Talk:Wemyss Ware/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 04:32, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewing. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:32, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Disamb is fine and the references are not 404ed, however there is an issue of chief importance.

wemysswarebook.com does not appear to be a reliable source. It is a Wordpress blog with no apparent editorial control and does not actively cite its sources. The article's reliance on it is concerning.

I'm a bit conflicted about this. This is how it describes itself, and it is far and away the most comprehensive resource - it can be reconcliled with facts found elsewhere, and even though it is now not the sole reference for any fact, it is where the overarching narative comes from. It isn't an RS for the purpose of Wikipedia, but it is the best source - tricky one.

http://familytree.dearnley.com/reports/g0/p929.htm - does not seem to be reliable either. Explain how this meets WP:RS

Removed

http://www.piggybankpage.co.uk/wemyss_plichta.htm - Seems borderline - but it appears that much of the information comes from other sources already in the article. How does this meet WP:RS?

I could remove it, but I think it is OK. It isn't used as the sole reference for anything either.

http://www.oldandsold.com/articles/article149.shtml - Same, but more because the source is unclear and yet it copies an article without disclosing the origin.

I couldn't find the article anywhere, so that's been removed.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=69oHHc8xhww - The first YouTube video being used properly in quite awhile! Yay.

I'll do a deeper check once you respond to these issues. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:49, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry Chris - I might not be able to get around to this in time. I'll see what I can do tomorrow, but I've not been here for a while. James^x12345 22:42, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be away for awhile myself - no worries. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:09, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Couple more issues. The article is reliant on wemysswarebook.com which is a Wordpress site that has no editorial oversight and could be very well questioned on its sourcing and practices. The problem is that these claims are not sourced and not documented in such a way as to provide verification and it is still - at its heart - non-peer reviewed source that is the basis for much of the article. The blog does however highlight sources which I would expect you to consult yourself - directly, in writing this article.
“Wemyss Ware: the development of a decorative Scottish pottery c. 1883-1930”, The Scottish Art Council, 18 September – 10 October 1971 (exhibition guide).
“Wemyss Ware; c1880-1930”, Exhibition by Rogers de Rin at Sotheby’s Belgravia in London, 17-23 November 1976 (exhibition guide).
“Wemyss Ware: a decorative Scottish Pottery”, by Peter Davis & Robert Rankine, Scottish Academic Press – 1986, ISBN 0 7073 0354 0 (out of print).
“Wemyss Ware Pottery: The Devonshire Years” by Brian Adams, David Thorn & Esther Weeks, B&T Thorn and Son, 1990, ISBN 0 9515 5670 3 (out of print).
“Plichta and the Elton Pottery”, Brian Adams, B&T Thorn and Son, 1992 (out of print).
“Kirkcaldy Potteries”, by Carol McNeill, Fife Publicity – 1998, ISBN 0 9534 6860.
“Bovey Tracey Potteries: Guide and Marks”, by Brian Adams, House of Marbles – 2005, ISBN 0 9549 7440 9.

This gives no less then two dedicated books that should be heavily used in making sure this article hits upon the broad categories. The main issue would be the incomplete history and the complete lack of writing on the products and the techniques. It is good to have an article like this, but it feels a mere C because we know that the two chief sources for data have not been consulted. Not that I feel this is an adequate comparison - I've gotten more details on essentially undocumented and often hastily produced silent films that were destroyed 80 years ago to reclaim their silver content. You simply have not even begun to scrape the bottom of the barrel and a few inquiries note that Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll and the Countess of Wemyss (possibly Mary Constance Charteris (née Wyndham), Countess of Wemyss (1862-1937), Hostess, member of the Souls, daughter of Hon. Percy Wyndham and wife of 11th Earl of Wemyss) designed pottery. None of the produced items are detailed, much less there popularity as extended internationally - or at least America. In short.... I do not think it meets "broad" in its coverage - I am not asking for anything extensive, but I've already found references that royalty was involved in Wemyss Ware in 5 minutes of searching. The fact it is not mentioned in the article represents a problem. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:14, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think I'll withdraw this GAN. I don't have the interest or knowledge to do this article justice. James^x12345 17:41, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]