaucer supervised the preparation of the tournament's works as clerk of the king." Could "preparation of the tournament's works" be changed to "preparation of the tournament"? Just feels like a better flow.
 * edited, thanks --DarTar (talk) 21:02, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "Smithfield was for centuries the main site for the execution of heretics and dissidents." Doe we have a date for the first execution, or at least something a bit more specific that "for centuries"?
 * I don't know when the series of execution started, but it's definitely something that would need further research. I used "centuries" because the executions I mention in the following section span the period from the 14th to the early 17th century. Since the 16th century, Tyburn became a more popular location for executions, and this should be mentioned in the article --DarTar (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The chronology of the area and its history section is a bit odd in that in the second paragraph it mentions the fair being suppressed in the mid-19th century, and then jumps back to the 14th century. Also, there's a gap in the history of the place between the 17th century and the 1990s.
 * I agree, this needs to be improved, unfortunately there is not much material about the history of the area as opposed to the history of the market in modern times. --DarTar (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd feel more comfortable if more references were used, some paragraphs don't have one. Claims such as "The fair was suppressed in 1855 by the city authorities for encouraging public disorder" and "Meat has been traded at Smithfield Market for over 800 years, making it one of the oldest markets in London" can be challenged and so per WP:V need a sourse.
 * Sources added from the Corporation of London's website. --DarTar (talk) 19:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "In the Victorian period, many started advocating for the removal of the livestock market" Who suggested this? Local landowners? The government?
 * Many, including writers and local residents as those that I mention in the following paragraphs. I changed the paragraph and added a further section heading to make this clearer.--DarTar (talk) 19:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "West Smithfield was left as waste ground for a few years" That's a bit imprecise, it would be better to say "...was left as waste ground until 1866", which leads into the next section.
 * changed, thanks --DarTar (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "pykrete, a mixture of ice and woodpulp, alleged to be tougher than steel" I don't think pycrete is tougher than steel, the wikipedia article on it says it was stronger than concrete in some ways but doesn't mention steel (though of I shouldn't use wikipedia as a reference and this probably isn't so important really).
 * maybe we should add quotation marks as this was the original "marketing idea" of pykrete as far as I know --DarTar (talk) 18:16, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

A nice article, but these issues need to be resolved before I can support. I've made these edits to the article, mainly some minor copyediting, but you may want to check to it over to make sure it doesn't inadvertently change the meaning of anything, such as when I was decapitalising City. Nev1 (talk) 17:30, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Comment
 * The picture "workers inside the market" probably ought to say which building is depicted. Fainites barley scribs 18:36, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Caption changed, thanks --DarTar (talk) 19:35, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Oppose Not comprehensive and not neutral enough.
 * While there is a great deal about the history and development of the Meat market. Apart from very brief references there is virtually nothing about the Bartholomew Abbey, the Charterhouse monastery, and even more importantly the famous Bartholomew Fair that ran there from the 12th century to 1850. It is the subject of a play by Ben Jonson, important plays such as the Beggars Opera were performed here, and it is mentioned in Shakespeare. It should have at least a subsection. (The link to "Bartholomew fair" in the article actually links to the play by Jonson)
 * All these do not belong to the Smithfield article, but to their respective articles: St Bartholomew-the-Great and London Charterhouse. Have you checked these articles at all? I agree the Bartholomew Fair article should be expanded to include details on the fair on top of the Johnson play, but again I am unsure this is part of the duties of an article on Smithfield. I can try to improve the article on the fair in the future, but I don't think this should be considered part of the assessment of the present FAC (much as the aforementioned related links) --DarTar (talk) 23:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The people executed in the market are twice referred to solely as protestants and "Marian martyrs". In fact Henry VIII burnt Catholic monks and others here, particularly from the Charterhouse, and Elizabeth burnt Anabaptists and others.  Xan  dar  23:34, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you have sources I could use to expand on Catholic and Anabaptist martyrs? That would be very useful. Also, consider adding to this page any link to existing articles on individuals executed at Smithfield (my current list is as comprehensive as possible, but I may have overlooked some names)--DarTar (talk) 23:52, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I just double checked: none of the Carthusian Martyrs appear to have been executed in Smithfield. According to the article, they were either put to death at Tyburn or in the Newgate Prison.--DarTar (talk) 00:19, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * A good article and in particular a Featured Article should cover everything notable about its subject to a reasonable extent. I am not asking for a huge amount, but considering the weight of text directed to the Meat market, there should be at least a paragraph on the great monasteries there, and slightly more on what was Smithfield's major claim to claim for most of its history - the Bartholomew Fair.
