Talk:DuSable Black History Museum and Education Center/GA1

DuSable Museum of African American History Review

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

I will be reviewing this article in celebration of Martin Luther King Jr. Day. The review should be complete by tonight (January 19). If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 17:36, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   See comments in Prose section below.

   See comments in MoS section below.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   See comments in References section below.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

   No problems here.

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

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

   The only comment I have about the images is that the caption for the image displaying the Harold Washington Wing is dated. It's no longer considered "new", is it? It's close to two decades old. Also, I am moving the image down so that it is near the appropriate text.

   Removed "new"

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

I truly apologize that this took so long. There's one prose issue and a few reference issues that should be taken care of and then I'll pass the article. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 03:42, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Prose

• In the "Collection" section, du Sable's last name is spelled as one word, but is spelled as two words in the "History" section. This needs to be consistent with whatever the accurate spelling of his name is.
  • As I understand it, his name has a space and the name of the museum does not. I think I missed the point you made here at first. It is fixed now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:43, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

Lead

• ...by Dr. Margaret Taylor-Burroughs, her husband Charles Burroughs... and Dr. Burroughs and other founders... Are you speaking of Dr. Taylor-Burroughs' husband, Charles? If so, it should be "her husband Dr. Charles Burroughs". Are you speaking of Dr. Taylor-Burroughs? If so, it should be "Dr. Taylor-Burroughs and other founders"
  • I have no information that her husband is also a doctor. Even his Jet magazine obituary makes no reference to him as a doctor.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I saw the revision. I was just confused about who you were speaking of. I would have simply referred to her as Dr. Taylor-Burroughs or Taylor-Burroughs throughout the article. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 17:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
      • In the instance that you mention it should be changed, but other instances of Burroughs are probably best left alone.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:24, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
        • Fair enough. I see what you're saying. The only other place where confusion may occur is in this sentence: ...which was located across the street, founded by Burroughs and dedicated by Eleanor Roosevelt... in the "History" section. Which Burroughs are you speaking of? Margaret or Charles? Or both Margaret and Charles? – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 00:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
          • Changed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:40, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
• It is located at 740 E. 56th Place at the corner of Cottage Grove Avenue in Washington Park community area on the South Side of Chicago. Is "in Washington Park community area" really necessary in this sentence?
  • If you are not from Chicago (and don't know where Cottage Grove or 56th place are) and want to know what part of the city it is in, including the community area is designed to help you.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Fair enough. I'll strike it. I revised the sentence to fix a grammatical error and make it sound smoother. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 17:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• I believe the sentence telling the location of the museum should be at the end of the lead. The last sentence would run more smoothly if it were directly after the sentence explaining who founded the museum. If you could find a way to revise this paragraph, I think it would sound a lot better.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:55, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

History

• ...following the work of Margaret and Charles Burroughs... One of them is a doctor, according to the lead. Also, Margaret's surname is Taylor-Burroughs, right? It should be consistent throughout the article.
  • She is referred to by several names. The article has been changed to reflect that.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:14, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
    • See my comment above. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 17:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
      • I think when referring to him or the family name it should just be Burroughs.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
        • Okay, I'll strike it. Just keep in mind that if you wish to take this to FA, this may be a complaint. But, it may not. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 00:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
• During the 1960s, the museum and the across the street neighboring South Side Community Art Center, which was founded by Burroughs and dedicated by Eleanor Roosevelt, formed an African American cultural corridor. This sentence sounds entirely awkward. Is there any chance of revising it?
  • How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:17, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• This original museum site had previously been boardinghouse for African American railroad workers. During which time period?
  • The source does not say.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:18, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I'll strike it, but this might be something worth looking into if you have time. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 17:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• The DuSable Museum quickly filled a void caused by limited cultural resources then available to African Americans in Chicago and became an educational resource for African American history and culture as well as a focal point in Chicago for black social activism. This would be better broken up as two sentences.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:20, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I edited this a little bit. Let me know what you think. Strike this off if it's acceptable. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 17:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Looks O.K. I struck the item.
• ...as well as a focal point in Chicago for black social activism. The museum has served as focal point... Watch out for redundancies.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:21, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• ...the Chicago Park District gave the use of a park administration building... What do you think about "the Chicago Park District donated the usage"?
  • Sounds fine to me.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:27, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• The DuSable Museum is the oldest and largest caretaker of black American culture in the United States and over its long history, it has expanded as necessary to reflect the increased interest in black culture. Again, I think this would sound better if broken up into two sentences.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• The museum was the eighth Museum located on Park District land. Again, watch for redundancies.
  • fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:30, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• ...due to historical obstacles to other forms of historical documentation. Another example of redundancy.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:39, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Collection

