A fact from Victoria Square, Christchurch appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 August 2013 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New Zealand, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New Zealand and New Zealand-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New ZealandWikipedia:WikiProject New ZealandTemplate:WikiProject New ZealandNew Zealand
The following discussion 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.
I am willing to undertake this review, and will aim to prepare my review comments within 7 days. One initial request is to expand the lead. According to MOS:LEADLENGTH, an article of >5,000 words of readable prose should have a lead of 3-4 paragraphs. I suggest something in the range 250-400 for the word count of the lead. I will not review the lead until expansion is completed, and will focus on the body of the article in the meantime._Marshelec (talk) 20:12, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
expand the early part of the lead to include something like: "......originally known by European settlers as Market Place, but was renamed to Victoria Square in 1903 in honour of Queen Victoria."
..before its redevelopment in 1896–1897 into a park.[1] This statement may be valid, but the body of the article does not specifically describe a transition to a park in 1986-97. Also, this sentence is one of only two in the lead with a citation. The lead will have a cleaner appearance if citations can be avoided. I suggest some minor copy editing in the body and the lead so that this statement is a valid summary of content in the body. then, if the citation is used in the body text, it can be deleted from the lead.
Even after this first redevelopment, The words "Even after .." carry some sort of implication, but I am unclear what it is. Perhaps this clause could be deleted.
The surrounding department stores made it one of the city's major shopping destinations.. This sentence is likely to be factually correct, but it is content that is not currently found in the body of the article. If included in the body, it will need a citation.
The square underwent major changes during the last part of the 20th century, with the construction of the Christchurch Town Hall on the northern side in the 1970s, and the closure of Victoria Street at Kilmore Street in the 1980s prompting a complete redesign that transformed the square into a major urban green space. This sentence is 54 words and needs to be split.
* The closure of Victoria Street at Kilmore Street in the 1980s prompted a complete redesign that transformed the square into a major urban green space. It seems more likely that Victoria Street was closed as part of a complete redesign, or to enable a complete redesign. Please review.
Subsequent to the February 2011 earthquake, the square was located in the Central City Red Zone and was closed, reopening in November 2012,[2] with restoration work completed in 2017. I recommend this sentence is split to improve readability. The fact about re-opening in November 2012 needs to be in the body, along with a citation. Also, this sentence could be reworded for better flow: "The February 2011 earthquake caused damage to Victoria Square and the area was closed to the public as part of the Central City Red Zone." I also note a small difference between 2017 stated here, and 2018 stated in the Post-earthquake section of the body, for the completion of the restoration work. This needs to be resolved.
Subsequent to the February 2011 earthquake, the square was located in the Central City Red Zone and was closed, reopening in November 2012, with restoration work completed in 2018. This sentence is still a bit awkward. To me, the words "the square was located in the Central City Red Zone" carry an implication that the square is portable and can be moved. Here is a suggested reworking: "Following the February 2011 earthquake, Victoria Square was closed to the public as part of Central City Red Zone. After initial repairs, it was re-opened in November 2012 and full restoration was completed in 2018."
Te Pae Christchurch Convention Centre faces into the square on its southern side, and the square is part of the precinct of greenspaces through the central city on the banks of the Avon River / Ōtākaro. This sentence needs to be split.
Is there a case for some brief mention of changing public attitudes about open space in the central city?. There have been multiple occasions in the history of Victoria Square where strong public reaction against proposed developments have led to proposals being cancelled or substantially modified, preserving open space and the existing character of the square.
There probably is, but I think it would require a bit of a writeup and maybe some original research. The changes to the square have actually been mostly well-received over its history from my research, with the only major deferrals I can think of being the tourist tower and the post-earthquake redesign, both of which are covered. Newspaper letters to the editor show a good amount of both positive and negative discourse on other changes through the years, but these are primary sources I can't directly rely on. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)09:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is difficult to know what details to include/exclude in the lead about the post-earthquake period. To me, the demolition of the Crowne Plaza hotel is a major item. Also, it seems to me that as a highly notable building, the restoration of the Christchurch Town Hall could be specifically mentioned.