 * As far as executions go, Hanging Drawing and Quartering generally took place at Tyburn from Tudor times, and burnings took place at Smithfield. Friar Forrest and the Maid of Kent were certainly burnt at Smithfield along with other Henrician martyrs. Elizabeth burnt people there too.  Xan  dar  12:04, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I moved the article on the play to Bartholomew Fair (play) and added some initial materials at Bartholomew Fair with disambiguation links, former links have been updated to reflect the disambiguation. --DarTar (talk) 14:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This is an improvement. However I still feel there is not quite enough about the Fair. A sentence about the plays held here and perhaps a direct reference to Ben Johnson and the Beggars Opera would help cover this issue properly. I still think the article gives the feeling that the Meat Market is the primary focus, when this is actually an article on the district of London called Smithfield. There are some other issues too which I think are standing in the way of FA status.
 * There is no map that locates the district within London. Check the locator maps on articles such as Vauxhall and Wandsworth.
 * Comment Smithfield is within the City Ward of Farringdon Without (note place and political entity); for which there is such a locator map. There is currently a discussion at WP:London as to whether there is a need for a finer grained map to cover locations within central London - as the current map makes little distinction between places within (say) Zone 1. Vauxhall and Wandsworth are not comparable, as they are much larger districts than this. A plethora of maps can be called from the geo-co-ordinates, at the top of the page. While I can see there may be a need for a map; perhaps we can agree that it should actually be a useful one. Kbthompson (talk) 11:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I've added a section Religious houses to deal with the sites and their subsequent history. It's fairly tightly referenced to the relevant chapters in History of the County of Middlesex, but my prose could always do with a brush up. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 16:34, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Great job! I changed the section title to "Religious history", I wonder if this makes more sense? Then we should decide what to do with the religious executions described below. --DarTar (talk) 21:07, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Very positive changes so far. The new sections make a big difference. However there's still no more on the fair. And any sort of locator map showing Smithfield's position in London (even one just indicating the location with a dot) would be better than none.  Xan  dar  00:38, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Issues with prose.
 * As a large open space close to the city it was a favourite place for gatherings such as public executions and jousting. In 1374 Edward III held a seven-day tournament in Smithfield, for the amusement of his beloved Alice Perrers. Possibly the most famous tournament in medieval Smithfield was the one ordered in 1390 by Richard II. Jean Froissart, in the fourth book of his Chronicles, reports that sixty knights would come to London to tilt for two days, "accompanied by sixty noble ladies, richly ornamented and dressed". The tournament was proclaimed by heralds in England, Scotland, Hainault, Germany, Flanders, and France, to rival the jousts given by Charles of France into Paris a few years earlier, on the entry of his consort Isabeau de Bavière. - Public executions and jousting should be dealt with separately. It is not clear whether the Jean froissart report is of the same joust as that referred to previously. The final sentence seems too long and confusing.
 * The area is also a popular venue for historical racing and other sporting events. What exactly is "historical racing"?
 * In the Victorian period, many pamphlets started circulating in favor of the removal of the livestock market and its relocation outside of the city, due to its extremely poor hygienic conditions[11] as well as the brutal treatment of the cattle. No need for the "many" before "pamphlets". The sentence falls apart after "market". Might be improved by splitting in two. US spelling of "favor" jars here.
 * There is a "center" in the text too, which should, for consistency, be anglicised. Tim riley (talk) 15:21, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The General Market, built between 1879 and 1883, was intended to replace the old Farringdon Market located nearby and established for the sale of fruit and vegetables when the earlier Fleet Market was cleared to enable the laying out of Farringdon Street in 1826–1830. Again, long confusing sentence.
 * It was one of London's first cold stores to be built outside the London docks and continued to serve Smithfield until the mid-1970s "London" twice in the same sentence.
 * Smithfield is one of the few of the great London markets not to have moved from its central site to a location further out with cheaper land, better transport links and more modern facilities (compare with Covent Garden and Billingsgate). Since the market is designed to supply inner city butchers, shops and restaurants with meat for the coming day, the trading hours are from 4:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon every weekday. Instead, Smithfield market has been modernised on its existing site; for instance, its imposing Victorian buildings have had access points added for the loading and unloading of lorries. Opening hours split the flow of ideas re: the non-removal of the market. First sentence of this passage is a mess.
 * Some of the buildings formerly associated with the meat market have now been put to other uses. For example, the former Central Cold Store is now, most unusually, a city centre power station operated by Citigen. "most unusually" is comment, not needed here.
 * The public park comprises the centre of the only part of Smithfield which is still open space – this is in effect a large square with the market forming one side and mostly older buildings the other three. Confusingly unclear description. Is the public park the whole open space and "large square". If not, what else is in the square?  Xan  dar  00:55, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Technical Review
 * Fix the disambiguation links, as found with the links checker tool.
