Wikipedia:Peer review/Keswick, Cumbria/archive1

Keswick, Cumbria
This peer review discussion has been closed. A town is rather far from my usual GA/FA territory (viz music, lit and theatre mostly), and I am not at all sure how good my current effort is. I should be very glad of any comments to help me improve the article further and to decide whether it has GA or FA potential or neither.  Tim riley  talk    16:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Cassianto comments
On the whole, good, although not FAC stuff quite yet. I went ahead and fixed some ref formatting issues and left some hidden comments about others I wasn't sure of. I'm sure after the usual suspects have had a pick and a ponder, this will be the usual winning Riley stuff!

Name
 * Recorded where would be the natural question one would ask upon reading this.
 * Redrawn.  Tim riley  talk    18:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Prehistory
 * "There is clear evidence of the presence of prehistoric man in the area" -- personally, I would give "Kewick" again as it is a new para in a new section. We do it for persons, so the same rules should apply here.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    18:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "The antiquary W G Collingwood, commenting on finds in the area, wrote that they showed that..." -- that/that awkwardness.
 * Yes - lost the second "that"
 * Second para: Would it be correct to finish a para with a cite?
 * Puzzled: I have, surely?
 * That's a note; after 5 years, I'm still not sure of the rules, would a cite not be needed regardless of the note? Cassianto talk 18:55, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I intended the cite within the note to cover what went before, and looking at it again I think it does, but am quite happy to duplicate it if wanted.  Tim riley  talk    20:01, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh I see, no not really. I think that would cover it.  Cassianto talk 20:07, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

More to come... Cassianto talk 18:18, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Looking forward to it. Thanks for the first batch.  Tim riley  talk    18:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

20th century and beyond
 * Last para starts with "the town" as opposed to Keswick.
 * Looking again I think this is all right. A solid phrase rather than a pronoun. If I had said "It", that would be open to objection, I agree.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Historical Modern
 * "The Crosthwaite Free Grammar School was built in 1566, adjoining the churchyard; it had up to 200 pupils, of both sexes." -- I know discipline in schools was strict in those days, but not that strict, surely!?
 * Would you care to suggest an alternative phrasing? I'm wholly open minded on this point, as indeed on all points.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I will try: "The Crosthwaite Free Grammar School was built in 1566 and had up to 200 pupils, of both sexes; the building adjoins the [which] churchyard" maybe? Some may call this overtly nick-pickity, but I think another order would sound better.  Cassianto talk 20:13, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * That's fine with me – now adopted verbatim.  Tim riley  talk    20:43, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Why do we repeat ref 44 in close succession?
 * Overtaken by events: ref 44 was potentially not a WP:RS (see the article talk page) and I have replaced all refs to that site.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Up to here, sorry for the intermittency. Cassianto talk 20:46, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * No rush, and be as spasmodic as you like. I'm glad of your comments in whatever sized portions.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Last point: Would a pronoun be more suited to the second "Walpole" in the last para of the Lake Poets and other Keswick notables section? Cassianto talk 17:57, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The others have beaten me to it. I see no other issues Tim, great work as usual. Cassianto talk 22:37, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt
Very nicely done. I could not help thinking about Chincoteague ... I've wandered around England quite a bit in my time, and spent a few hours here once. I remember very little about it, though. Still, I shall make a point of looking around more comprehensively should fate place me back in the area. Only a very few comments.
 * Lede
 * "several important developments" This might not be clear to all readers. Developments tend be building stuff in the US.
 * Now "initiatives"  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Name
 * I should put the cheese lovers together, and the dissenters at the end.
 * Ah, well to tell you the truth I started and finished with the cheese lovers so as to deny the dotty old Flom the last word, having which always carries excessive weight. Not quite utterly neutral? I hope it will squeeze past GAN or FAC reviewers if I get that far.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Middle ages
 * "original Barons" just drawing attention to the capitalisation. I guess they were Men in those days.
 * Good - done.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * 18th and 19th
 * Is there no article on the rail line? Our rail buffs must be asleep at the switch!
 * Very good point. I have done a bit of peer reviewing for one top-notch railway buff and will go and prod him gently.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh, Hellfire and damnation! Of course there's an article and it was boneheaded of me not to think of looking for it! Shall link instanter.  Tim riley  talk    19:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Ownership
 * " Jacobite rising of 1715." this particular segment seems year-heavy. I might take "of 1715" outside the pipe and make it "the previous year".
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Lake poets
 * " Wordsworths had moved" unsure why the "had"
 * I'm not sure either, and have blitzed it.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Reminder to use convert templates for distances.
 * Off to consult the manual, and will do the deed once I have worked out how.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "many memorabilia" this seems to be a rather uncommon phrase, per google. Perhaps "much memorabilia"?
 * Blitzed the adjective altogether: just as good without.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * That's it. Well done.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:05, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for these points, Wehwalt. All attended to except my cheesy bit of top-spin.  Tim riley  talk    19:43, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Cliftonian's thoughts
Lead