I've struggled a bit with this, I can't find an organic way to mention the demolition of the Crowne Plaza without first mentioning it being built, and that feels out-of-place to mention in the lead. I'm also not convinced the town hall restoration needs a mention in the lead. Given that the restoration meant there wasn't any real change to the square (ie the building wasn't demolished) it feels like a tangential thing that doesn't fit in the lead. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)06:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple heritage-listed buildings and monuments in and around the square. The current wording uses "landmarks" but I think that heritage listing / historic place terminology is preferable.
Some of these places aren't heritage-listed, for example the pouwhenua and the Bowker fountain (the fountain is included as part of the CCC heritage assessment but not listed by Heritage NZ, it really should be listed by them though). David Palmer//cloventt(talk)09:30, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
add wikilink for Ngāi Tahu
Pouwhenua should not be capitalised. Also needs a wikilink.
@Cloventt: The article is already in good shape, and my points of feedback about the body of the article are mostly quite minor. I will separately provide feedback about the lead, images, and other GA criteria, but this can wait until after these points about content and referencing are addressed.
I recommend you only respond in writing on this review page about points where you do not agree with my suggestions, or I have missed the point etc (ie don't bother to record "done" for items you have actioned). When you have completed all your responses to this feedback, just let me know. I will then review, and as confirmation I will apply strike-throughs to every point of feedback that has been actioned or otherwise resolved. I have used collapse templates for sections, to make the initial display on the page more compact and less overwhelming. It also hopefully means that feedback can be reviewed and actioned in manageable blocks.Marshelec (talk) 02:44, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It would be helpful to rework the first sentence, and perhaps add an additional sentence. Explain briefly that the original design layout for Christchurch was based on a grid with a city square in the middle, and three additional rectangular areas allocated nearby as parks.
The square was placed east of and in-line with the northern part of the Avon Loop (now Hagley Park).This sentence is unclear because the Avon Loop has not been mentioned or defined, and the reference to Hagley Park makes the confusion worse. Can this sentence be deleted ?
The square was initially bisected north-west to south-east by Whately Road (named after the Archbishop of Dublin, Richard Whately, who was a member of the Canterbury Association[4]), later renamed Victoria Street, and this formed a major route to the north towards Papanui and beyond. This sentence contains 44 words and is difficult to read. For ease of reading, sentences should be less than 30 words (and some authorities recommend a maximum of 25 words). The sentence needs splitting and reworking.
The Avon River diagonally bisects the square from south-west to north-east.. This would flow better if "diagonally" is removed, eg: "The Avon River bisects Victoria Square from south-west to north-east".
There is one instance of Avon River being wikilinked in this section. It is already linked in the lead. I am relaxed about repeating links where it is definitely useful, as per MOS:REPEATLINK. However, there are other instances in the article where it is also linked. Worth a review.
In the sentence Depending on context, Victoria Square can refer to both the entire area bounded by the four surrounding roads, or just the public park in that area..., replace "both" with "either". Also, consider splitting the sentence after "area", because it is currently 45 words long.
History: Market Place era
History: Market Place era
The area of the Christchurch central city where Victoria Square is today located was part of... could be replaced with "The area where Victoria Square was established was originally swamp land on the banks of the Avon River (Ōtākaro:)". The citation at the end of the next sentence should be to Rice (2014) pages 14-15, not just 14.
the phrase though it likely did not have a formal name could be deleted to simplify the sentence to: "The name most often used for this area is Puāri, although this name is probably fairly modern"
Christchurch was surveyed by Joseph Thomas and Edward Jollie in March 1850, and on these earliest maps the area that became Victoria Square is marked as grassland. Is it Thomas who actually designed the layout ? Surveying is focussed on measuring and recording, or laying out areas based on some design guidance. If Thomas and Jollie actually designed the layout then it would be helpful to clarify this and use the word "design".
