Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/West Wycombe Park

West Wycombe Park
I started this page a couple of years ago when I was very new to Wikipedia (another name ago) since then it has been edited by many others. A month or so ago I completely re-wrote it, expanded it and referenced all the facts, and took out those which were dubious or just completely unfounded. So it's sort of a self-nom. Surprisingly almost unknown outside of it's immediate locality, it's an interesting house architecturally as it is mongrel of many styles carried out in a theatrical way for a very interesting and notorious man. It seems to me to meet all the criteria for a featured article. Giano 16:18, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I read the first two sentences and found a problem. "The first impression of West Wycombe is that it should be situated in the hills of the Veneto, or perched as an aristocratic summer retreat looking over the sea in the Crimea." The first impresion by whom? Why should it be situated in the hills? Just scrap this sentence, too much personal opinion for my tastes. Joelito (talk) 16:28, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have removed both offending sentences, allthough I think "should be situated in the hills of the Veneto" could be re-instated as the reasoning is explained later in the text, and the lead is merely summarising what is cited laterGiano 17:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Support - I have given this one a light copyedit too, although some infelicities no doubt remain for the eagle-eyed, but this is an excellent article on a beautiful house. I'm sure Giano will find a citation for the "first impression" - it is a quite extraordinary villa to find near a lake in the English countryside. -- ALoan (Talk) 16:43, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * An excellent article overall (as if there were any doubts regarding Giano's writing), but a number of little things that need to be cleaned up:
 * The image stacking is so dense as to cause gaps to appear in the text; some of the images should really be interleaved onto the left margin.
 * I don't see any gaps Giano 21:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The "References" section needs to be properly formatted and alphabetized. (And why the strange "20.VIII.06" date style?  I don't believe I've ever seen Roman numerals used for months, only years.)
 * Numerals for months is standard British legal formatting, but if you hate it you can change it Giano 21:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The footnotes should be cleaned up to have proper spacing and punctuation; in particular, "p57" should be "p. 57" or "57", and so forth.
 * The "See also" section should be eliminated; most of the links are already present in the text, and any that aren't can probably be worked in without too much difficulty. Kirill Lokshin 18:00, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I have eliminated the "see also" as suggested, the only problem with that is that people often come along don't know such pages as List of films shot at West Wycombe Park exists, don't bother to read the page and then just insert their film in the wrong place, usually in my experience when a film is shot somewhere like West Wycombe it means there is one distant shot of the house a mile away for 2 seconds, and the interiors are all in a studio in America, which is why I seldom insert such trivia myself, and like to have a separate clearly visible page for such information - but anyway that is my reasoning but I have removed that section as that seems to be the majority view. Giano 08:56, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced that either of those lists really needs to exist; they seem rather like unexpandable trivia to me. But that's not really in issue with this article. ;-) Kirill Lokshin 13:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * The images look ok on my screen, but I'm sure they can me moved around a bit. I have hacked the references and see also about a bit.  A patient person still needs to add dots and spaces in the notes. -- ALoan (Talk) 18:33, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've sorted the footnotes, I think they are all OK now. Giano 12:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Seems fine now, as do the images, so support from me. Kirill Lokshin 13:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Support per nom. I'm always happy to see articles about architecture at the FA level, especially the ones written by Giano. This building was unknown to me too until this article, which is not just about architecture, but also history, and biography. DVD+ R/W 18:27, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose. Not good enough.  Not nearly.  Not for a while. Sorry.  Policratus 19:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah right. Crossing out comment from indefinitely blocked troll. Bishonen | talk 02:23, 5 November 2006 (UTC).


 * In what way is it not nearly good enough? -- ALoan (Talk) 19:24, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Poor formatting, too verbose, etc. Policratus 19:58, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh Dear, not a lot we can do about that then, never mind some you win, some you loose. Giano 20:02, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * You mean lose, not "loose," I think sir. Policratus 20:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't be so sure! Giano 20:05, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Comments. Lovely article on a house that may be lovely (I'm at work and my company blocks the pictures, alas).
 * I, too have an issue with the sentence "The first impression of West Wycombe is that it should be situated in the hills of the Veneto." It throws the reader a bit. Perhaps a solution would be to have it read "Built in the style of Palladio's Venetian villas, West Wycombe Park gives the impression that it should be situated in the hills of the Veneto." Better? Maybe?
 * Just curious, is much known of the manor house that this replaced? Should an earlier history of the park be added?
 * I'll cnhange it as per your suggestion Giano 21:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Nothing is known, just what is stated, probably another boring square box I expect
 * "The Greek Doric of the house's West portico is the earliest example of the Greek revival in Britain. Only Lord Burlington's Chiswick House, or Mereworth Castle, attempt to so faithfully replicate the classical ideals" - should be cited.
 * Sentence has gone Giano 07:29, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I agree with Kirill on the images. I would suggest moving three of the image as follows:
 * Frescoes in the Villa Farnesina moved to just above the paragraph starting with "West Wycombe has been described...".
 * 1781 view of the south façade moved to the left.
 * Wycombe's Blue Drawing Room ceiling moved to the left as well.
 * I think moving these images would solve the problems of the gaps in the text.
 * I don't have any gaps in the text, it all looks fine to me - I don't know how to place images, I just stick them in and hope for the best. Giano 21:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hmmm...maybe it's my browser. I'm using Internet Explorer...if you'd like, I can shift the images a bit and see what happens. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 21:49, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Again, like Kirill, I think the See Also section can be incorporated into the article.
 * I've absorbed the see also and deleted it. I don't think it was a good idea as the two pages are directly concerned with West Wycombe and will never be searched for elsewhere, but if that is what people want so be it Giano 22:21, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't intend for you to do away with the links, just place the garden one in the garden section and such. Indeed, they are important and should be in the article, just not a section to themselves. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 03:49, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