Name
 * "from the 11th century, when Edward I of England granted a charter" I presume this is a typo and we mean the 13th century?
 * A slip of my quill. Shall amend.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * "with the Lake Poets, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, and Robert Southey" do we mean the Lake Poets in general, or just these two?
 * The latter, and I oughtn't to have put the comma in after "Poets", which makes the sentence say the former. Shall correct.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Later: have redrawn a bit, to avoid any possible ambiguity.  Tim riley  talk    16:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * Do we know which royal charter and/or which year?
 * It was Edward I's market charter of 1274. I'm not sure I want to add the details here and then repeat them where they already are, in the History section. Can you think of a concise way of addressing the point?  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * OK, you're right. —Cliftonian (talk) 07:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Prehistory


 * "During the Roman Empire" seems slightly odd wording to me; perhaps "During the Roman period", "In Roman Britain" or similar might be superior.
 * Happy with "In Roman Britain". Will alter.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

History


 * "against the marauding Scots"—I suspect usage of the definite article here might be taken by some as an undue slight on the Scots as a whole. Suggest losing it ("against marauding Scots" does not have the same connotation). Ditto "with the Scots finding richer ... targets"; perhaps "with Scottish attackers" or similar
 * an undue slight? Shall adopt your wording nonetheless.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Why not wikilink Edward IV?
 * Indeed, and it shall be done.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * We refer to "Wad mining". I know we have made clear in the previous paragraph this is graphite but I think it would be clearer for the reader just to use the modern term.
 * Fair point. (I wrote that bit while in Cumbria and must have breathed the local air too deeply – graphite is still widely called wad here.) Shall alter.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Why not wikilink the River Greta?
 * Done  Tim riley  talk    16:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Religious worship Regular events
 * Perhaps say "Eastern Orthodox" rather than just "Orthodox"? Slightly clearer in my view.
 * Yes, better.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Do we know for how long Muslim worship has been accommodated?
 * No. It took the very helpful man in Keswick's information centre long enough to dig out even this exiguous information, and I don't fancy my chances of unearthing any more.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * OK —Cliftonian (talk) 07:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Have there ever been other religions in Keswick? Do we know anything about pre-Christian worship?
 * Almost certainly, and naturally the Stone Circle has been the cause of wild surmise - Druids and all that, but surmise it remains. No other pre-Christian religions are recorded in the sources.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * How old are the beer, film and jazz festivals and the agricultural show, do we know.
 * The agricultural show is long established, and the others more recent, I think. I 'll see if I can dig any dates out.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * OK —Cliftonian (talk)</b></b> 07:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Later: Done, so far as the Agricultural Show is concerned (and added some new info published this very day, if you please!) Shall rummage for the other dates.  Tim riley  talk    17:06, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * OK <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">—<b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">Cliftonian</b> <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">(talk)</b></b> 07:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Features
 * Remove link from River Greta and link further up
 * Yes.

