Wikipedia:Peer review/Milton Keynes/archive1

Milton Keynes

I've listed this article for peer review because… it has had extensive revisions since last reviewed a few years ago, in particular to ensure that statements made are fully supported by properly formatted citations (and trivia removed). It is a "level 5 vital article" so it ought to be GA standard: this request is to identify what more needs to be done for that standard to be reached. Thanks, John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:53, 25 February 2019 (UTC)

Comments from SkyGazer

Hello John Maynard Friedman. Because of the message you left on my talk page and the fact that the Morpeth review is almost finished, I think I'm going to review this article at least somewhat and see what improvements can be made. I may not be able to fully review the whole thing and just because all of the comments I make are addressed doesn't necessarily mean it would be GA-level, but I will do what I can as time permits. Best, --SkyGazer 512 ^{Oh no, what did I do this time?} 20:35, 5 March 2019 (UTC)

• I briefly mentioned this on my talk page, but I still think the biggest problem is the lead. It does not summarize the article; currently it only contains the town's population, location, and a tiny bit about its history. A brainstorm would be to maybe put the population and location info in the first paragraph, devote a second paragraph to summarize the History and Urban design sections, have a third paragraph summarize the facilities of the town, such as the Culture and Education sections, and finally have a fourth paragraph for the business, economy, and government info. I'm not sure if it would work, but it's just an idea.
• Why do you have note 1 and then a, b, c, etc. all the way to k for the notes? Shouldn't this be consistent (e.g. a instead of note 1, going all the way to l)?
• You do not need references in the lead for any info duplicated or discussed in more detail in the body, with few exceptions, see WP:LEADCITE.
• According to the Middleton page, Milton Keynes Village is the name, so having village of Milton Keynes on this page seems redundant.
• Considering the actual names of the rivers are River Great Ouse and River Ouzel, you should probably capitalize them as such.

@SkyGazer: Thank you for these comments. I am obliged.

• Yes, I agree that the lead is too terse, I'm still hoping that inspiration will strike to provide the killer narrative that grabs the reader's attention straight off. Right now, the e-dustbin is full of crumpled electrons and I am still staring at a blank page. It is surprisingly difficult to find GA exemplars for larger settlements. Your suggestions may break my writer's block, so thank you!
• An artefact of article history, easily fixed. (Reason is a local vanity. We don't like being a mere town, the law is an ass).
• Accepted. I need to ensure that these are reflected in the body and will then delete.
• The name of the village is still Milton Keynes. Locally it is disambiguated by appending "Village" but that has no status. So I need to look at this again to see if I can come up with a form of words that will be meaningful to the man on the Clapham omnibus.
• Agreed, will do.

Once again, thank you. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 16:24, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

@John Maynard Friedman: No problem, thank you for responding. I did not realize that the actual name of it was "Milton Keynes" and not "Milton Keynes Village", I admit to having simply briefly glanced at the article rather than do a thorough search. In that case, what the article has now should be fine; although nit-pickily I would recommend taking the "village of" out of the link.--SkyGazer 512 ^{My talk page} 16:30, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

I thoroughly enjoyed this article, and it seems to me to meet the GA criteria. A few drafting points that I hope will be of some use:

• "the work of Californian urban theorist Melvin M. Webber, described by the founding architect of Milton Keynes, Derek Walker" – inconsistent use of false titles: Webber gets one but Walker escapes it.
  • Done
• "Before construction began, every area was subject to detailed archaeological investigation: doing so has exposed a rich history" – doing what? There is no verb other than "was" earlier in the sentence.
  • Text now reads ... detailed archaeological investigation: this work has provided ... '. Is that what you had in mind?
• "Lord Norman Foster" – Lord Foster or Norman Foster, but not Lord Norman Foster, unless he's the younger son of a marquess or duke.
  • Done. I resisted the temptation to write "Norman, Lord Foster" after Alfred, Lord Byron :-)
• "the Corporation attracted talented young architects" – says who?
  • Bendixson p95
• "led by the young and charismatic Derek Walker" – ditto.
  • Bendixson (and Roche, quoted in Bendixson). But changed to "respected designer" which is what the source says.
• "Professor David Lock, CBE" – the post-nominals are not wanted here (MoS).
  • Done
• "six minutes walking distance" – possessive apostrophe missing.
  • Done
• "Local Centres" – why the Capital Letters?
  • Because it is That is What is Used in Planning Documents :-) Fixed.
• "Grid Roads" – sudden outbreak of capitals here, too – uncapitalised earlier.
  • Done
• "1970 Master Plan" – more odd caps.
  • Done
• "not exceed six stories" – unexpected spelling of storeys. I see from Fowler that "story/stories" for buldings is AmE.
  • Done
• "Aqueduct over the Ouse" – capital A?
  • Done
• "planned by landscape architect Peter Youngman" – another false title we could do without.
  • Done
• "Chief Landscape Architect" – caps?
  • I have left this because it a job title, like Chief Executive Officer.
• "Milton Keynes Arts Centre offers a year-round exhibitions" – clash of singular-v-plural here.
  • Yeuchhh, how did I miss that one going in. Now "a year-round exhibition programme".
• "Data on the economy, demography and politics of Milton Keynes are collected" – how very nice to see "data" correctly used as a plural word! A rare treat.
  • I read a good explanation of when it is appropriate to use data as a singular collective noun: if the entities are all alike, data is singular but if not then data are plural. Data on puffins is good but data on razor-bills and guillemots are incomplete, which must give some sub-editors nightmares! Count yourself lucky that it is not "datums".
• "Education, Health and Public Administration" – further otiose capitals.
  • Done
• "25.3% of the Borough population is aged under 18 (5th place) and 13.4% are aged 65+" –another clash of singular-v-plural
  • Done, both now say "were"
• "a portion of more or less dissected boulder clay plateau…." – we don't use quotation marks for block quotes.
  • Done

Nothing of any great consequence there, but I hope some of these points are of use. I also hope (pretty confidently) the GAN goes well. Tim riley talk 10:36, 25 March 2019 (UTC)

Tim riley, thank you for these very helpful suggestions. My apologies again for missing your peer review and so taking so long to acknowledge it. Thank you also for your kind opening remarks – terse writing can end up like the instruction booklet for a washing machine so I am pleased that you liked it. I shall now submit the GAN. --John Maynard Friedman (talk) 12:10, 16 April 2019 (UTC)

Since the article is now a GA candidate, it is eligible for closing, so I believe I'll close this now. Best of wishes on the GAN!--SkyGazer 512 ^{My talk page} 18:06, 16 April 2019 (UTC)