Giano, despite my picking and the picking of others, this is a fine article. You certainly have blessed us with marvelous articles on architecture (this one is no exception!) and I thank you for introducing me to the fascinating Dashwoods. They've somehow slipped under my radar and I will certainly pursue some research on them. Cheers! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 21:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I think we can dispense with see also, I don't think that was part of my input, I may be wrong, I've forgotten Giano 21:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Support I tweaked one pic a bit and now it looks fine to me...I hope it works for everyone else as well. Marvelous work! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 14:24, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Quick Comments I was only able to skim through, but it looked good in general. I also made some light copy edits.
 * Only Lord Burlington's Chiswick House, or Mereworth Castle, attempt to so faithfully replicate the classical ideals. Is Mereworth Castle another name for Chiswick House? If so, it doesn't need to be linked again does it? If not, than it should probably read "and Mereworth" without commas.
 * "John Donowell" is linked three times (twice in close proximity).
 * Perhaps "Greek and Roman mythology" can be changed to "Greek and Roman mythology". Gzkn 05:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks I've addressed all of your points and fixed. I've removed the offending sentence about Chiswick and Mereworth becaise I'm not sure I 100% agrree with it - so it's out. Giano 07:27, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Hehe...thanks for the talk page message :). Read the article over again and changing to Support. Gzkn 10:58, 3 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Support. Very fascinating read from start to finish, and another great job.  You're a machine! --badlydrawnjeff talk 15:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Nice to see some personality in the writing for a change; "his risque devotion to that goddess of love" alone makes it worthwhile. I'd like to see an inline reference for the "Interior" section though (I assume it is from Knox). Yomangani talk 16:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, excellent article, good writing and images. --Kuzaar-T-C- 18:15, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
 *  Conditional support with a couple of comments. Two images - Image:Palazzo_Chiericati.jpg and Image:Farnesina_frescoes.jpg - severely overlap and crowd each other into the text at resolutions at and above 1600x1200. The text is over-linked in places; I don't think satellite is what you meant to link to, and why link things like guns, champagne, prop?? Lastly, while the writing is very good and surprisingly engaging, there are a few instances of editorializing, eg "Palladio would have placed the main entrance on the first floor reached by an outer staircase", "brutally cut", "the atmosphere...is not overpowering", etc. Opabinia regalis 05:15, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've removed some of the links, as a non native English speaker myself "prop" was a word I had to look up after living in England and speaking fluent English for three years so I have left that linked for the benefeit of others like myself, regarding other links, I beleive they are supposed to be linked. Palladio would have put the entrance on the first floor, so I have left that, but reowrded it to be clearer. The images appear fine on my screen, and I have fixed them for two editors who commented above - I don't know what to do about your problem, could you have a go yourself, that may be easier, I don't really understand pixels and sizes etc.  The satellite link is what I meant to link to, isn't that an idiom in English too? Giano 08:32, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Check User:Opabinia regalis/Sandbox - the images now arrange properly on my screen, but I didn't want to bork the formatting for more common resolutions. Yes, smaller subsidiary buildings can be called satellites, but the article satellite is about celestial bodies. I don't really see the benefit in linking to a totally different use of the word just because they're metaphorically related. "Prop" maybe, but... guns? Pineapples? Antique? There's no need to link these, because the only thing about them that the reader has to know in this context is the definition, and these are not uncommon terms. I've seen the delinking folks remove things like "X is a protein found in plants". Opabinia regalis 04:42, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I've had a look, and there are no white spaces but the problem ism the exterior section instead of beginning with a nice clear shot of the exterior, now begins with an interior shot (ie Frescoes in the Villa Farnesina) there is so much text above, cannot it somehow be absorbed in that, as it it on other screens. I have delinked pineapples etc etc, allthough I suspect someone will link them all back within a month.  Thanks for trying with the images. Giano 08:50, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Way too minor to fuss over, but bear in mind that the exterior section doesn't begin with a nice clear shot of the exterior for users browsing at 1600x1200 or above. I'm not sure how big a population that is overall. Opabinia regalis 01:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Support but: 1) Architecture: Exterior: 2nd paragraph: There are references to "this" side and "this" portico; I see that it's the "west," but it seems like we're talking about a specific design crisis/time that isn't clearly enough delineated for me (was this a particular time? was this part of his opening of bidding/redesign?); 2) Dashwoods: Lax sexual morality: It's an interesting time, and, in fact, sexual morality was not very lax except among the rich at the time; in fact, many moral crusades were underway, including George Whitfield and the Methodist awakening, so someone like Boswell could be doing fairly offensive things and feeling no guilt, but the nation itself was growing more scanalized, and therefore things like the Hellfire Club were political statements either against the new "dissenter" inspired religious movements or as a demonstration of how the rules wouldn't apply to nobles; my point is merely that I'd love to see "lax standards" removed or conditioned.  A great article with a very full narrative of both the technical, historical, and family stories that have gone into one of the most visible and frequently seen examples of 18th century architecture.  Very well done, well researched, and well presented and organized.  Geogre 15:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks Geogre - I understand your first point, I've addressed it but please have a look and see if I have understood you properly - the sexy bit I have fixed - I could make that longer in explanation but the architecture is sexy enough for me Giano 16:18, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Really nice fixes, Giano. No hesitation on my support.  Geogre 19:02, 4 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Support, another great article by an author is who is rapidly becoming one of the most prolific FA producers in Wikipedia's short history. Normally I scan articles for their content, but this drew me in because of how well-written it was. Kudos to you, Giano! Daniel.Bryant [ T · C ] 21:17, 7 November 2006 (UTC)