Lake Poets and other Keswick notables
 * "probably the best-known resident of Keswick was Sir John Bankes" I think "probably" would do better at the end—"was probably Sir John Bankes" but this is just my opinion
 * Happy with that. Will do.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * wikilink Fitz Park higher up in "features" and remove the link here
 * Indeed.
 * Wonderful ending.
 * Thank you! I like a good peroration when I can get one.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Overall I think this looks very good—perhaps not ready for FA yet, but I think a GA nomination would be successful with very little trouble. The article is enjoyable, thorough and informative and I enjoyed reading it. I hope these thoughts help. Cheers, and keep well. <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">—<b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">Cliftonian</b> <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">(talk)</b></b> 11:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for this, Cliftonian. Your comment and Cassianto's above chime with my own feeling, viz that GAN is probably the route to take.  Tim riley  talk    15:08, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Later: all suggestions attended to as above.  Tim riley  talk    16:33, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Revisiting: the article seems to be even better now and looking over it I see no reason not to nominate for FA. The article would be a shoo-in for GA and while I see no reason not to go down the GA route as a precursor to FA, I think the peer review has picked up any issues the GA review would normally highlight. So in my opinion having had this peer review going for GA would simply eat up time and not add much to the article. The decision is ultimately yours however. I will just say I preferred the "my good fortune" quotation at the end where it was before, so perhaps consider moving the "culture" section down to the bottom? Well done again Tim on this fine article. <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">—<b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">Cliftonian</b> <b style="color:white; background:darkgreen">(talk)</b></b> 07:44, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I concur with Cliftonian Tim. My comments were based on what I saw as the first reviewer, but having revisited since then, I see that this PR has helped the article immensely.  FAC is the way to go as far as I'm concerned!  Cassianto talk 17:48, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Dr. comments
Perhaps mention some of the notable landmarks like the museum in the lead?♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:57, 29 August 2014 (UTC)#
 * Very good idea. I struggle with writing leads, and suggestions like that are most welcome!  Tim riley  talk    15:09, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * With the dissolution of the monasteries, between 1536 and 1541, Furness and Fountains Abbeys - the Furness and Fountains Abbeys? I believe you and Cass prefer to use the definite article.
 * You may perhaps be thinking of my disdain for the false title, but that doesn't apply to real titles, and putting an article in for Fountains and Furness would be like referring to "the Westminster Abbey" or "the St Paul's Cathedral".  Tim riley  talk    22:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "and at 2014 " ="as of 2014 still continues to be published every Friday"
 * Horrid Americanism: I hate "as of..."  Tim riley  talk    22:59, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The geography section is rather undeveloped I believe. Nothing about geography, only a bit on geology and climate. I think first you should state where Keswick is located and its distance from four of five other towns, see Aarhus for instance. You can find distances on google here by clicking directions and entering a town. I've added some details myself to help. Then there really needs to be a description of the local terrain, is the area, flat/hilly, are there mountains or hilly areas in the vicinity? Should be OK now with the additions I've made. One thing though can you check the course of the Greta, the channel I mention I don't know if that is it or not. Google maps shows the Derwent river I think passing along the north side of the city and then there's a channel going south to the west of Keswick into the Derwentwater, it might be the Greta. Not keen on the climate table, can you use a more standard one like in Copenhagen?
 * Thank you very much for the additional geographical material, duly tweaked. I have no idea how to do a table like the Copenhagen one, and I don't think this could be seen as a stumbling block at GAN or FAC.  Tim riley  talk    23:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Later: I'm having a play in my sandbox, but we shall see.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * And now succeeded! Thank you for the suggestion, Doctor.  Tim riley  talk    12:36, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Will continue later. I've added a list of listed buildings. You might want to mention the Grade I listed Greta House, now part of the school and give some architectural details from the listed site. I know you mention it already in the notables section. I also think you should add some architectural detail about the Grade II* listed Church of St John and Church of St Kentigern and The Moot Hall in the Landmarks section.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:28, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Transport is generally put towards the bottom of city articles, I don't think it belongs under geography. I'm a little concerned that a lot of sections don't follow the general ordering of city articles. Regular events and Keswick culture/notables really belongs under a combined Culture section. -I hope you don't mind but I've reordered a little.♦ Dr. Blofeld  09:57, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Very happy with your valuable additions and rejigging. First rate stuff, and I'm in your debt.  Tim riley  talk    23:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Not keen on the infobox box image. Most of it is dark/obscured and only catches the building at an angle. I'd rather see wider general image like the panorama one. Would you be open to a montage image like Paris? Something like File:Keswick,_Cumbria_Panorama_2_-_June_2009.jpg at the top and then say four images of notable landmarks in the town underneath?♦ Dr. Blofeld  12:27, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Not at all sure about removing Keswick's icon, the Moot Hall, from the top image, but I suppose the composite picture could do well enough if the bottom right image – never seen by visitors (or me in more than fifty years) – were replaced with something more recognisable, such as File:The Alhambra - geograph.org.uk - 475539.jpg or File:Crosthwaite.jpg.  Tim riley  talk    23:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Updated that bit. No longer part of the school. Details added.  Tim riley  talk    23:32, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The drop-down list of listed buildings is brilliant. Thank you so much!  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * There's some terrific stuff here. Plenty to keep me out of mischief tomorrow. The only downside is that your substantial (and most welcome) additions mean you can't do the GAN review which I was rather hoping you might. No matter.  Tim riley  talk    15:12, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, actually with a bit of strengthening in places I think you could skip GA and go for FA. Let's just ensure it's as comprehensive as possible first though.♦ Dr. Blofeld  17:18, 31 August 2014 (UTC)

