Talk:Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral

message: The caption to the last image tells us that "The roof is the largest of its kind in the world". Er, what does that mean? What is "its kind"? Could we have a source please? Cheers, DWaterson 23:11, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Image caption

message: *The lead as it is now is a bit brief, it needs to summarise the whole article. For instance, for a structure with such a complex construction history, no mention is made in the lead of when building started or the main phases.
*If available, it would be good to include the expected and actual costs of each phase of construction. That way, when it's stated that Scott's 1953 design cost £4M the reader can compare it to earlier figures.
*It's mentioned that Scott's design was criticised and abandoned, but it's not really explained what about it was criticised.
*The Sir Edwin Lutyens Crypt section feels out of sequence and a bit repetitious. I think it should be integrated into the Lutyens' design section so that chronological order is restored and the article doesn't repeat itself.
*What happened to the Lady Chapel while Lutyen's cathedral was in use? Is the cathedral now the parish church?
*Lutyen's design is pretty unusual, has it won any awards?
*It should be mentioned in the article that the cathedral is a Grade II* listed building.
*Finally, I can't put my finger on what's missing and nothing particularly stands out, but the article feels a little "light".
I've made these edits, mostly copyediting. Some of the references were used more than once. When this happens, there's no need to use the same wikicode; what can be done instead is give one reference (usually the first occurrence but it doesn't particularly matter) a name, ie: <nowiki>. Then when the same source need to be referred to later, you can just use the name, like this: <nowiki>. Putting the / at the end is important to end the reference, otherwise it messes up the formatting of the page. I think the article is in decent shape, and oince the points I've raised are addressed it may as well be taken to WP:GAN to see what happens. Nev1 (talk) 13:37, 11 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Is there a reason why the featured picture of this cathedral is stuck at the bottom in the gallery section, and a slightly grainy picture is in the main infobox? Bob talk 09:30, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I think its because the featured image doesn't represent what the cathedral looks like day-to-day and that its night-time in the image. Tsange ►talk 14:57, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Image 

message: I have read through the article again and can see that work has been done, but there is still much more to do  by way of further improvement. I really don't have time for a full review, but will point out a few areas where attention is required:-
*In the lead
**Untidy and repetitious opening in which the word "cathedral" occurs four times in the first sentence-and-a-bit. Needs to be written more economically. (finally!)
**The term "Northern Province" needs to be explained in this context.  (apparently; no mention of "Northern Province" found)
**"This building is also one of Liverpool's many listed buildings, more specifically as Grade II*." It is not clear what "this building refers to, since you last mentioned the Anglican cathedral. The word "also" is redundant. 
**The words "As it is today" at the start of the second paragraph are unnecessary 
**The words "or even started" are misleading since work was begun on two of the three schemes thatb you list. Suggest end the sentence at "failed to be completed." 
*Elsewhere
**Clarify Goss's position. You have described him, initially, as co-adjutor Bishop of Liverpool. The "Bishop of Liverpool" link goes to a list of Anglican bishops of Liverpool.   Later, Goss is referred to, rather casually, as "then bishop". It would be clearer if you introduced him as "Alexander Goss, the co-adjutor or assistant to the Catholic Bishop of Liverpool..." and then "In 1853 Goss, by then himself Bishop of Liverpool,..."
**The "Gibberd's design" paragraph, which deals with the long-term faults arising from this design, is out of place, since you haven't explained anything about how Gibbert won the design in the first place. You have also linked Gibbert's name twice in the paragraph. I also think the final sentence of the section is very awkwardly worded.
**THe degree of detail given about the organ is somewhat disproportionate.
**The "location map" is not particularly informative.
**The images still lack alt text.
Please remember that this is not an exhaustive list of issues with the article, just a few helpful hints. It's as much as I can manage, but good luck with it, anyway. Brianboulton (talk) 00:08, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: A few post-Peer review comments

message: a rising cost from £3 million to £27 million (£1.17 billion in 2015) ... a smaller cathedral design with a £4 million budget (£97 million in 2015).
One of the two 2015 figures is wildly inaccurate. (The ratio of 4 to 27 is 6.75; the ratio of 97 to 1170 is about 12.) Which one is incorrect? C0pernicus (talk) 10:02, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Costs in today's money 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090129080052/http://www.liverpoolmetrocathedral.org.uk/history/history.html to http://www.liverpoolmetrocathedral.org.uk/history/history.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:24, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110714113836/http://www.mondoarc.com/built_with_light/226507/no14_liverpool_metropolitan_cathedral.html to http://www.mondoarc.com/built_with_light/226507/no14_liverpool_metropolitan_cathedral.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071217215148/http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/walker/exhibitions/cathedral/history/index.asp to http://www.liverpoolmuseums.org.uk/walker/exhibitions/cathedral/history/index.asp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:14, 29 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Liverpool Metropolitan Cathedral. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120717011724/http://www.liverpoolmetrocathedral.org.uk/content/Visitus/TheCathedral.aspx to http://www.liverpoolmetrocathedral.org.uk/content/Visitus/TheCathedral.aspx
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:23, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: There's a fascinating film; - "Crown of Glass" - made by the Shell Film Unit on the design and construction of the glass panels in the cathedral roof, on YouTube here: 
The narrator is Bob Holness. 86.8.126.91 (talk) 11:07, 27 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contemporary film on the making of the glass panels