Talk:David Macaulay

Lead edit

In response to a tag on this page I have edited the lead in an effort to make it more concise and succinct. I have removed the tag as well. Feel free to further improve on my efforts. Cheers. Mdukas (talk) 20:26, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on David Macaulay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090818020041/http://www.vermontlifecatalog.com:80/backissues/guide/guide05-09.html to http://www.vermontlifecatalog.com/backissues/guide/guide05-09.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 01:07, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on David Macaulay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090216151321/http://www.macfound.org:80/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.2070789/apps/nl/content2.asp?content_id=%7B956CCD18-8768-44B2-9F19-0998EF94C9DC%7D&notoc=1 to http://www.macfound.org/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.2070789/apps/nl/content2.asp?content_id=%7B956CCD18-8768-44B2-9F19-0998EF94C9DC%7D&notoc=1
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.literature.at/viewer.alo?objid=14769&viewmode=fullscreen&scale=3.33&rotate=&page=105

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:34, 8 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on David Macaulay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.macfound.org/site/c.lkLXJ8MQKrH/b.2070789/apps/nl/content2.asp?content_id=%7B956CCD18-8768-44B2-9F19-0998EF94C9DC%7D&notoc=1
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928014959/http://www.cincinnatiartmuseum.org/absolutenm/templates/ArtTempNews.aspx?articleid=523&zoneid=90 to http://www.cincinnatiartmuseum.org/absolutenm/templates/ArtTempNews.aspx?articleid=523&zoneid=90

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:07, 6 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on David Macaulay. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061004014922/http://www.thencbla.org/biopages/biomacaulay.html to http://www.thencbla.org/biopages/biomacaulay.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061004014059/http://www.thencbla.org/boardinterviews/macaulayinterview.html to http://www.thencbla.org/boardinterviews/macaulayinterview.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070707003827/http://www.dixon.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3 to http://www.dixon.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=3

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:48, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:David Macaulay/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Barkeep49 (talk · contribs) 23:03, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Needs large copyediting effort around organization needed. No major grammar issues but writing is not currently to standard (e.g. numerous 1 sentence paragraphs disconnected from other content)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Editorial effort needs to be made to bring attention to what is noteworthy and to place it in context of less noteworthy efforts.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Given other issues, sources were not looked at to evaluate any possible issues with NPOV.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Discussion

@Occono: Black & White blew my mind when I read it as a child. Happy to see this nominated. Will start review in the next couple of days. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 23:04, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

I actually wasn't even familiar with him, but I was just improving it after watching an LGR video about The Way Things Work CD-ROM and ended up being able to cite nearly everything on the page, so I felt motivated to nominate it just because I somehow ended up spending the day doing that. That confessed, I now want to help improve it further to get it to GA status if possible, and I plan to actually find his books now. Incidentally, the actions taken over GDPR regulations by some outlets are making it harder to source articles when you aren't American, I've discovered. I also don't have JSTOR and other database access now that I've left college, sadly.--occono (talk) 23:29, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

@Occono: So after reading through the article, I can tell you that it is a fair distance away from GA quality and cannot pass it at this time. As an example of a GA quality writer I can point you to Margaret Atwood a GA review I recently completed. I hope you take the time to improve it - given Macaulay's prominance I would hope the sourcing would be there. You mentioned issues as a European reviewer. Have you thought about exploring WP:LIBRARY and requesting access to sources that way? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 16:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Okay, results noted. As my contributions were just finding references for what was already there (see the edit history) I'm happy that that part was reviewed well. I can try rewriting the article over the next few days to make it more readable and well-written.--occono (talk) 16:42, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

@Occono: Yes that was great. It seems like, however, more information needs to be brought into the article in order to make it complete to GA standards. Thanks again for your efforts here. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:31, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Potential Sources

As I work on Black and White (picture book) here are sources I found which could be useful in this article:

• Profile of Macaulay by Chris Van Allsburg