Almost nothing from SchroCat
Very slim pickings from me: a couple of minor tweaks undertaken earlier: feel free to revert anything you don't like. As to the rest…

16th and 17th centuries
 * "Wad mining continued": you've told us this is graphite, so is there any need to retain the ancient name, or would the modern equivalent be better?
 * It would, and now is.  Tim riley  talk    16:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

20th century and beyond
 * I wonder why The Manchester Guardian is unlinked, but The Daily Telegraph is?
 * Because I'm a careless old codger. Now amended.  Tim riley  talk    16:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)


 * FN32 needs sorting out
 * It did indeed, and now has been.  Tim riley  talk    16:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

All ship-shape and riley-fashion apart from those two really insignificant questions. Pip pip! – SchroCat (talk) 16:12, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you, SchroCat, both for tweaks and suggestions.  Tim riley  talk    16:47, 29 August 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley Miles

 * " civil parish within the Borough of Allerdale in Cumbria, historically in Cumberland". This sounds clumsy to me. Why 'within' rather than 'in' (ha revenge for you jumping on my 'amongst'!) and I am not sure historically is grammatically correct in that context. How about "civil parish formerly in Cumberland and from 1974 in the Borough of Allerdale in Cumbria"?
 * I chuckled at that, and I plead that I inherited that wording from the text as it was before I began interfering. Shall follow your suggestion to the letter.  Tim riley  talk    17:23, 2 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "The town is situated just north of Derwentwater, and 4 miles (6.4 km) from Bassenthwaite, both in the Lake District National Park." As you mention the National Park, I think you should say whether Keswick is in or just outside it.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk  
 * " Eilert Ekwall (1960) and A D Mills (2011), both for the Oxford University Press, and Diana Whaley (2006), for the English Place-Name Society" This sounds as if these bodies endorsed the theory. Perhaps "in books published by"
 * Redrawn.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * " prehistoric man" sounds dated. I would prefer prehistoric occupation.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Collingwood is far too dated to be RS on the archaeology of Keswick. Searching on "Keswick neolithic" in Google Scholar gives more up to date sources.
 * I've replaced the refs for the two factual statements, and added the date for Collingwood's comment, which is a pleasing quote I'm loth to lose.
 * "The last major influences on the area before reliable historical records began" What is the point of this qualification? I would delete it.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "absorbed by the Kingdom of Scotland until 1092" The ref should be Haywood pp. 104-5
 * Changed – thank you  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * In the lead you say that Keswick was first recorded in 1276, but this is not stated in the main text, and you say Fountains based a steward in the town in the early 13th century.
 * Redrawn  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "The buying and selling of sheep and wool was no longer centred" Should not this be "were" centred?
 * This is "fish and chips is/are a good lunch" territory: arguable either way, but I'm happy with the plural and have changed.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "but evidently that use did not begin until the late 18th century" I would delete "evidently" as superfluous.
 * Redrawn  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "During the 18th century and into the 19th..." I got confused in this paragraph as it appears to jump around with dates. McAdam constructed roads - must be late 18th or early 19th centuries but when? It goes on that this made the Lake District accessible by coach, yet a few lines later it says that coach services started in the 1760s, which must be before McAdam. The Grand Tour impossible during war in Europe - McAdam's improvements must have been so late that this means the Napoleanic war, so why link to a list of 18C wars? "Nonetheless, by the middle of the century" Which century? Coach services had not started in the middle of the 18th so presumably the 19th.
 * Blitzed McAdam, who was only one of several roadmakers at work. Chronology now adjusted.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "bargain prices, such as six shillings" Presumably for the middle classes. Many workers earned less than that a week.
 * Redrawn  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:58, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for these points, Dudley: really precise and helpful, and I so glad you were free to look in. I'm looking forward to grappling with your points tomorrow (my last day in Keswick, and able to use the very fine archive in the library, until late September)  Tim riley  talk    15:17, 31 August 2014 (UTC)