 * Fixed, thanks --DarTar (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Fix the 3 dead external links, as found with the links checker tool. Strike-through text
 * Fixed, thanks --DarTar (talk) 10:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I also added a note why it is not advisable to change the redirects (using a permanent identifier as main URL)--DarTar (talk) 10:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Cool.--Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   02:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref formatting, as checked with the WP:REFTOOLS script, is up to speed.--Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   01:14, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up --DarTar (talk) 10:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * No prob.--Best,  ₮ RU  C Ө   02:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)--Best,   ₮ RU  C Ө   02:26, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Support an excellent article on the principle use of the meaning. Bartholomew Fair is related to the eastern edge of the market, so not a primary use. Similarly, the Abbey should be dealt with under the development of Barts - it's at Smithfield, but not within Smithfield (see etymology). Charterhouse was still going to a disambig, but somebody fixed it - before I could! Em, the article there could do with some work - Thomas Sutton was one of the principle beneficiaries of the dissolution, and his foundation had nothing to do with the Carthusians - but that's irrelevant to the current discussion. Barts was re-established after petition by the City of London to Henry VIII; he gave in - but they paid for it. But these are all in the surrounding area - would like to see some link to William Dixon's Cattle Layers (see Islington); where the cattle were fattened before coming into the market. Possibly, some link to the annual Smithfield Show at the Royal Agricultural Hall. Missing is some link to St John's Gate - which was the entrance to the Priory of the Order of St John (Clerkenwell, just to the north of the site) - hence St John's Street. Seems to me the article covers the links to the various 'malcontents' burnt, pickled, or fried here. Might be worth putting in an external list - like Tyburn should be. Ah, there's something missing Fortune of War was a popular meeting place for Resurrection men, definitely worth a mention. Em, Turnmills, probably more appropriate to mention that the street was associated in Tudor times with brothels; particularly that of a black madame who had been a maid to Lizzy I - I can probably dig out a ref for that. None of that detracts from a fine article, all those are peripheral to the main topic. Kbthompson (talk) 01:06, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Bit by bit, this little corner of Jacobean London emerges: the industrious, quarrelsome, somewhat rackety French family with whom he lodged; the neighbours he knew – the trumpeter Humphrey Fludd, the adulterous mercer Henry Wood, and, most interesting, the brothel-keeper and hack author George Wilkins, who later collaborated with him on Pericles. Wilkins was a dangerous and unpleasant character – his voluminous police record includes brutal acts of violence against prostitutes. On one occasion, he “outrageously beat one Judith Walton, & stamped upon her, so that she was carried home in a chayre”; on another, he was charged with “kicking a woman on the belly which was the greate with childe”. Wilkins’s establishment – nominally a tavern but certainly a brothel – was on Turnmill Street, in the notorious red-light district of Clerkenwell. His wife, Katherine, was nicknamed “Mistress Sweetmeat” – perhaps she served the overpriced cakes and pastries that were associated with brothels. “For a pippin pie that cost in the market fourpence”, warns the pamphleteer Robert Greene, you will pay “at one of the trugging houses 18 pence”." - from Times Online. That's Wilkins brothel, there should be much more. Note, The Times places the street in Clerkenwell - and the Shakespeare connection. The Turnmill brothels also come up in the Threepenny Opera. HTH Kbthompson (talk) 13:36, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * You may wish to look at:
 * 'Smithfield', Old and New London: Volume 2 (1878), pp. 339-344 and succeeding pages.
 * 'The Metropolitan Meat-Market', Old and New London: Volume 2 (1878), pp. 491-496


 * Comments -
 * Need a last access date for current ref 4 (Froissart...)
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.britannia.com/history/articles/peasantsrevolt.html
 * This is a popular summary of the Peasant's Revolt history and it was taken from the main article, I agree it can be replaced with more reliable sources. --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.flyingbombsandrockets.com/V2_maintextd.html
 * This is a very detailed compilation of documents and photographs about V2 bombs, it can easily replaced if it hurts someone's sensibility --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * http://www.riskybuildings.org.uk/docs/17poultry/
 * This is a campaign/documentation project run by one of the main organisations in Britain for the preservation of 20th Century heritage: The Twentieth Century Society. --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Current ref 8 (Smithfield...) needs publisher and last access dates
 * Current ref 9 (Official Market...) needs publisher and last access dates
 * Current ref 27 (Urban75...) needs a last access date. Also, what makes this a reliable source?