The smooth river stones from this quarry later resulted in many potholes on the early roads. This sentence will be unclear to readers. Why would the round stones lead to potholes in the road ? Also it lacks a citation. If there were significant problems with the gravel roads caused by unsuitable gravel, there are presumably historic sources that can be cited. However, it is beginning to drift off topic. One alternative is to delete the sentence - it depends to some extent on the notability of the gravel-related problems with the Market Place quarry.
In June of that year Isaac Luck built the structure on the corner of Armagh Street and Cambridge Terrace, which measured only 10 by 20 feet (3.0 m × 6.1 m) The last clause relates to the structure, not the streets. It would be better to reword this as: "In June of that year Isaac Luck built the structure, measuring only 10 by 20 feet (3.0 m × 6.1 m), on the corner of Armagh Street and Cambridge Terrace."
..like many contemporary buildings in early Christchurch. The difficulty with the word "contemporary" as an adjective is that it has two different meanings, and only one of them is valid in this context. I think it would be best to avoid using "contemporary", by re-writing to "...like many early Christchurch buildings".
..that the area be renamed to Victoria Square as it was no longer used as a market. the citation should be to page 149, not 148
With Victoria's diamond jubilee in 1897, ... should be "With Queen Victoria's diamond jubilee in 1897, ..."
History: 20th century
would attempt to block the trams from operating. When police broke up the protests in Cathedral Square, the angry crowds would recongregate in Victoria Square. It is best to avoid the use of "would" when there is a simpler alternative. Both sentences can be rewritten into simple past tense: "..attempted to block the trams from operating. When police broke up the protests in Cathedral Square, the angry crowds recongregated in Victoria Square."
the first electrically illuminated fountain in the Southern Hemisphere. the citation should be to page 197, not 196
sites suggested for the construction of a Town Hall "town hall" in this sentence should not be capitalised, as per MOS:CAPS
He proposed to close Victoria Street at the corner of Kilmore and Durham Streets, stopping it before it ran through the square. flow could be improved here. My reading of the source is that the proposals by Stephenson including linking a development that closed off Victoria Street with the development of a town hall on the Kilmore St site. This is worth adding, to improve the flow to the next sentence about the building of the town hall.
The administrative and library block began construction in 1975,[49] and was positioned to somewhat intrude onto the riverbank lawns in Victoria Square. The first part of this sentence would be simpler as: "Construction of the administrative and library block began in 1975.[49]". The second part needs review. If there is to be mention of the building "intruding" onto the riverbank area, this needs to be set against the background of concerns raised by the community about the riverbank environment. There is an interesting point here about "environmental concerns" in urban planning for Victoria Square. It seems likely that by the 1970's communities were much less likely than earlier generations to accept government directives (I note the Lake Manapouri controversy of the 1970's). Is there some connection between changing community attitudes about the environment and what was acceptable for Victoria Square. ? However, it might be difficult to find sources that are sufficiently specific to support this point. Please review the inclusion of the content about the building "intruding", and whether or not there is a case for some content about changing attitudes about green space. There is perhaps a case for some brief mention in the lead about multiple occasions in the history of Victoria Square where strong public reaction against proposed developments have led to proposals being cancelled or substantially modified, preserving open space and the existing character of the square.
Bit tricky, I just re-used the word "intrude" from the article I referenced, though this is a primary source. In this case, if there was public opposition to building on the riverbank lawns I didn't see much mention of it, and it certainly didn't stop the building being built. I'm open to more general discussion of the history of public opinion on changes to the square. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)03:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The structure would have been the South Island's tallest and was to be located the footprint of Victoria St, on the south-east corner of Colombo and Armagh Streets. The words "the footprint of Victoria St," need review. Should this be "immediately adjacent to Victoria Square.." ?
I think the wording on this is wrong/confusing and I need to check my sources. I believe the proposal was to build in Victoria Square, roughly where the Victoria statue currently is. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)03:47, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The statues of Queen Victoria and James Cook were moved, and large circular paved areas were built, including a large circular amphitheatre north-west of the Avon. The sentence has two instances of "circular".
History: Post-earthquake
History: Post-earthquake
the first paragraph requires a citation
The intention was this to be a point of "welcome", including a place to conduct pōwhiri.[74]. This sentence needs some rework, perhaps just adding "for" after "was".