 * "Any prospect of major expansion of the town was ruled out" It might be just me but this has a regretful tone, which I am sure you did not intend! Maybe instead give a very brief summary of the restrictions on development the National Park entailed.
 * The National Park has been surprisingly undogmatic about discreet and fitting development within the town: I could show you probably a hundred new buildings tucked away here and there put up in the half-century that I've been familiar with Keswick. The real no-no is any outward expansion or development beyond the post-war boundaries of the town. I've purged the (unintentional) suggestion of regret.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * What a great picture that panoramic view is!
 * Just so. I can claim no credit for it: it was there when I started work on the article.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "These fells were formed during the Ordovician period" I think it is best to give a time period as well as saying Ordovician as most people will not know when this was. However I see that the source gets it wrong as Ordovician is 485-443 million years ago and the leaflet says 500 million. Natural England here is a better source, though even this has a typo as it says 495-443.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "Climatically, Keswick is in the North West sector of the UK" What does this mean? Is it a Met Office classification?
 * It is. Ref added to that effect.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I would make 'Ownership and governance' a sub-section of history. It is all historical.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "The first known official record of the town" Was there an earlier unofficial mention? Where does before 1216 come from?
 * Redrawn.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "Land to the south and west were part of Greenwich Hospital's forestry and farming estates until the 19th century.[65] In 1925 the National Trust acquired 90 acres of land in this estate, including the foreshore woodland, the gift of Sir John Randles" Did Randles buy it from the Hospital? I would take "acquired" to mean purchased - suggest just saying he donated it.
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Is it known how long the Crosthwaite Free Grammar School survived?
 * I have an idea that it morphed under Rawnsley's care into Keswick School, but I can't say for certain at the moment. Bott doesn't make it clear, and I'll have to fossick a bit more in the archives. I imagine the Transactions of the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian and Archaeological Society will oblige.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That's it from me. A first rate article. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:33, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much indeed for that very thorough review and for so many spot-on suggestions.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Lake District Louie

