Talk:St Giles in the Fields

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Architecture Portal
This article covers subjects of relevance to Architecture. To participate, visit the WikiProject Architecture for more information. The current monthly improvement drive is Johannes Itten.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the assessment scale.
Christianity
Christianity Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. If you are new to editing Wikipedia visit the welcome page to become familiar with the guidelines.
Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
This article is supported by WikiProject Anglicanism. See also The Anglicanism Portal.(with unknown importance)
This article is supported by WikiProject Catholicism. See also the Catholicism Portal. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments

User:Neddyseagoon, you've clearly been beavering away on the St. Giles in the Fields article. As a 'newbie' (how I hate that coinage), it has been fascinating to see how Wikipedia works. At the same time time, as the original writer of the article, it has been a little disheartening to find it gutted, and elements of the sense having been removed.

  • In the first paragraph, for example, it now twice refers to its proximity to Centrepoint, and the linking irony of this being so busy whilst St. Giles was a hermit has been excised for no obvious reason. And that's just the first paragraph.
Reinstated, though someone may have pulled that bit on POV grounds.Neddyseagoon - talk 16:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • There are now huge chunks of text that have been lifted virtually verbatim from the church's own website, surely negating the point of Wikipedia,
Yes, the stuff from the website needs copyediting, but I felt it interesting nonetheless. Neddyseagoon - talk 16:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • a snotty remark about the church's preoccupation with minutiae, whilst perhaps accurate, is surely not appropriate for this style of article?
I think the writer may have been trying to say how the church was now Evangelical and hostile to a candlestand's Anglo-Catholic associations - I'm looking into it.Neddyseagoon - talk 16:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • More amusingly, the commentary about the organ not having been spoilt by modern restoration as made rather redundant by the fact that it is currently spread over the workbenches of an organ restorer in the West Country...

Hoppers 15:01, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, feel free to edit it again to get rid of this anomalies.Neddyseagoon - talk 16:21, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Article title

Is there a reason for not having this at St. Giles in the Fields (with a period after "St")? If not, it should be moved. Recury 20:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)