Talk:Ed Westcott
Latest comment: 8 years ago by BrineStans in topic External links modified
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ed Westcott article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | Ed Westcott has been listed as one of the Warfare good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: August 1, 2015. (Reviewed version). |
| This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 | A fact from Ed Westcott appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 February 2011 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|  |
Manhattan Project photos
editARE his MP photos public domain? I realize he was a contractor for the gov, but then there is also this thing about national labs versus DOE (read the warning on the DOE template) and he was at a national lab.TCO (talk) 17:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
- The situation certainly is confusing. For many years, his photos were published without identifying the photographer -- they were "US government" photos. It's my understanding that his work was born "government property" and is public domain. He was a federal government employee for most of his career -- not a contractor. He was not an employee of Oak Ridge National Laboratory, which is/was actually only one of several government facilities and operations in Oak Ridge -- and ORNL didn't actually exist as such until after the war. --Orlady (talk) 19:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Ed Westcott/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ian Rose (talk · contribs) 21:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Should be able to get to this in the next couple of days. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Toolbox checker
- No dablinks
- Some EL issues, see below.
Prose/structure/detail
- Reads well, hardly changed a thing in my copyedit.
- I think you could reconsider the necessity of some links, e.g. photographer, camera, newspaper, etc, but not a showstopper.
Referencing
- Links for the following footnotes seem to be dead or dying:
- 1
- 8
- 11
- 13
- 14
- Re. FN11, not sure we're encouraged to use blogs but as I can't access the site I don't know just what it looks like.
Images
- All licensing checks out.
- Format-wise, there is a fair bit of sandwiching from all the pictures so I wonder if shifting a few to a gallery at the end might be better, but again not a showstopper.
Summary -- really enjoyed this one, I guess loving photography as well as history helps... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:21, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- I have cut back the necessary links, and removed a couple of duplicates. I would have repaired the link rot early if I had known the article would be reviewed so soon. The links in sports articles have a half-life of just a few months, so they usually decay waiting in the queue. I submitted this one as a MilHist article because I couldn't see an obvious slot for a photographer, so of course it gets reviewed straight away. Anyhow, the sports articles give good practice, I have have repaired them all straight away. Moved some of the images into a gallery to reduce the clutter (and added two more). Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:53, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, the links all work and I think the layout is much improved with some images moved to a gallery. Just one last thing, has Children of the Manhattan Project considered a reliable source for other articles? I didn't spot the editorial policy and it just looked a bit amateurish/enthusiast... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
- I've replaced it with other sources. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
- Changes look good (I might've said known for "Manhattan Project photography" instead of just "Manhattan Project" but will leave to you) -- passing as GA. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 03:01, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
- I've replaced it with other sources. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
- Okay, the links all work and I think the layout is much improved with some images moved to a gallery. Just one last thing, has Children of the Manhattan Project considered a reliable source for other articles? I didn't spot the editorial policy and it just looked a bit amateurish/enthusiast... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:30, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Ed Westcott. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
- Attempted to fix sourcing for http://cdn.knoxblogs.com/atomiccity/wp-content/uploads/sites/11/2012/11/ed-westcotts-secret-city-photos
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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 IITalk to my owner:Online 10:54, 28 March 2016 (UTC)
- Checked. BrineStans (talk) 13:51, 28 March 2016 (UTC)