Template:Did you know nominations/Mortonhall Crematorium

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Jolly Ω Janner 03:24, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Mortonhall Crematorium

edit
Mortonhall Crematorium's expressionist architecture
Mortonhall Crematorium's expressionist architecture

Created by Drchriswilliams (talk). Self-nominated at 02:09, 12 January 2016 (UTC).

  • Just over the minimum length. Nominated within 7 days of creation. QPQ not mentioned but the nominator appears to have no DYK credits. The image is used in the article & has an appropriate license, but is probably too dark to use at that size on the main page. The hook fact is short enough & interesting; there is a problem of ambiguity (is it one of the best examples of Spence's expressionist work in Edinburgh or of expressionist architecture in Edinburgh?). Expressionism should be capitalised. More problematically, there is no direct mention of this main hook fact in the article, and it is not referenced at all. The architect is actually given as "A Dewar" in the listing. Aside from that, my main problem is that the bulk of the article addresses a controversy over ashes of stillborn or very young infants & a memorial garden built in response, rather than anything to do with the architecture; this feels unbalanced. The information on the architecture is very slight, sufficiently that it should really be labelled a stub. There is a long listed building report which is barely touched on apart from a too-close-paraphrased sentence: "The buildings include dramatic angular shapes made with white calcined flit aggregate concrete blocks" vs "dramatic geometric angular shapes of white calcined flint aggregate concrete blocks". Moreover a grade A listed building should have many many sources about its architecture that have not been touched on here. There are also other paraphrasing issues; for example: "A walled garden opened in December 2015. It featured plaques inscribed with the names of 149 babies and infants surrounding a stone water feature and trees." vs "The walled garden features plaques inscribed with the names of 149 babies and infants surrounding a stone water feature and trees." Espresso Addict (talk) 06:45, 13 January 2016 (UTC)
  • I have edited the hook to avoid ambiguity. I have added some content to the article to clarify details of the architects who were involved, to match the more recent memorial garden and the background to it, and added more references around the architecture. Drchriswilliams (talk) 10:51, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
  • Sorry for the delay. The article is considerably improved and feels more balanced now; thanks. Considering the new hook... "Prominent example" is probably ok as a synthesis of grade A listed and included in the Prospect & RIAS lists. Spence is not formally stated in the article to have led the team that designed it, but he was clearly the senior architect in the company so I think that's fine; Ref 3 is independent support for Spence having planned it. It would be nice to have a direct reference for the statement in the article "It is an example of Basil Spence's post-war Expressionist style." but the "calmly expressionist" quotation is probably adequate for the purposes of the hook. On the close paraphrasing... there are still a few fragments that could do with rephrasing -- I have rephrased a couple -- but no wholesale near quotations. QPQ is completed. I think it's good to go now. Espresso Addict (talk) 03:03, 8 February 2016 (UTC)