Jump to content

Talk:Althorp

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

conspiracy theory

[edit]

Should we mention the conspiracy theory? Seems pointless without some more credible infomation.

Found these ==

A few sources here:

-=# Amos E Wolfe talk #=-

The is said that: "is a country estate of about 14,000 acres (60 km2)". Cant be right, 1 hektare is 2,472 acres, so 16.000 acres is only 5.650 hektares, not 60 km2. Elijas Bijur (talk) 21:56, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You've slipped the decimal point. A hectare is 2.47 acres (not quite two and a half), so 14000 acres is 5666 hectares or just over 56 and a half square kilometers. (Sixty km2 is 14826 acres.) Biblioteqa (talk) 05:40, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Althorp/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: SchroCat (talk · contribs) 13:53, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to make a start on this monumental piece of work this weekend, reporting back, probably in dribs and drabs next week. As per my normal reviewing process, I'll tweak those obvious (and hopefully uncontentious) things that take longer to write about than to do. Feel free to revert or ask about any of these changes. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:36, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One minor point, there are the spellings of Wooten, Wooton and Wootton for the hall: although the spelling may have changed over time, it is probably best checking this (and making a clarifying note if that is the case). - SchroCat (talk) 09:47, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Spencer in his book spells it Wootton, I'll add a note, also spelled Wooten and Wooton.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:53, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Reworded. The memorial is still open and popular in July and August, just not the exhibition.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:35, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

Early history

  • "Robert Spencer, 1st Baron Spencer of WoooooHooooo, was created the 1st Baron Spencer of WoooooHooooo": I think we can tweak this a little
  • "Robert's notorious bad temper": I think we can lose the "notorious"
  • There's a lot of superfluous stuff about the history of individuals, rather than about Althorp, largely around which titles people held etc. It's fine when the personal stuff impacts on the estate (bankruptcy, etc), but when it's just for background info, it detracts from the info about Althorp itself.
Yeah I added that last as I felt it put the history in context more. I think as you say I've overcooked it so I'll remove a fair bit. not today though, tomorrow most likely. I think some of it is useful though.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:09, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed a fair bit, although in part I think some of it's relevant and helps the article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:31, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural hub

  • The stuff about the marriage doesn't fit in with the description of "cultural": perhaps Cultural and social hub?
OK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:31, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 15:00, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Modern history

Architecture

Wooten Hall

Sitting room

Library

  • You've already told us about George John's obsession to collect every one of the 110k volumes
  • "Marlborough won the auction with a "ludicrous" bid of £2,260 at that time, but later sold it to George for £750." This could probably be re-formed, especially given the scare quotes on ludicrous. Perhaps something along the following lines would work: "Marlborough won the auction with a bid of £2,260 - an amount described by xxx as "ludicrous" for that time - but the item was later sold it to George for £750."
Changed, almost as suggested aside from "the item was later sold it"!.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:41, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Doh! - thanks. - SchroCat (talk) 16:58, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

China museum

Not really worth it so I've removed it.♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:43, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Picture gallery

Bedrooms

  • "as you enter the room": probably best to avoid this sort of construction, and you could actually lose this phrase without too much of a problem.
  • "The Princess of Wales bedroom is named after the future King...": no, it was named after Alexandra, the fiancée of, so you need to re-work accordingly.
Sorry, I thought Rosie had done that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:18, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Final batch and some copy editing to follow shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 09:04, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Outer buildings

  • "The current owner, Charles Spencer...": I think this may be the fourth time I've read this phrase, so I think you may need to do a skim through and sort out
It's needed because there were other Charles Spencers. What I'll do though is add note in first instance that when referring to Charles Spencer we mean the current owner. Should b sorted now.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:15, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Diana

  • Is "toy typewriter" worth a redink? Maybe just link the typewriter, if that's what you were aiming for?

Linked typewriter instead.♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:28, 2 June 2014 (UTC) Prose check all sorted: I'll sort the rest of the GAN tomorrow. - SchroCat (talk) 21:41, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Last batch: again all very minor bits and pieces. There are still a few bits above that need to be sorted.

Footnotes

  • FNs 12, 49: can we change the shouty caps?
  • FNs 50, 62, 76, 112: Needs a pp, rather than p.
  • FNs 50, 79, 103, 112: Need to have two digits in the second set of numbers, rather than just one
  • FN 74: pages 81 to what?

Bibliography

  • You may want to have a spin over the Bibliography: the caps seem to have gone awry in a couple of places.

That's the lot to be looked at: the article is a solid piece of work and will be a strong GA once these minor points are tidied up. Good work to one and all. - SchroCat (talk) 13:40, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All done I believe. Excellent review, exactly what was needed, thankyou Schro.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:50, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A couple still outstanding: I'll go through and strike the completed ones. - SchroCat (talk) 16:49, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions): Although galleries are sometimes contentious, I think you've done well here with two small galleries that help readers, rather than interferring with the subject
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

@SchroCat: All done I think.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:07, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not yet: there are a couple of minor points in the prose list that still need to be looked at. I've stricken all those dealt with, so it's just a few minor prose tweaks to sort here and there. - SchroCat (talk) 19:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Care to refresh me underneath what needs doing still?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:12, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, only three, as it turns out:

Lead

  • "Diana, Princess of Wales, before..." She wasn't PoW before the marriage.
Good point, done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Early history

  • "Robert Spencer, 1st Baron Spencer of WoooooHooooo, was created the 1st Baron Spencer of WoooooHooooo": I think we can tweak this a little so the title isn't repeated

Bedrooms

  • "The Princess of Wales bedroom is named after the future King...": no, it was named after Alexandra, the fiancée of, so you need to re-work accordingly.

Now?♦ Dr. Blofeld 19:44, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


All good: now passed as GAN. Nice work @Dr. Blofeld: and @Rosiestep:! - SchroCat (talk) 19:58, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking this one on @SchroCat: and for your very thorough review. It's a better article for it. --Rosiestep (talk) 14:37, 3 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thorp - daughter's settlement?

[edit]

I was surprised to see that "thorp" is said to be related to Scandinavian "throp" or "thrupp" and in Danish probably meant "daughter's settlement". The etymology given here reflects my own understanding of the word's origins. See also Oxford dictionaries. It is true that many Danish place names ending in -rup or -trup are said to have originated in -torp which is sometimes interpreted as meaning an additional settlement for those stemming from a larger or more important community in the area. Perhaps this has been referred to (or mistranslated as) "daughter's settlement" in the literature. I can see that it might be said to mean "daughter settlement" (cf "daughter company") meaning "subsidiary settlement". However, I believe that many "-thorps" in the U.K. are probably more closely related to Dutch "dorp" or German "dorf" and fail to see why Althorp should be an exception. The British Library tells us that even in names of Scandinavian origin, "thorp(e)" simply means "homestead".--Ipigott (talk) 11:11, 19 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Althorp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:44, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 22 external links on Althorp. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:12, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation

[edit]

You state that Althorp is popularly pronounced "AWL-thorp". Does this mean that "AWL-thrup" is an affectation? Valetude (talk) 16:33, 27 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Althorp&oldid=1204760696"