Jump to content

Talk:The Pioneer Mother Memorial/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sources

[edit]

---Another Believer (Talk) 17:15, 19 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

---Another Believer (Talk) 00:47, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Holding the barrel?

[edit]

I think the Smithsonian's description is slightly in error. The woman appears to be holding not the barrel, but the forearm of the rifle.

Also, just wanted to point out the pioneer mother statue in Denver is similar, with a mother holding a child in one arm and a rifle in the other. It doesn't seem to have an article yet but it is at Media related to Pioneer Monument by Frederick William MacMonnies at Wikimedia Commons. — Brianhe (talk) 04:23, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Brianhe: Thank you for pointing this out. I removed "barrel" from the article, so now it just says she is holding a flintlock rifle. ---Another Believer (Talk) 14:11, 6 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

@Another Believer: I keep seeing this article waiting for a review at GAC. I'll tell you what stops me from doing a review on it: :Commons Freedom of panorama United States. The images are wonderful, but the way I read the FoA: For public artwork installed between 1923 and 1977 inclusive, use {{PD-US-no notice}} or {{PD-US-not renewed}}. I don't know if that's any other potential reviewer's concern, but it seems to me those wonderful images should have a notice on each one. Your thoughts? — Maile (talk) 21:28, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Maile66: Sorry, I guess I can request their deletion at Commons. I wouldn't let the images stop you from completing a review, if you are interested. The images are a very simple fix. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:37, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Another Believer: Maybe you misunderstood my intent?? I'm just suggesting you pick one of those tags, either "no notice" or "not renewed", and put it on each image at commons. Stick those on the images at Commons, and I'll do the review for you. OK? — Maile (talk) 21:48, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I did misunderstand. I am not sure either of those tags are applicable, though. The Smithsonian Institution entry says the work was copyrighted when it was surveyed by the Save Outdoor Sculpture! program. ---Another Believer (Talk) 23:26, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If these images must be deleted from Commons, perhaps the first two could be uploaded here at English Wikipedia under fair use? Seems it may be appropriate to illustrate both sides of the memorial, especially since the reverse side has its own artwork. ---Another Believer (Talk) 00:58, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe someone else can answer that question. I'm not familiar enough with all the details of Non-free media use. — Maile (talk) 20:01, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, ok. Well, feel free to take on the review if you are comfortable, otherwise I can wait for someone else once the image issue is resolved. ---Another Believer (Talk) 21:35, 21 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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:The Pioneer Mother Memorial/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Eteethan (talk · contribs) 13:31, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Rate Attribute 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. Plenty of refs.
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). All sources are reliable.
2c. it contains no original research.
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. Checked using CopyVio detector.
3. Broad in its coverage:
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. Has all the history and important information.
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Stays focused on topic.
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. Checked and passed.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. No recent edits by other users.
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. Fixed.
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. All images are of good quality and have captions.
7. Overall assessment. The image problem is fixed, so we're good to go.

This is a very nice article. It is just the right length for this subject.

Thank you! Happy to address any questions or concerns you may have. ---Another Believer (Talk) 17:11, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Another Believer: Take a look here. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think your photos are copyrighted. However, this article passes all other criteria. Eteethan(talk) 20:20, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean to say that the photos are of a copyrighted work? ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:28, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I have nominated all four images in the Commons Category for deletion. I will re-upload two of them here at English Wikipedia under fair use.  Done ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:33, 25 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Update: I have nominated all four images at Commons for deletion. I re-uploaded two here at English Wikipedia, which are now displayed in the article. I think this should take care of all concerns. Assuming the Commons images are deleted, and therefore the Commons category as well, I will update this article accordingly to not display the Commons box at the bottom. Thank you for taking time to review this article. ---Another Believer (Talk) 20:44, 25 January 2016 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Pioneer_Mother_Memorial/Archive_1&oldid=803175011"