Talk:Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 02:34, 13 February 2011

Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art was nominated as a good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (February 6, 2011). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Architecture Start‑class Mid‑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
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Visual arts Start‑class

	Visual arts portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Visual arts, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of visual arts 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.Visual artsWikipedia:WikiProject Visual artsTemplate:WikiProject Visual artsvisual arts articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.

Template:Project Cornell

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 15:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: one found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 15:56, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
The article is not reasonably well written, it appears to be thrown together from information on the institution's website. Elementary mistakes of punctuation and capitalisation abound. The organisation of information is poor and the lead is too short and does not fully summarise the article.

~~The Architecture section appears to be a copyvio~~ We established that the other website copied from this article.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
One primary source supplies all but one of the sources.

One dead link found and tagged.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The whole article could do with expansion cited to independent reliable sources.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Reads like a tour guide
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):
~~File:Artmuseum22.jpg needs a better description on the file page than just "took it"~~
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
This is a straightforward fail. The nominator has been indefinitely blocked. perhaps someone else can sort it out and when it meets the GA criteria renominate. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Purported copyvio

This edit proposed that the article had copied text from http://www.campusdestinations.com/cornell/destination/503/Herbert-F-Johnson-Museum-of-Art.

I don't find the assertion to be credible for the following reasons:

The Wikipedia article provides other external sources for the information in contention, demonstrating that the author(s) were properly sourcing information;
The external source provides no information not present in the Wikipedia article;
The information given in the external source is not contiguous in the Wikipedia article;
The Wikipedia article often gives more specific and detailed information than the external source, for example, "over 32,000" vs. "over 30,000";
The external website appears to have copied or paraphrased material from Wikipedia in several other entries, such as the entry on the Cornell Dairy Bar (cf. Cornell Dairy);
The external website is not even a reliable source and seems to be cobbled together from a mishmash of other sources- for example, its entry on Morrill Hall conflates information about at least two structures.

In short, the external source appears to be a mixture of direct copying and paraphrasing from Wikipedia. (Thanks to Racepacket (talk · contribs) for bringing this situation for my attention.) —Bill Price (nyb) 02:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 {{Talk:Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art/GA1}}
+== Purported copyvio ==
+[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Herbert_F._Johnson_Museum_of_Art&action=historysubmit&diff=412362536&oldid=412360466 This edit] proposed that the article had copied text from [http://www.campusdestinations.com/cornell/destination/503/Herbert-F-Johnson-Museum-of-Art http://www.campusdestinations.com/cornell/destination/503/Herbert-F-Johnson-Museum-of-Art].
+I don't find the assertion to be credible for the following reasons:
+#The Wikipedia article provides other external sources for the information in contention, demonstrating that the author(s) were properly sourcing information;
+#The external source provides no information ''not'' present in the Wikipedia article;
+#The information given in the external source is ''not'' contiguous in the Wikipedia article;
+#The Wikipedia article often gives more specific and detailed information than the external source, for example, "over 32,000" vs. "over 30,000";
+#The external website appears to have copied or paraphrased material from Wikipedia in several other entries, such as the entry on the [http://www.campusdestinations.com/cornell/destination/499/Dairy-Bar Cornell Dairy Bar] (cf. [[Cornell Dairy]]);
+#The external website is ''not even a reliable source'' and seems to be cobbled together from a mishmash of other sources- for example, its entry on [http://www.campusdestinations.com/cornell/destination/505/Morrill-Hall Morrill Hall] conflates information about at least two structures.
+In short, the external source appears to be a mixture of direct copying and paraphrasing from Wikipedia.
+(Thanks to {{user|Racepacket}} for bringing this situation for my attention.) &mdash;[[User:Notyourbroom|Bill Price]] ([[User talk:Notyourbroom|nyb]]) 02:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)