The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
(b) 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);[2]
^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
^This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
^Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
^Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
^The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
There are tons of references, meticulously cited. Unfortunately the citation methods aren't entirely consistent within the article. Is it the case that this article is citing books one way, and periodicals in another? Having given it some thought, I'm not convinced that that is a stable solution for this article in the future. Update: This has been improved.
Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)
Includes inline citations to reliable sources, handled with care.
Pass
(c) (original research)
There are citations throughout, sometimes multiple citations for a single claim; even the Notes section has footnotes for every sentence. The photographs on Commons have reasonably transparent attribution with clear date stamps, etc.
Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)
Earwig says a violation is "unlikely" and in the few instances where there were 20+% matches, they generally turned out to be common phrases or long titles of books. Spotcheck of several other sources showed no evidence of close paraphrasing.
Pass
Broad in its coverage:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (major aspects)
Very thorough coverage of historical periods from 1765 to present. Interesting to view American history through the lens of this house (although it seemed like the Civil War just happened somewhere way in the distance). Also includes sections on its more recent history as a museum and a separate section on its architecture.
Pass
(b) (focused)
Article seems very focused on the history and architecture of the mansion, as well as its architecture and modern operation as a museum. Architecture sections for old buildings like this sometimes give me pause, because you need to make sure that claims made in older sources aren't presented as though they are necessarily currently true. But this seems to be carefully handled in that section.
Pass
Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
Notes
Result
Article is neutral in tone, covering centuries of various disputes and changes in ownership. Section on Eliza Jumel is covered sensitively without overegging her eccentricity.
Pass
Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
Comment
Result
Relatively new and no sign of edit warring or ongoing
Pass
Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
Criteria
Notes
Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)
The images are either CC BY-SA 4.0 (with significant contributions from Beyond My Ken and CaptJayRuffins and others) or Public Domain.
Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)
Would be better if every external shot of the mansion had a date indicated, given the long history of the building and significant changes (and deterioration) over time. (Not sure if I like look of the caption "(2014)" in parentheses in the infobox, but at least the year is stated there.) Update. This was fixed.
Thanks for the comments so far @Cielquiparle. Here are my responses:
For citation style, I generally put a {{cite book}} or {{cite report}} citation in the "Sources" section if two or more page ranges are cited. I've now moved all of the book and report cites to the Sources section regardless of how many times they're cited. All other types of citations remain in the "Citations" section.
For the captions, I've added some dates to the captions that didn't have them yet.
Thanks Epicgenius. I will give it a couple more read-throughs and likely pass soon. Your writing in general is so clear I don't really anticipate any issues. But if I had to make a picky comment, it's this sentence I don't like: He entered the house on the night of September 14–15, 1776; the exact date and time of his arrival is unclear. Do you mean the exact time of his arrival is unclear? Or do you mean the date is also unclear because it may have been before midnight or after midnight? If that's the case, I think it's enough to say "time" and not "date" because the date is right there. Otherwise I start wondering if "entering the house" is somehow different in meaning from "arrival", or if he might have arrived on another day completely (date unknown, possibly much earlier) but that the only record we have of his entrance into the house was September 14–15.) Cielquiparle (talk) 20:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Pass