Talk:American Museum of Ceramic Art

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on American Museum of Ceramic Art. 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/20150530003754/http://studio.amoca.org/ to http://studio.amoca.org/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• 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) 11:28, 11 October 2016 (UTC)

Article evaluation: American Museum of Ceramic Art

Article evaluation: American Museum of Ceramic Art

1.) Notes:

   - Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
       Most everything is relevant except for a few random pieces of information. An example would be how it was included that Colette Wilson was a childhood friend of Shirley Temple. 

   - Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
       The most recent date in the references section is from 2015. Considering it is 2019, I am sure that there is more information out there now about more recent exhibitions and any changes to the collections. 

   - What else could be improved?
       Under the "Helen and Roger Porter Resource Library" section, there could be more detailed information regarding what books it actually contains instead of just giving a vast overview. 

   - Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position?
       This article seems to be very neutral. It only states the facts and steers clear from any qualifying statements. 

   - Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
       The histories regarding certain individuals who contributed to the museum seem to be overly explained than the actual history of the museum itself and details about the museum today seem to be missing. 

   - Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
       The sources all seem to appear legitimate and reliable. There are even links to the website of the actual museum and different elements that pertain to the article, such as the museum's mission statement.

   - Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
       It appears that the sources are only listed at the end instead of being directly referred to throughout the article.  

2.) Checking the talk page:

   - What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
       The only conversations are regarding additional references and new links that should be updated (and were) to the article. 

   - How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
       This article is a C-class low importance article and is a part of the following WikiProjects: Museums, Visual Arts, United States, and California.  

   - How does the way Wikipedia discusses this topic differ from the way we've talked about it in class?
       We have not talked about this subject or any other ceramic museums in class. Frankly, I wasn't even aware that there were strictly ceramics museums. 

3.) Question:

       What is the museum up to now? Why aren't there any more relevant sources than the ones from 2015? 

Hhorn117 (talk) 03:07, 30 January 2019 (UTC)