238:
I'm not convinced by the BritHistory Online claim about the history; Pevsner, who's generally totally trustworthy, makes a convincing case for most of the house being 17th and 18th century remodelling, based on a shell by
Compton, itself possibly part of a larger courtyard house which has since been
215:
Unfortunately, the Flickr stream is marked non-commercial use, which is incompatiable with GFDL. (I think it would be nice to have them – the current set of photos are rather sterile – but there's nothing with enough of a "wow!" factor to warrant the effort of chasing the photographer and pestering
173:
For what architectural history there is, I think it's better to go by
Pevsner – who says much the same, but in far more detail. I agree that the listing needs to be cited, and have included cites to IofE for the building and its tower, which is listed separately. (The boundary walls to the park are
128:
of construction, let alone a date. I'm aware that, because information on the history of the structure is so scant, the history of the inhabitants seems unduly large, but I can't see an obvious way round that. Because of the gaps, this will be an unusual FAC, and ideally I'd like as many eyes as
337:
Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer
Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 13:41, 27 March 2009
118:, and now I'm wondering whether it can get over the next hurdle. I has some gaps in the architectural history, but these are gaps where the sources don't exist – archaeologists are still unable to decide on the origins of the building, and even the usually-authoritative
263:
Note re the automated peer review – I think "The Hill School" is correct in this context as "the" was part of the proper name. I'm aware the lead is short, but it covers all that needs to be said, and expanding it would just be padding for expansion's
216:
them into releasing rights.) Regarding the oldlondonmaps.com image, I think that image is either a conflation, or a trick of perspective – I don't believe there's ever been any suggestion that the tower once formed part of the house, and
430:
152:
mentioned - at least to reference the fact that it is a Grade I listed building which is currently uncited - NB gives construction date of c1600. The other relevant sources from IoE are:
304:
You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
239:
demolished. Hill moved some internal walls, but AFAIK the only change to the external appearance of the house made under him was the building of the school extension at the back. –
220:, which predates this picture (as it still shows the gables removed by James Townsend in the 18th century) shows that the two were clearly unattached at this point. –
103:
349:
The project was initiated by The
Libraries Partnership - West Midlands, which becomes part of Museums, Libraries and Archives - West Midlands in April 2003.
201:, showing the tower incorporated into the structure - but looking at the modern structure, I suspect it's been conflated from individual sketches. HTH
327:
217:
197:; very kindly he marks the stream 'creative commons, with attribution'. There may be something usable from the finds' tray. There's an image
70:
114:
I've listed this article for peer review because after sitting half finished for some time, it's finally been expanded, recently passed a
66:
377:
435:
51:
297:
188:
The basic structure is said to be of the era of the
Comptons (BritHistory online); but extensively modified for Rowland Hill.
43:
381:
373:
393:
389:
17:
95:
328:
http://www.search.revolutionaryplayers.org.uk/engine/resource/exhibition/standard/default.asp?resource=4276
164:. Based on those a little more description of the architecture would be possible. Hope these are helpful.—
129:
possible to take a look to try to weed out any issues missed in the GA review before it goes that far. –
312:
115:
409:
359:
277:
250:
233:
210:
183:
168:
142:
403:
385:
355:
271:
206:
161:
157:
153:
149:
316:
291:
308:
59:
320:
192:
174:
also listed separately, but I think mentioning them would be going into excessive detail.) –
99:
398:
351:
266:
241:
223:
202:
175:
132:
365:
369:
424:
287:
198:
36:
364:(ec) Although I agree the design makes it look like a fansite, it's actually
165:
120:
366:
a collaboration between a number of respectable academic institutions
368:
which deal with the history of the West
Midlands and Mercia (
148:
I've taken a quick look & would have expected to see
98:
review of the article for issues relating to grammar and
85:
78:
47:
396:
etc) to unify their online biographical archives. –
431:Peer review pages with semiautomated peer reviews
311:with the templates that start with Cite such as
8:
194:Bruce Castle Park community excavation 2006
111:This peer review discussion has been closed.
94:A script has been used to generate a semi-
7:
24:
378:Birmingham Museum and Art Gallery
150:Bruce Castle at Images of England
319:. They shouldn't be mixed per
102:style; it can be found on the
1:
382:Derby Museum and Art Gallery
18:Knowledge (XXG):Peer review
452:
410:14:24, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
374:Birmingham Central Library
360:14:18, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
321:WP:CITE#Citation templates
278:13:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
251:18:38, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
234:18:33, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
211:18:24, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
184:18:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
169:18:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
143:17:31, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
104:automated peer review page
394:Wolverhampton Art Gallery
347:Revolutionary players :-
191:You may want to look at
436:April 2009 peer reviews
307:You've mixed using the
124:is unable to specify a
116:very thorough GA review
218:the 17th century image
313:Template:Cite journal
154:Western boundary wall
390:The National Gallery
386:Erasmus Darwin House
158:South boundary wall
330:a reliable source?
317:Template:Cite news
309:Template:Citation
232:
141:
86:Watch peer review
443:
406:
401:
276:
274:
269:
249:
247:
244:
229:
226:
221:
181:
180:
138:
135:
130:
83:
74:
55:
451:
450:
446:
445:
444:
442:
441:
440:
421:
420:
404:
399:
272:
267:
265:
245:
242:
240:
227:
224:
178:
176:
136:
133:
106:for March 2009.
89:
64:
41:
35:
31:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
449:
447:
439:
438:
433:
423:
422:
419:
418:
417:
416:
415:
414:
413:
412:
370:Bewdley Museum
340:
339:
334:
333:
332:
331:
324:
281:
280:
260:
259:
258:
257:
256:
255:
254:
253:
236:
189:
113:
108:
107:
91:
90:
88:
34:
30:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
448:
437:
434:
432:
429:
428:
426:
411:
408:
407:
402:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
362:
361:
357:
353:
350:
346:
345:
344:
343:
342:
341:
336:
335:
329:
325:
322:
318:
314:
310:
306:
305:
303:
302:
301:
299:
296:
293:
289:
285:
279:
275:
270:
262:
261:
252:
248:
237:
235:
231:
230:
219:
214:
213:
212:
208:
204:
200:
196:
195:
190:
187:
186:
185:
182:
172:
171:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
151:
147:
146:
145:
144:
140:
139:
127:
123:
122:
117:
112:
105:
101:
97:
93:
92:
87:
82:
81:
77:
72:
68:
63:
62:
58:
53:
49:
45:
40:
39:
33:
32:
29:
26:
19:
397:
348:
294:
283:
282:
222:
193:
131:
125:
119:
110:
109:
79:
75:
61:Article talk
60:
56:
37:
28:Bruce Castle
27:
326:What makes
48:visual edit
425:Categories
352:Kbthompson
203:Kbthompson
96:automated
298:contribs
288:Ealdgyth
284:Comments
264:sake. –
160:&
126:century
121:Pevsner
71:history
52:history
38:Article
405:scent
400:iride
338:(UTC)
286:from
273:scent
268:iride
246:scent
243:iride
228:scent
225:iride
179:scent
177:iride
162:Tower
137:scent
134:iride
100:house
80:Watch
16:<
356:talk
292:talk
207:talk
199:here
67:edit
44:edit
315:or
166:Rod
427::
392:,
388:,
384:,
380:,
376:,
372:,
358:)
300:)
209:)
156:,
84:•
69:|
50:|
46:|
354:(
323:.
295:·
290:(
205:(
76:·
73:)
65:(
57:·
54:)
42:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.