Ngāi Tahu ultimately abandoned this proposal on the principle that a pōwhiri should be conducted at an established marae, and that there is no such marae in the central city. Ngāi Tūāhuriri upoko, Te Maere Tau, concluded that a pōwhiri in the central city is essentially meaningless under tikanga Māori, and that major pōwhiri should instead be conducted at the established Tuahiwi marae instead These two sentences describe the same "stance". Are both needed ? What is the relationship between Ngāi Tahu and the other group. What is a upoko ? Given that the proposal did not proceed, I suggest reducing this down to a single sentence with simple content for ease of reading.
The cultural centre would have stood on the former Crowne Plaza site, but it was never built.. This sentence could probably be deleted.
Instead, a number of Ngāi Tahu cultural art installations were included as part of the restored square to re-assert mana motuhake over the area; indeed, one such installation was a pair of upright waka carvings named Mana Motuhake, unveiled in 2019 This sentence has 41 words. Suggest splitting and avoiding the semi-colon and "indeed".
Beginning in 2017 the square was restored, reopening to the public in 2018.[79]. I just noticed that the fact in the citation is about the completion of restoration. It is not entirely clear that this is the same as re-opening. I note that at present, the lead has a statement that the square was re-opened in 2012. This needs review.
Events
Events
Since 2006 the Christchurch Lantern Festival has run each February in Victoria Square. Suggest "..has been held each February .."
this section seems a bit "thin". Public use of the space is already mentioned several times in the History sections above, so perhaps a brief summary of types of events through the history of the square can be added here. Public use of the space (including for events) is also important when considering the public reaction to the various proposals that have been floated and rejected over time. I recommend some expansion.
Transport
Transport
Suggest adding a Further template at the top of this section, linking to Christchurch tramway system, to make the existence of this separate article more obvious for readers.
Today the paths in the square are open to both cyclists and pedestrians, with right of way given to pedestrians. It might be useful to briefly mention that the cycleway through Victoria Square connects with other parts of the city cycling network - eg the cycleway route up Victoria Street to Bealey Avenue an Papanui Road.
These paths are path of the City Promenade path that runs through the central city on the banks of the Avon. This sentence uses the word path three times. Please review.
A lockable electronic bicycle parking rack called a Locky Dock is located on Kilmore Street on the northern side of The Commons. This seems like a detail more suited to a travel guide. I suggest it is removed.
Christchurch Town Hall
Christchurch Town Hall
It may not be necessary to provide wikilinks for Avon River, and 2011 Christchurch earthquake, but this is a minor point
....listed as a category-I heritage location by Heritage New Zealand The listing actually says "Historic Place", and I recommend sticking with that terminology, because there is a separate "Historic Area" classification.
At present this is the first instance of "Heritage New Zealand", so I propose this should be wikilinked.
There is a template NZHPT that is useful for citing Heritage New Zealand list entries, ensures consistency and saves work. See: Template:NZHPT. I recommend you replace all citations to Heritage New Zealand in this article using this template.
I dislike NZHPT because the template doesn't seem to allow for attaching archived versions of the page as standard templates do. It therefore is also incompatible with the very handy archive linker bots that come around and add such links when they're available. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)05:13, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Crowne Plaza Hotel
Crowne Plaza Hotel
After the demolition the former building footprint was renamed The Commons and used by the Gap Filler charitable trust.... The paragraphs from about this point in the section are really about the new use of the north-east corner of the square, following demolition. They don't really fit under the heading Crowne Plaza Hotel. I recommend a review of how this is treated. Perhaps a new section called "The Commons" ??
After the demolition the former building footprint was renamed The Commons and used by the Gap Filler charitable trust as the location of several community projects, including the "Pallet Pavilion" — an outdoor venue made from over 3000 blue wooden shipping pallets[93] — and the "Retro Sports Facility" which provided a space for field sports such as football and cricket This sentence has 58 words and needs to be split.
