Talk:Geology Hall, New Brunswick, New Jersey/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Dr. Blofeld (talk · contribs) 15:17, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Lead

• Can you link mastodon and Ptolemaic, out of all those were the two I'd most want to click!

• Done - I thought I had linked them but then realised I had only linked the later in the article. --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:07, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

History

• "Courses in agriculture, chemistry and engineering was also provided Hall for several years" provided Hall?

• Done - Revised. --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

• Seems a big jump from late 19th century to today. Is there nothing at all available on 20th century history?

• Reply - I agree, but oddly, I haven't been able to find anything. What I've been able to find is a pattern in most of the histories (books, webpages, archives) at Rutgers where discussing something being built, or getting started and anything between isn't mentioned until there is a change in the status quo. I haven't discovered any activity in the 20th century anything except for (a) it's still a museum upstairs, and (b) the geology department offices moved across the river, after other offices/classroom space moved elsewhere much earlier.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Rutgers

• "This collection consists of rare minerals, many of which are found only in New Jersey, were discovered during nineteenth- and twentieth-century zinc mining operations in Franklin and Ogdensburg in Sussex County." "such as those discovered during" would fit better here.

• Done - Revised. --ColonelHenry (talk) 16:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

this might contain something useful.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:31, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

• Reply Thanks for pointing me to this resource. When I get a little time later this afternoon, I'll see what I can glean and use.--ColonelHenry (talk) 16:15, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

There's some good sources in google books but most of them aren't available sadly...♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:44, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

• Google Books is a great resource, although I've found that several of the sources repeat what earlier sources already had. Much like Roman historians copying earlier historians verbatim.--ColonelHenry (talk) 18:04, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

It would be good if you could find more on the 20th century history but I think this is a decent overview.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:53, 2 December 2013 (UTC)