Talk:St Deiniol's Church, Llanddaniel Fab/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Malleus Fatuorum 21:24, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Lead

• As the name of the church is "St Deiniol", not "St Deiniol's Church, Llanddaniel Fab", then only "St Deiniol's Church" should be emboldened in the opening sentence.
  • Not sure I agree on this one; surely the location of the church is as much part of its name as its patron saint(s)? E.g. this list of churches within the deanery.

• "It was built on the site of an earlier church, and the first church in this location is said to have been established by St Deiniol Fab (to whom the church is dedicated) in 616." That sentence runs on and needs to be reorganised; there's a jarring disjunction between "site of an earlier church" and "the first church" when they're squeezed together like that.
  • Addressed.

• The lead is a little too short to adequately summarise the article. As a rule of thumb it ought to encapsulate each of the major sections, but it includes nothing about the church's architecture and fittings for instance.
  • Expanded (last point to be addressed).

History and location

• "... but it is said that a son of St Deiniol (the first Bishop of Bangor) established a church here in 616." By whom is it said?
  • Addressed.

• "A later edifice, dating from the 16th century or perhaps earlier, was replaced in the 19th century, although the 1937 survey by the Royal Commission on Ancient and Historical Monuments in Wales and Monmouthshire considered that sections of the walls of the nave may be from the older building." I can't make sense of the "although" there. Although what?
  • 'Replaced but sections perhaps reused in building the new church' was what I was trying to get across. Reworded.

• "The parish has been merged with that of the adjoining village of Llanfairpwll ...". What parish? We've been talking about a church until now.
  • Addressed.

• "... it was suggested that it could be used as a studio or for storage, subject to necessary consents being obtained." By whom was it suggested? The estate agent?
  • Addressed.

• "People associated with the church include the antiquarian Henry Rowlands, author of a history of Anglesey (Mona Antiqua Restaurata) in 1723, who served as priest there and in nearby parishes from 1696 onwards, and the clergyman and translator Isaac Jones, who was curate from 1840 until his death in 1850." This sentence needs a bit of work. For one thing it's a bit too long, and for another Rowlands wasn't just the author of his book in 1723; he's still the author of his book.
  • Addressed.

Architecture and fittings

• "The church has a simple aiseless nave". Is "aiseless" a typo?
  • Not sure if I introduced that witless typo, but nevertheless I should have spotted it. Reworded.

• "The door in its north wall has medieval door jambs, and the keystone of the pointed arch, which is also medieval, is a carved human face." It's not clear whether we're talking about a door in the north wall of the church or the north wall of the vestry. I guess the church?
  • Vestry, clarified.

• "Entrance is through a porch on the south wall ...". The previous sentence was describing the chancel, but I guess we've now switched to talking about the entrance to the church? If so, this is repeating what the opening of the paragraph says: "The church is entered through the porch". Probably ought to be "a porch" in any case.
  • Reworded

• "A visual inspection in 2006 determined that there were many cobwebs inside, but also that the pews and organ remained in place." The previous sentence ended by describing a silver cup, which makes it look like it was the cup that was full of cobwebs and so on.
  • Addressed.

Response in progress. Bencherlite^Talk 18:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful review and nit-picks. The only issue that hasn't led to a change is what words should be in bold at the start. If you're right, you're right, and I'll make the changes to this article (and all the other GAs in this series) but I'm not immediately sure that I agree with you. (Note to self: if you're disagreeing with MF, you're probably wrong anyway...) Bencherlite^Talk 19:10, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.