The area is also home to The Arcades, a series of tall wooden arched pergolas that run diagonally from the corner of Kilmore and Durham Streets into the square, providing a path for foot traffic entering the square from the north-west. This sentence is 41 words long and should be split.
In 2019 the world's largest public hāngī pits were dug on the site by representatives of Ngāi Tūāhuriri, a hapū of Ngāi Tahu, between The Arcades and the Town Hall[95] as part of the Christchurch Arts Festival. This sentence is 37 words long and doesn't flow well. It should be split.
The Bricks
The Bricks
The buildings were an imposing row of Victorian era brick arches, stacked two-storeys high and looking out over the Avon River into the square.. I don't follow the "....brick arches, stacked two-storeys high". Where does this come from ?
From photos the building was pretty striking. It was a red brick ediface with with white brick arches on both levels, giving the appearance of stacked arches. I haven't been able to find a freely licensed image, but you can get an idea of what it looked like on Rice p165. I don't know how better to include it than by using a text description, given the lack of a photo. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)09:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I propose a rewording: "The buildings looked out across the Avon River into the square, and featured an imposing row of Victorian era brick arches stacked two storeys high".Marshelec (talk) 07:10, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In looking at Rice (2014) page 165, I found mention of the drilling of an artesian water bore in the square in 1903. This seems notable to me, and worth including somewhere in this article. (Separately, I note that the coverage of water supply in the article Christchurch is poor, and in need of major improvement.)
This bore was experimental and dug just to the south of the bandstand (roughly in the area where the current day Bowker fountain is). As far as I know it was never used as part of the city water supply. Mostly it just created an annoying muddy puddle in the grass near the bandstand, and it was fenced off for a bit before being filled in. There is a partial photo on Rice p165. It might be worth mentioning in the Christchurch article as part of the history of the water supply but I didn't feel it was particularly noteworthy in the history of the square. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)09:02, 22 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Limes
The Limes
add wikilink for Lime trees. Almost certainly Tilia
The Anglican Diocese of Christchurch, which by this time owned the building, finally chose to sell it to the Christchurch City Council in 1963 so the land could be used to build the new town hall This sentence is 36 words long. Consider splitting.
Te Ahi Kaa
Te Ahi Kaa
Built to commemorate the signing .. The pou is a work of art, so I suggest "Created to commemorate the signing ..."
the first sentence uses "Ōtākaro", but the caption in the adjacent photo uses "Avon River". These should be consistent.
remove wikilink from Ngāi Tahu - it is already linked in content further up the article
add a convert template for "6 metres tall "
the formatting of the text and translation of the bronze plaque is odd and a bit distracting. I recommend a review of how this is presented.
Hamish Hay Bridge
Hamish Hay Bridge
It is listed as a category-II heritage location by Heritage New Zealand. The listing actually says "Historic Place", and I recommend sticking with that terminology, because there is a separate "Historic Area" classification.
The early bridge was variably named the Papanui Bridge or the Market Place Bridge until it was renamed to the Victoria Bridge when the present-day bridge was constructed.. Here is a possible alternative for consideration: "The early bridge was referred to as either the Papanui Bridge or the Market Place Bridge. When the current bridge was constructed in 1864, it was named Victoria Bridge."
Bowker Fountain
Bowker Fountain
the first two sentences both start with "After his death ..." This needs review. Also, consider splitting the second sentence - it is 33 words long.
.. the first fountain lit with electricity in the Southern Hemisphere." The citation given says it was the first in Australasia. A different citation [1] says Southern Hemisphere. This needs review.
The "Peeling Back History" site is a dodgy reference, I've replaced it with Rice and the CCC heritage report. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)04:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I note from the Canterburystories account that Bowker had an office overlooking Victoria Square. I think this is worth mentioning. I also note that that the Canterburystories account does not mention Victor Hean, and says it was designed by A.R. Galbraith, with expert input from General Electric Company of America. This needs further investigation and a review of the content.
As per above, the CCC heritage listing specifically mentions Hean, so I've added a mention of both architects though I think Hean did all the work. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)04:56, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Within hours of reopening a vandal poured washing powder into the fountain, causing it to foam up This seems like a trivial matter - the kind of thing you would read in a newspaper, but is probably not needed for the encyclopaedia.
