Talk:Soaring Stones/Archive 1
Appearance
Source
[edit]This faculty member's profile mentions the sculpture, but I don't think it is worth incorporating into the article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 01:39, 19 April 2015 (UTC)
Should this article be included in Category:2007 sculptures? It was first installed in Portland, but was later installed under a slightly different name in Washington in 2007. ---Another Believer (Talk) 03:31, 24 September 2015 (UTC)
- IMO, it's not a 2007 work; even though the piece was re-installed slightly differently and re-titled, it's still ostensibly the same materials arranged in the same way, and doesn't constitute a newer work. Unless it's significantly different to the original and a reliable source describes it as a 2007 work, I think it's still a 1990 work. Just my 2d worth. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
- @Baffle gab1978: This is very helpful, thank you. I won't add the category unless others advocate otherwise. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:27, 27 September 2015 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Soaring Stones/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Wilhelmina Will (talk · contribs) 06:49, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
GA criteria
[edit]- (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
- (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation
- (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)
- (c) it contains no original research
- (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic
- (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style)
- (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content
- (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions
- Thank you very much for your time and assistance. Much appreciated! ---Another Believer (Talk) 18:38, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
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.