 * Current ref 28 (Market values..) needs a publisher
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:57, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Support; pretty much what Kbthompson says above. It comprehensively covers what someone familiar with the area would consider "Smithfield", and I'm really not concerned with the whole "technically, foo falls within the formal boundaries" issues – any more than Noel Park needed a long section on Wood Green Shopping City. Ideally, I'd see the history section split into subheads, but that's just me and certainly not something I'd oppose over. –  iride scent  19:08, 2 April 2009 (UTC)


 * A MOS review is needed. On a very quick tour, I found WP:ACCESS issues; WP:MSH (incorrect use of "The" in section headings); WP:OVERLINKing of common terms known to most English speakers; WP:NBSP.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:14, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Oppose based on sourcing and structure. Karanacs (talk) 14:42, 9 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Some of your references are bare links. The websites need publisher, title, and access date at the very least (see current refs 8 and 9)
 * WIll be fixed, thanks --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Books need to have the publisher listed. Books also need to have the specific page number listed for each fact used.,  Some do this, some do not.
 * WIll be fixed, thanks --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I echo Ealdgyth's concerns about some sources not being reliable. Please see her comments above.
 * See my replies above --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Why are so many of the sources consulted so old? I see several that were published 150+ years ago.  Have nothing been written more recently on this topic? A quick google books search showed a few more recent things that may be useful (and there were more than these examples):
 * An economic history of London, 1800-1914 By Michael Ball, David Sunderland
 * Smithfield Meat Market By D Metcalf, London School of Economics and Political
 * London, A Social History by Roy Porter
 * Is there any official WP guideline against the use of old sources? All of these sources can be looked up in Google Books and are essential to report factual information that is not available in references published more recently. --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Should there be citations in the first part of the area and history section? I would expect one at least for the name Smooth Field'
 * Most basic information about Smithfield is available in multiple sources, including the official market website (ref. 9), I can surely add further notes but adding a reference every three words does not help legibility. --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Is it known when the first reference to the Smooth Field/Smithfield area was made in written documents?
 * Not to my knowledge --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * per WP:MOSDATE, 24 August instead of 24th August.
 * There are comma issues throughout the article - I see many instances where a phrase begins to be offset by a comma (or should be offset by commas), and there is no closing comma
 * The prose in the Area and history section does not flow very well.
 * I think there is a tad bit of overlinking. Do peasants, coing forgers, boiled in oil, etc really need to be linked?
 * I think they do, considering that the English Wikipedia is read by a massive number of non native speakers who may not know what "peasant" or "forger" mean. --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Probably need a source for  By the 18th century the "Tyburn Tree" (near the present-day Marble Arch), became the main place for public executions in London.
 * Is the information about Smithfield, RI really that necessary? That seems a bit trivial to me and seems to have no bearing on the future of Smithfield in London.  (If this does stay, it needs a source)
 * Need a source for the entire paragraph on bars, pubs, and clubs
 * Did nothing happen in the history of this area between the 17th century and the late 1990s? There seems to be a great big gap in the history
 * Need a source for , but with the increased nightclub activity around Smithfield the UHULMC (a motoring club) decided to move the event start to Finsbury Circus.
 * Why are we using Self-published sources to describe events that happen in the area? It is much better to find newspaper articles, etc that discuss interesting things that go on.  Besides the fact that newspapers are much more reliable sources, sourcing events from self-published sites (like the smithfield Nocturne website) leaves an impression of  WP:OR - someone familiar with the area is deciding what is important by consulting the websites of things that person knows about.
 * I think these pointers are meant to provide readers with the official link for a specific event. Is there any reason to doubt that information about a sport event as published by the official organisers may be less reliable than informatin about this event in secondary sources? --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Per WP:MOSQUOTE, short quotations (4 lines or less) should not be offset, they should be inline.
 * Due to the volume of cattle driven to Smithfield on a daily basis, the market started raising major concerns. - who was concerned? why?  Very vague sentence
 * Between 1740 and 1750 the average sale at Smithfield was reported to be around 74,000 cattle and 570,000 sheep -- I read "average sale" as average individual sale, but that doesn't appear to be the case. Is this annual sale or something else?  please be more specific.
 * I agree with the above oppose that the article appears weighted very heavily towards the market (perhaps undue weight). This can be fixed with a mix of two methods - add more information about other pieces of the area history (some suggestions below) and/or better integrate the information that is currently in a separate meat market area into the history section.  For example, the world War II info is dropped into the meat market section, but it does not relate directly to the meat market
 * There is no information about how the boundaries of the area might have changed. When did Smithfield officially become part of London?   (There is no real information about what makes up the boundaries now at all)
 * As much as many London districts described in Wikipedia (Clerkenwell, Covent Garden, Soho, West End, etc.) Smithfield is not an administrative district with clearly defined boundaries so it might be pointless to try to figure out how boundaries may have changed over time. I agree more information could be added to better define the geographical scope of the article in the first section. --DarTar (talk) 10:19, 10 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I assume there were neighborhoods in the area - is it possible to get information on how the population changed over time?
 * I think the article is using italics incorrectly throughout the article. See WP:MOSITALICS
 * Much of the today section is not cited; what is is cited to the market website, which may or may not be appropriate.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.