Statue of James Cook
Statue of James Cook
.. listed as a category-II heritage location The listing actually says "Historic Place", and I recommend sticking with that terminology.
a citation is needed. I recommend the Heritage New Zealand listing.
Magistrates Court
Magistrates Court
I think it is worth a small addition to state that the building is another in the Gothic Revival style.
Also, I recommend "historic place", rather than "historic location"
Armstrongs Building
Armstrongs Building
..listed as a category-II heritage location. I recommend "historic place", rather than "heritage location".
The building was damaged by a major fire in October 1993, but the damage was not structural and it was soon repaired. The fire was considered to be suspicious. Are either of these points sufficiently notable to be worth retaining ?
In 1999 a bar called the Vic and Whale opened in the building, and became a popular part of the Christchurch nightlife.. Needs a citation.
The diocese announced they would sell off the land they own in the area, and it remains undeveloped. Suggest rewording to "and as of 2024, it remains undeveloped". Consider using the template Template:As of
Red Telephone Box
Red Telephone Box
In 1988, when Telecom took over management of the phone network from the New Zealand Post Office they made the decision to repaint all existing telephone boxes in a pale blue to align with their new branding, with the ultimate goal of replacing all phone boxes with a more modern steel and glass design. This sentence is 54 words long and needs splitting.
..with service provided by Spark Unsure if this is worth retaining, but if it is retained, wikilink to Spark New Zealand.
I've already wikilinked that at the top of the section as "Telecom", I wasn't sure if I should wikilink twice or if that would constitute overlinking. If its ok to add it twice I will do so.David Palmer//cloventt(talk)05:15, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Statue of Queen Victoria
Statue of Queen Victoria
It is listed as a category-II heritage location. I recommend "historic place", rather than "heritage location".
Consider adding a sentence to describe where it is installed, and its setting in the square. I also think it important to note here that the name of the square was changed to Victoria Square when the statue was unveiled, even though this is mentioned in the history section.
When it was unveiled, the square was renamed from the former name of "Market Place" to match the statue. I suggest an alternative "When it was unveiled, the square was renamed from Market Place to Victoria Square in honour of Queen Victoria." This would match the wording in the lead.
Ice Cream Charlie
Ice Cream Charlie
Ice Cream Charlie is a mobile ice-cream vendor that operates from a food truck opposite the Te Pae Christchurch Convention Centre on Armagh Street, at the south-side of the square. I think "food truck" generally means a self-powered vehicle, but from photos, it looks like the ice cream business is a cart that needs to be towed. Here is a possible alternative: "Ice Cream Charlie is an ice-cream business that operates from a cart parked on Armagh Street opposite the Te Pae Christchurch Convention Centre at the south-side of the square."
Armagh Street Bridge
Armagh Street Bridge
It is listed as a category-II heritage location... I recommend "historic place", rather than "heritage location".
Isaac House
Isaac House
It is listed as a category-II heritage location... I recommend "historic place", rather than "heritage location".
Suggest replacing It is today used as pub. with "As of 2024[update] the building is occupied by a pub known as The Victoria Free House."
Te Pae Convention Centre
Te Pae Convention Centre
One citation should be added for the text about Te Pae.
I also recommend adding one or two sentences about the former building that was on the site for more almost 70 years, with a link to Haywrights#Stores. You could potentially copy most of the content about the Christchurch store from the Haywrights article section. (Although not part of this GA review, I would also like to see the same content added to the Te Pae article, to recognise the earlier occupation of the site).
Thanks! I knew you'd mentioned something about that but I had forgotten what it was exactly. I'll research this up. The Te Pae article needs a general re-write anyway and it is on my to-do list.David Palmer//cloventt(talk)05:18, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Other
Other
This was a replacement[132] for a watering place closer to the Hamish Hay Bridge (then the Victoria Bridge), which was closed by the city council earlier in 1874. This is a bit confusing on first reading. Initially I thought that "..which was closed by the city council .." referred to the bridge, not the watering place. I recommend a review of this sentence.