• The DuSable has developed its collection largely from private gifts. The collection contains... Redundancy.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
• The collection contains United States slavery-era relics, nineteenth- and twentieth-century artifacts, archival materials such as the diaries of sea explorer Captain Harry Dean, and letters, photographs, and memorabilia of scholar W. E. B. Du Bois, sociologist St. Clair Drake, and poet Langston Hughes. This sentence is a little convoluted. What are the chances of revising it?
  • I tried.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:42, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Looks okay. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 00:21, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Facilities

• The US$4 million expansion was funded... There is a link to "US" here, but not earlier in the article. Any reason why?
  • fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
• Do you know what's going on with the hidden writing in this section?
  • there was a lot of unsourced material from prior versions. Feel free to delete this stuff if you like.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:10, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Well, it's hidden, so it's no big deal. I'll keep it in there so that you may work on it later if you like. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 18:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

MoS

• There are three instances of red links in this article. I suggest unlinking them until a page is created.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:07, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

History

• ...including Boston, Los Angeles, and Philadelphia. These are not linked, but other cities in the article are. Any reasons why?
  • linked.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:04, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
    • I fixed the other red link (in the infobox). This is done. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 18:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
• ...the desk of Ida B. Wells and the violin of Paul Laurence Dunbar. Does "violin" need to be linked? "Desk" isn't. Also, not everyone knows who these people were known for. A short description (e.g., "the violin of poet Paul Laurence Dunbar" and "the desk of activist Ida B. Wells") would be nice.
  • I don't think we should assume a reader knows which instrument the violin is (if they recognize it as an instrument). Personally, I can not remember whether the viola or the violin is the small one.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Okay. Good explanation. I used to be a musician and I have to remember that some people do not necessarily know all the instruments. Blah, blah, blah, I'll strike it. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 18:59, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

References

• You should probably incorporate some of the references in the lead.
  • There are two ways to write a WP:LEAD: either fully cited or fully uncited with all citations placed in the main body text.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:54, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Okay. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 02:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
• References from the Chicago Sun-Times require a subscription to read the entire article. Any chance of finding references that do not require subscriptions?
  • done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

History

• What is reference 2 (the HistoryMakers article) citing in the first paragraph of the "History" section? As far as I'm concerned, reference 3 (the article from the official website) covers this entire sentence.
  • That is a WP:SPS, we need backup.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
    • You're correct. My apologies. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 03:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• The museum was originally located on the ground floor of the Burroughs' home at 3806 S. Michigan Avenue. Any reason for the 3 references at the end of this sentence? Reference 5 (the Chicago Tribune excerpt) covers this.
  • Aren't multiple refs better than a single ref. Is there policy to the contrary. Links go dead all the time.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:39, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Multiple references are usually only necessary for information that would be seen as highly controversial and/or very likely to be challenged. Using more than one reference unnecessarily can clutter the article. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 02:42, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
      • I have never heard the clutter argument for fewer than five refs for a claim and only in articles that have a preponderance of heavily cited claims. More is better up to about five from my experience.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
        • I still find the use of all of the references unnecessary. But you made a very convincing argument. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 03:37, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• In 1968, the museum was renamed for Jean Baptiste Pointe du Sable, a Haitian fur trader and the first non-Native-American permanent settler in Chicago. The reference says that he was Afro-French. I realize that he is Haitian, but we need to keep with what the source says or find another source stating that he is Haitian.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
• In 1971, the Chicago Park District donated the usage of a park administration building in Washington Park as the site for the museum. Any reason for multiple references here?
  • With the rate at which links go dead, two corroborating refs is a good thing, isn't it?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:23, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
    • Agreed. But one of the references is from the official DuSable Museum website. I highly doubt it will go dead. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 02:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
      • Yes, but this makes it a WP:SPS requiring backup if possible.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:53, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
• ...named in honor of the late Mayor Harold Washington, the first African-American mayor of Chicago. I would find a reference stating that Washington was the first African American mayor of Chicago.
  • NYTimes added.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:30, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
• Although it is the only Chicago museum exhibiting African American culture... The reference at the end of this sentence does not support this piece of information.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:36, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Collection

• Almost the entire second paragraph in this section is practically identical to the writing of the source. I highly suggest you rewrite this part of the article.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 08:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
    • This is still kind of iffy. I'll strike it for now, but suggest that a better revision be made in the future. – Ms. Sarita ^Confer 16:47, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Facilities

• The museum has a 466-seat auditorium, which is part of the new wing... Not seeing this in the source (reference 6, the Encyclopedia of Chicago source). Am I missing it? Or was this reference accidentally put here, since the information is sourced at the end of the sentence (reference 4, the New York Times article).
  • Yes wrong ref.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
• The museum's funding is dependent upon a Chicago Park District tax levy. The source says the museum receives partial support.
  • Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:31, 28 January 2009 (UTC)