Talk:Booker T. Washington State Park (West Virginia)/GA1

GA Review

edit
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Ceranthor (talk · contribs) 19:32, 28 February 2018 (UTC)Reply


I'm planning to review this in the next day or so. ceranthor 19:32, 28 February 2018 (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.
  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).
  2c. it contains no original research.
  2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
  3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
  3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.
  6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
  7. Overall assessment.
Lead
  • Too long for such a short article.
  • I think the fourth paragraph could be culled a good amount. Some of the history of the park could be combined into the previous paragraph, but the background of Washington Carver isn't necessary in the lead
Prose
  • "He and his wife (a freedwoman) operated a plantation near the park's location," - what's her name?
  • "Booker T. Washington State Park was located just outside the unincorporated community of Institute, Kanawha County, West Virginia," - "located" is not needed
  • "Situated on 7.43 acres (3 ha) at an elevation of 732 feet (223 m)[1] on the northern edge of the Kanawha River valley" - seems like an awfully long phrase; could probably be separated into two sentences?
  • "This region of the Kanawha River valley was granted to George Washington, recently returned from fighting in the French and Indian War, following Virginia Lieutenant Governor Robert Dinwiddie's Proclamation of 1754.[18][19]" - should definitely clarify what this means
  • Generally, very very good writing. Engaging and interesting, and well-organized.
References
  • Check out. All seem reliable.

More comments hopefully later today. ceranthor 19:38, 1 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

Images
  • Booker T Washington checks out.
  • Lodge picture is good.
  • Rest also look fine.

My last remaining comment, more of a question, is whether the first sentence should read "Booker T. Washington State Park was a former state park near the community of Institute in the U.S. state of West Virginia" rather than "is". Thoughts? ceranthor 17:52, 3 March 2018 (UTC)Reply

  • Ceranthor, thank you so much again for taking the time to perform this GAR. And thank you for addressing this issue. I went back and forth regarding this wording in the lede, but I chose to go with “is a former” in present tense because it is in a present state of non-existence (for lack of a better way of phrasing this). Saying “was a former” almost implies that it used to be a former state park. What would you think about restating it as thus: “was a state park.” Please also let me know if you have any other outstanding issues with the article that I can address in the meantime. Once again, thank you for taking the time to review this article! — West Virginian (talk) 13:01, 5 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
  • Ceranthor, I just wanted to take this opportunity to touch base with you to see if you had any outstanding suggestions for further improvement. Again, I appreciate your selection and review of this article for GA status. I also have another GAN for Morgan Morgan Monument, so if you have time, I would really appreciate your subject matter expertise and guidance for that article as well. Thank you again for taking the time to engage in this GA review. — West Virginian (talk) 13:44, 7 March 2018 (UTC)Reply
Hi West Virginian, I think the article's ready to pass. I'll have to come back later today. ceranthor 13:08, 14 March 2018 (UTC)Reply