..and unveiled by Christchurch Beautifying Association secretary-treasurer Barbara MacMaster. My observation is that articles usually do not include the names of people who are not notable. I recommend this sentence is reviewed.
The plaque makes reference to the weeping willows that stood along the banks of the Avon near Armagh Street;[140] however, several of the original willows around the memorial were lost after the earthquake. This sentence needs a tweak. I presume the plaque refers to the origins of the weeping willows that are a well-known feature of Christchurch, in multiple locations along the banks of the Avon, not just a few that were near Armagh St and didn't make it after the earthquake.
They are part of a series of thirteen such installations along the Otākaro in central Ōtautahi .... This is the first use of Ōtautahi in the article. I suggest it is also introduced into the lead, and it may be useful to add a wikilink.
consider adding mention either here, or elsewhere, of the low carved wall "Parerau" behind the Queen Victoria Statue. [2]
I suggest a re-arrangement of items currently listed as Points of interest, under new top level headings. This proposed structure may make the information better organised and more accessible for readers. This is just a suggestion for consideration.Marshelec (talk) 05:14, 21 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its a good suggestion, but I'd prefer to keep them combined under a single top-level heading. Though then we'd end up with 3 layers of nesting which might start to look strange. I've had a look at other GA park pages to see how they do it:
Jacob Riis Park has a Description top-level heading, containing a Features second-level heading, and then third-level headings for each feature (I don't like this).
Prospect Park (Brooklyn) uses the three-level structure of Landmarks and structures -> Plazas and entrances, Bridges, Drives and paths, Monuments and statues, Notable structures and Former structures, with each containing tertiary headings for individual things.
Flushing Meadows–Corona Park uses Notable structures -> Attractions, Art installations, and Other, with some tertiary headings under Attractions.
@Cloventt This looks good to me. You can proceed with structural changes as soon as you wish. One small point to watch is that this re-arrangement may possibly lead to the need to change a few wikilinks, so that the first instance is linked. I will proceed with reviewing progress and putting strikethroughs for feedback that has been addressed.Marshelec (talk) 05:56, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Structural work has been done I think, it required some creative rearranging. For example Parerau is now included with the Victoria statue, just because they're right next to each other. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)02:11, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Proposed change to structure
Buildings in the square
Christchurch Town Hall
The Bricks
The Limes
Magistrates Court
Buildings facing the square
Isaac House
Te Pae Convention Centre
Armstrongs Building
Areas within the square
The Commons
Fountains
Ferrier Fountain
Bowker Fountain
Bridges
Hamish Hay Bridge
Armagh Street Bridge
Colombo Street Bridge
Monuments
Statue of James Cook
Statue of Queen Victoria
Installations
Te Ahi Kaa
Mana Motuhake
Three paved mosaics
Red Telephone Box
large boulder with an embedded bronze plaque commemorates the early French settler François Le Lievre
@Cloventt: Progress is great. Thanks for being so responsive :) I have put strike-throughs in all sections of my feedback, including the lead, for points that have been addressed. Only a few items remain. None of these remaining items are obstacles to passing the nomination, but are offered as possible/ recommended improvements. Please review these remaining points and decide which of these you can action. However, I prefer to wait until you are able to undertake the proposed structural changes before passing the nomination, and look forward to seeing how this turns out.Marshelec (talk) 23:13, 23 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cloventt: Thanks, the revised structure is good, and I have acknowledged the most recent edits in response to remaining points of feedback. Almost there now. Please have a look at the comments that remain in the feedback about the Lead.Marshelec (talk) 04:54, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cloventt: Thank you for your hard work on preparing this article and for your patience and responses to the GA review comments. The article is in great shape. Congratulations on your first GA. The ChristieBot will shortly add the GA icon to the top of the article, along with some other actions.Marshelec (talk) 07:58, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
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.
It is probably worth adding content about the failed proposal for the tourist tower, and the Hay's department store that had a playground on the roof. David Palmer//cloventt(talk)01:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
