Talk:Bartow–Pell Mansion/GA1

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

Nominator: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 01:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: CosXZ (talk · contribs) 17:01, 30 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Comments

Image and source review

• All images are good CosXZ (talk) 16:47, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• All references are styled well CosXZ (talk) 17:40, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Using a random number generator between 1-182 for a source check, will be checking 13 sources CosXZ (talk) 18:25, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  [78] Y

  [168] Y A classic source

  [58] Y Official government division

  [6] Y Couldn't access but, at that time of publication, the New York Herald Tribune had a very good reputation

  [166] Y A classic source

  [25] N I am not sure about this source even if is isn't a SPS per RoySmith below

  Twomey was a borough historian who wrote several books about the Bronx. Epicgenius (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Feel way more comfortable calling this source a reliable source CosXZ (talk) 22:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC) [reply]

  I've always been cautious of using Twomey's books as RS. Yes, he wrote a lot about Bronx history, but it's mostly WP:SPS. His books are published by Arcadia Publishing, which may not be strictly a Vanity press, but pretty close to it. I don't see anything on their website that makes me think they provide anything in the way of editorial oversight or fact checking. Twomey is clearly more reliable than some rando blogger, but I'm still hesitant to use his stuff once we're talking GA level. RoySmith (talk) 15:54, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Fair enough. I've removed his book from the article, since it's redundant to other sources, anyway. Epicgenius (talk) 19:57, 14 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  [23] Y Isn't a SPS which is good and the author has a street named after him so, that means he has done good works

  [182] Y A classic source

  [163] Y A classic source

  [118] Y Good author

  [27] Y I don't trust a newspaper that published a Hoax

  The hoax was published 80 years before the newspaper article in question was published. I will remove it if there's further evidence that the Sun consistently published hoaxes even through the 20th century. However, in general, newspapers from the early 19th century were less accurate than today, and they occasionally published embellished or false articles to drum up attention. Epicgenius (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Okay CosXZ (talk) 22:12, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think The Sun has redeemed itself CosXZ (talk) 22:22, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  [147] Y Official government division

  [61] Y I looked up Lockwood Barr and the search results showed a singer not a historian

  According to this blog (which I am not using as a source), he wrote about Pelham's history in the mid-20th century. Epicgenius (talk) 00:08, 3 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ok I feel great callin' this a reliable source CosXZ (talk) 01:10, 13 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Overal this passes 2B CosXZ (talk) 22:44, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Earwig

Earwig Shows 18.7% CosXZ (talk) 16:47, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

2nd opinion

@Epicgenius: I am requesting for 2nd opinion for the rest of the criteria. Cos ^{(X + Z)} 04:20, 18 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]