Talk:World War I Memorial (East Providence, Rhode Island)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 02:58, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do this one, it has been nominated for quite a long time and deserves a close look. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:58, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attributeabc	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	this is the only area on which this article does not meet the GA criteria, and it will fail without it. There are a number of questions that go unaddressed by the article, including who came up with the idea, who paid for the memorial, who chaired the committee, who Summerall was, whether the memorial is used for commemorative activities (and when), if it has been maintained (and by whom). Have a look at South African War Memorial (South Australia) for an example of a memorial article that has sufficient detail to meet this criteria.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	~~I am placing this article on hold for seven days for criteria 3a to be met. If it is not met, unfortunately I will have to fail the article~~Failing on criteria 3a, I encourage you to re-nominate it if the coverage can be improved, I would be glad to review it again

You are asking me to provide something that the National Register of Historic Places doesn't even provide OR the book reviewing it as part of the sculpture theme - its not unknown, as you suspect, but it would be a primary document that I would have to obtain from the city itself. No worries, it is not an unreasonable request and I know that such records likely exist - mind you I have found gaps in others. I'll contact the city on Monday. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 09:08, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What about local papers? American Legion? Veterans of Foreign Wars? There must be some news coverage of events conducted there, and the dedication. By the way, it is an excellent statute, I've rarely seen one as good, and I see a lot of memorials. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 09:17, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I am looking, wasn't coming up with any online searches, but I figure that something must exist on it. I just didn't find it in the two sources which typically would have it, the last time someone dug up something really obscure at Brown for the Columbus (Providence, Rhode Island) one. Of course, I made a trip to the 1893 World's Fair archives two days back and got some great information and I hope I can get a few contacts to help piece together more history of these NRHP statues. They are pretty rare and poorly documented it seems, but I'll do what I can! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 12:35, 24 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since it was the city who originally came up with the idea, it probably maintains the memorial. You may find something on http://www.eastprovidenceri.net/ - I have worked on other articles about war memorials and the city meeting notes often discuss plans regarding upkeep, expansion, etc... and may provide more background info. The city's library may be a help, too, with old newspaper articles, etc. that give more information. Good luck!--CaroleHenson (talk) 06:36, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Going to renomination since nearly a year has passed, but the added background I added abotu Montana's work is best. If anyone has more information I'd be pleased, but given that several leads turned into dead ends. Specifically, being pointed to the NRHP nomination for "more information" being a dead end. Unfortunately even Newspapers.com did not have anything more substantial on this work - the Brooklyn focus (naturally) gave better background that I've since added. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:27, 17 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]