Talk:Jubilee Library, Brighton

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brighton Mid‑importance

	East Sussex portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brighton, an attempt at creating a standardized, informative, comprehensive and easy-to-use resource about Brighton and Hove. If you would like to participate, please visit the project pageBrightonWikipedia:WikiProject BrightonTemplate:WikiProject BrightonBrighton articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.

Libraries Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Libraries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Libraries 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.LibrariesWikipedia:WikiProject LibrariesTemplate:WikiProject LibrariesLibraries articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Jubilee Library, Brighton appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 October 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that so many people used Brighton's Jubilee Library (pictured) on its opening day that the toilets stopped flushing?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2011/October. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Jubilee Library, Brighton.

Wikipedia

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 19 external links on Jubilee Library, Brighton. 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:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://database.designinglibraries.org.uk/view/index.php?id=434831a73024a
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.hughpearman.com/articles5/brightonlibrary.html
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/sites/brighton-hove.gov.uk/files/downloads/conservation/North_Laine_Study_1994.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brightonbusiness.co.uk/htm/ni20041008.130308.htm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=b1149084
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=b1149084
Corrected formatting/usage for http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/sussex/6429723.stm
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=b1149084
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=b1149084
Corrected formatting/usage for http://present.brighton-hove.gov.uk/Published/C00000705/M00005841/AI00048462/%2420151104104014_008191_0034040_LibraryServiceReviewAppendix2.docxA.ps.pdf
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brightonandhovenews.org/2015/12/10/brighton-is-home-to-britains-fifth-most-visited-library/44199
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2005/feb/28/architecture.regeneration
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/jubilee-library-lands-prime-ministers-award-as-warm-up-to-stirling/586044.article
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1139701
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=b1149084
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.brighton-hove-rpml.org.uk/Libraries/sites/Jubilee/Pages/JubileeLibraryAwardWinning.aspx
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1024089.lovely_library_but_where_are_the_books/
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/1774458.Library_to_open_on_Sundays/
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111011151529/http://www.brighton-hove-rpml.org.uk/Libraries/sites/Jubilee/Pages/home.aspx to http://www.brighton-hove-rpml.org.uk/Libraries/sites/Jubilee/Pages/home.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Article tone

I think this article's tone almost a bit like an advertistment. There are too many sentances that seem to flatter and promote the library rather than use enclyclopedic language. I'll have a go to tone down the language a bit.Seaweed (talk) 19:29, 25 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've proof read and improved the tone, have added in current services of the library (so it isn't fully about the architecture/build) would anyone else like to read through and see if the tone is sufficient enough yet? Rhagfyr (talk) 14:31, 2 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excessive reliance on The New Encyclopaedia of Brighton (2010)

I've notied that there are a lot of references in the article that come from the 2010 version of The New Encyclopaedia of Brighton. It doesn't sound like a great idea for Wikipedia to rely on another encylopedia. I won't remove anything unless I can find better, alternative sources.Seaweed (talk) 16:49, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, but EncB is in fact more akin to a secondary source than a conventional teritary source, despite its (unfortunate?) name. Frankly I'm not convinced the work that has been done to this article is wholly necessary, but I will not rock the boat. (Incidentally any suggestion that the article "advertises" the library makes me smile wryly: I never fail to be disappointed by the poor layout, waste of space and weak selection of books there!) Hassocks5489 (Floreat Hova!) 17:42, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]