 * I would move the quote box to the left in the Middle Ages section.
 * Agreed. Done.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I removed a stray "e" at the end of the 18th & 19th centuries section. Did this "e" fall off the end of another word somewhere?
 * Pass.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I added a couple of dates in refs, and I suspect that other refs are missing dates of publication (the access dates are, IMO, of less importance than the publication dates), that can be found in, or divined from, the sources.
 * Thanks for that.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Landmarks: Why does Grade II* get an asterisk (*) -- but only sometimes -- while Grade I does not? What is the purpose of the asterisk?  I can assure you that most American readers will not know anything about the Grade scale for buildings.  I would assume that it has something to do with designating it as some kind of historical landmark, but that is all I could guess. Therefore, I think a blue-link would be helpful in both cases.
 * That is the odd way the listing system works. Effectively Grade I, Grade II* and Grade II are grades 1, 2 and 3. Tim could link to Listed building. Dudley Miles (talk) 00:23, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I've done precisely that, with a link at first mention of each of the three categories. In the circumstances I don't think I shall be guilty of WP:OVERLINK  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * What is a "a double flight of steps"? Are they double wide, double high, or two different sets side by side? -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:23, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Redrawn, but I'm keeping my powder dry on this. I have changed interior to exterior, but I must go and refresh my memory of the interior, just in case, when I'm next there later this month.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your review and these excellent pointers.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Minor matters from BB
I'm at the tail end of a distinguished company of reviewers, so not too many points. But:
 * The slogan "Keswick: famous for pencils" makes me want to giggle, but: "evidently that use did not begin until the late 18th century. Why do we need evidently?
 * Gone. There are worse slogans. My father used to chortle at "Newport – Home of the Mole Wrench", as well he might, you may feel.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "at 2014" sounds strange to me, rather than "in". (Late in the article you have "as at")
 * It's an attempt to avoid WP:DATED without using "as of 2014", a construction I abominate.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Is it correct to refer to the lake as "the Derwentwater" (as in "from the river to the Derwentwater to the east of Portinscale")? I have only heard of it as "Derwentwater".
 * An error that crept in during multiple revisions, and now corrected.
 * Conversely, I would expect to read: "The River Greta, a tributary of the Derwent..." rather than "River Greta..." etc
 * Ditto.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I assume you will pipelink the various listed grades to Listed Building
 * Done  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Moot Hall: "a double flight of steps inside" – I see an outside double-flight. It's more usual to call internal steps "stairs"
 * I reserve my position on this. There are certainly outside steps, as you say, but I shall have to look inside when I'm back up there at the end of this month to refresh my memory of the interior arrangements.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Churches: "Until 1838 Keswick had no church within the town boundaries..." but then: "Another parish church, the Church of St Kentigern on Church Lane, is also Grade II* listed. Dated to at least the 14th century...". And what about the Weslyan chapel opened in 1814?
 * Sorry. The unthinking arrogance of one brought up in the C of E. Now rewritten.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "...the chancel windows, designed by Henry Holiday, also date to that year" – not clear what year.
 * Redrawn  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "More than 250 barrels of beer, lager and cider are on offer, accompanied by music from live bands." Sounds a trifle promotional. Likewise: "In July one of the town's best-known annual fixtures begins..."
 * Pruned the PR stuff  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * "Before the Lake Poets the best-known resident of Keswick was probably Sir John Bankes, a leading Royalist during the English Civil War." I don't think an encyclopedia should offer this kind of conjecture; the language needs to be more neutral, e.g. "Among the well-known residents of Keswick before the Lake Poets was..." etc
 * Done.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Education: I'm not clear as to how the schools mention in the historical summary tie in with contemporary provision. For example, does the Crosthwaite Free Grammar School still exist or did it evolve into something else? Twelve day schools in the town by 1833 suggests a very generous provision, but I imagine most of these were dame schools with only a few pupils – can you clarify? Can you confirm there are no private schools in the town, and also say what is the responsible LEA?
 * Dudley Miles also raised the point about the Crosthwaite Free Grammar School, and I reserved my position: I think under Rawnsley's care it morphed into Keswick school, but Bott doesn't say, and I need to do a bit of on-the-spot research later this month.
 * Population: I would like to have a better account of the stages by which the towns population grew from the 1000 mentioned in the 17th century, and the present-day 5000. For example, what was population in the mid-19th century, or at the time of the 1914–18 war (which would give a context to the 117 war dead)? Also, can we have some demographic details. Is Keswick a popular retirement base with an ageing population, is it mainly families, etc? Some idea of the make-up of the poplualtion would definitely help to form an image of the town.
 * Done the 20th century stuff. I must rummage further for 17th-19th century stats.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The parliamentary constituency that includes Keswick is mentioned in the infobox but not in the text. Might be worth mentioning who the MP is (hee hee hee).
 * Added constituence details; I think I'll omit the name of the MP – WP:DATED again.

That is my lot. Aside from my light reservations expressed above, I found this at least as informative as the "Let's move to..." page which features in the Saturday Guardian. A little further attention should see it safely into FAC territory. Brianboulton (talk) 15:55, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for these points, Brian. All grist to the mill and attended to as reported above.  Tim riley  talk    11:41, 3 September 2014 (UTC)

Warmest thanks to everyone who has contributed. The article is so much better now than when I put it up for review. With the help of Dr Blofeld I aim to have it up to FAC in a week or two.  Tim riley  talk    16:41, 6 September 2014 (UTC)