Talk:Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 15:52, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.

Disambiguations: none found

Linkrot: one found and tagged.[1] Jezhotwells (talk) 15:56, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Checking against GA criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

   The article is not reasonably well written, it appears to be thrown together from information on the institution's website. Elementary mistakes of punctuation and capitalisation abound. The organisation of information is poor and the lead is too short and does not fully summarise the article.

   The Architecture section appears to be a copyvio We established that the other website copied from this article.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   One primary source supplies all but one of the sources.

   One dead link found and tagged.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The whole article could do with expansion cited to independent reliable sources.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Reads like a tour guide

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

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):

   File:Artmuseum22.jpg needs a better description on the file page than just "took it"

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   This is a straightforward fail. The nominator has been indefinitely blocked. perhaps someone else can sort it out and when it meets the GA criteria renominate. Jezhotwells (talk) 16:12, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Purported copyvio

This edit proposed that the article had copied text from http://www.campusdestinations.com/cornell/destination/503/Herbert-F-Johnson-Museum-of-Art.

I don't find the assertion to be credible for the following reasons:

1. The Wikipedia article provides other external sources for the information in contention, demonstrating that the author(s) were properly sourcing information;
2. The external source provides no information not present in the Wikipedia article;
3. The information given in the external source is not contiguous in the Wikipedia article;
4. The Wikipedia article often gives more specific and detailed information than the external source, for example, "over 32,000" vs. "over 30,000";
5. The external website appears to have copied or paraphrased material from Wikipedia in several other entries, such as the entry on the Cornell Dairy Bar (cf. Cornell Dairy);
6. The external website is not even a reliable source and seems to be cobbled together from a mishmash of other sources- for example, its entry on Morrill Hall conflates information about at least two structures.

In short, the external source appears to be a mixture of direct copying and paraphrasing from Wikipedia. (Thanks to Racepacket (talk · contribs) for bringing this situation for my attention.) —Bill Price (nyb) 02:34, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Herbert F. Johnson Museum of Art. 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 https://web.archive.org/20081006174614/http://magazine.14850.com/2008/0515johnsonmuseum.html to http://magazine.14850.com/2008/0515johnsonmuseum.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 03:50, 12 January 2016 (UTC)