Talk:William the Silent (statue)/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 21:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll review. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:17, 3 March 2014 (UTC)

First off, thank you for writing about this. I laughed out loud, literally, at the fact Dr. Turck hid this grand statue in his labratory's basement, and the folklorist commenting that "he hasn't yet whistled." Thank you for using the citation template where the page numbers appear next to the ref number; I'm reviewing another article where there's a good two dozen different entries in the references pointing to the same book. But more than anything, thank you for this lovely balance of narrative and facts.

Acquisition and donation

  • I would switch the link to be 428 Lafayette Street; as it is now, one can easily presume the linked to article is solely on the building, that it's on the Heritage Register or something.
  • Reply: I noticed your edit on that earlier today and agree with that rationale entirely. It was something I considered when I wrote it, and was mixed on both options and leaned toward including the 428 for aesthetics (although in hindsight, your rationale is far more sensible and logical).--ColonelHenry (talk) 06:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • The sentence beginning "While Turck was having dinner" ends with a space between the two references.
  • Fixed - I think I fixed this before I read your GA comments. It was one of those things that nagged me every time I saw it, and for a while now, but I'd forget about it while adding something else.--ColonelHenry (talk) 06:26, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Involvement in campus life

  • The first issue of any great matter: you say the graduation ceremonies have been held elsewhere since 2008. The two references for that sentence are from 1972 and 2005.
  • Fixed - I was supposed to put another ref for the source from footnote 1 (which states "More students ventured into Voorhees Mall and were acquainted with the statue when Rutgers College held its graduation there, Frusciano said. But the ceremony was moved to the stadium back in 2007..."). Ref for fn.1 has been placed on that sentence.--ColonelHenry (talk) 06:46, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


  • Does the Smithsonian just go around cataloguing random public art installations, or is there some deeper connection to this work?
  • Reply: The Smithsonian did (and continues to do) several a comprehensive catalogues and subject-indices of art in America museums, public statuary, etc. and this just happened to be one of many statues in NJ that they catalogued back in 1994--and one of two in the country of William. Based on what I've seen of the Art Inventories Catalogues, it wasn't a random assortment, it is very comprehensive.--ColonelHenry (talk) 06:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)


  • There's a template with code in it, that causes a complete break in content... perhaps {{-}}? I'm offline, so I can't test. Why I mention it, at my screen resolution, the dog detail breaks into the gallery section, causing strange alignment between the two sets of images. Trivial, yes, but my schooling was in graphic design.
  • Done and reply: I more familiar with the {{clear}} template and don't see much of a difference now that I've looked at both of them and have to read up on anything regarding their differences. Accordingly, I've inserted the "clear" template at the end of the "Description" section. I haven't found any policy on those type of breaks, so I've always been cautious to use them in articles (different renderings with various font sizes and screen resolutions would make it unwieldy) but I see the need for some sort of break to prevent the image creeping into the subsequent section and throwing it off.--ColonelHenry (talk) 06:16, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Further reply - I added a brief paragraph regarding location information to the Description section which might have otherwise solved the image-jamming.--ColonelHenry (talk) 15:31, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

I'm loving this article, and the fact it even includes an archival citation a fact that many writers would have tried to slip past uncited. (Why isn't Willie in the template at the bottom? Yes, Voorhees Mall is, but this deserves to get the in-bound linking.) -- Zanimum (talk) 13:17, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Reply Many thanks for your enthusiasm regarding my work, I'm glad to see you enjoyed it. I actually reached out to the Holland Society and to the Rutgers and New Brunswick Theological Seminary archivists for information to prepare this article--I find myself emailing archivists and research librarians a lot for work here on Wikipedia and on book projects I've been labouring to complete. As for the Rutgers template--I'm actually sandboxing a massive reorganisation of that template that I plan to unveil in a week or two that includes William. --ColonelHenry (talk) 06:22, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
  • Added to the current template--and he will be on the next version of the template coming soon.--ColonelHenry (talk) 14:51, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Apologies for the delay, a very solid GA! -- Zanimum (talk) 16:07, 7 March 2014 (UTC)