Talk:Oakwood Cemetery (Troy, New York)

Update coming

This article is currently undergoing a massive expansion at User:UpstateNYer/Oakwood. The work is being done there so a DYK can be achieved at the time the update goes live. Please feel free to make additions or suggestions there. upstateNYer 04:17, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Rewrite is now live. upstateNYer 02:20, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment per request at User talk:Doncram

I'm not Doncram, but saw your request. I followed up because I've just done a little work on Mt. Auburn Cemetery. I like this article. It reads well. I made a few minor changes which you've probably seen already. I have two general comments, just comments, not jumping up and down, and others may disagree. I should add that I'm a tough grader and some of my articles wouldn't stand this scrutiny.

1. I would cut back significantly on the references. For me, it's enough to cite a reference once at the end of a paragraph, or even several paragraphs if there's nothing particularly startling there. As an example, in the paragraph beginning, "Many notable sculptors...", I would put ref 9,20,21,22 and 23 at the end of the following paragraph. Along the same lines, I'd use the same cite for all of the members of Congress. Alternately I might cite the cemetery's own literature for all the burials.
   • For my own sake when going through the GAN process, I like having the explicit citations exactly where they should so I know exactly what I'm talking about later. I also trust the Biographical Directory of the US Congress more than the NRHP Nom. No offense to the author or anything, but they are trying to sell the place. Currently, I'm still trying to find the Congressional resolution from 1961 declaring Samuel Wilson the progenitor of Uncle Sam. Unfortunately when searching the text they quote, the top hits bring me to Uncle Sam, which doesn't help me and takes a bit from the Nom's cred, IMO. upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
     • OK, but maybe just one reference to BDotUSC -- this is a case where you need a cite (although Mount Auburn Cemetery has no cites for its burials), but no one is actually going to look it up, because they're all blue-linked anyway -- someone wanting more info on one of them is going to go to the Wiki link, and, perhaps from there, to the BDotUSC.. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 10:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
       • I don't agree with that. I always use Wikipedia as a starting place, and follow the references to learn more. Just linking to BDotUSC isn't enough for me. This isn't printed on paper, so I can be as complete as possible, which is what I always prefer. upstateNYer 02:27, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
2. I might use fewer images -- I'm a photographer myself, but I usually upload more images than I actually use in an article -- see WP:NOTREPOSITORY -- you're in the gray area here. Mount Auburn Cemetery has 14 images, Oakwood has 21 and arguably Mount Auburn would "deserve" more, because it has more notable burials there. I might follow Mount Auburns's lead and put some of the images of individual markers opposite the names in the list of burials.
   • Fair point. My aim with the photos (especially the gallery images) was to show examples of the architectural and artistic values of various monuments and structures. I didn't really mean to just show photographically all the monuments mentioned; there are a lot of unused images at commons:Category:Oakwood Cemetery (Troy, New York) at Commons. Personally, I think they add to the article and offer a visual way of describing the architectural and artistic merits of the objects on the property. upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
     • Personally, I like more images, and wouldn't object. But I've gotten nailed with WP:NOTREPOSITORY, so I mention it. Policy would be to create a gallery on Commons and add a tag to it, which you've done. (I might create a new category there -- something like "Oakwood Cemetetery Gallery Images", add a selection of the images there to it, and link to that). . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 10:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Minor comments:

• see Wikipedia:Capitalization#Military_terms for Major General Wool in at least two places.
  • Fixed, thank you. I had wondered about that. upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• if it's "about 300 feet" then it's 90 meters or maybe 100 meters, not 91. The result of a mathematical operation can't be more precise than the operands.
  • Hmmm, I see your point, is there a way to do that in the {{convert}} template? upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
    • I don't know, I don't use the template -- just divide by 3.28 and decide how much to round off. I think the template uses as many places as the input, which is, of course, what I'm suggesting is wrong here.. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 10:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• I would improve some of the citations -- for example, for your #4, I'd use:
  • Arthur James Weise (1886). The city of Troy and its vicinity (sic). Troy, NY: Edward Green. p. 54-55.
  • And the same for Cobb
    • Any particular reason? I've always cited authors last name first. upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
      • Yes, but your way the Weise ref shows up in the reflist as
        "^Weise",
        while my way it's
        "Arthur James Weise (1886). The city of Troy and its vicinity (sic). Troy, NY: Edward Green. p. 54-55." with the PDF indicator
        which tells you at a glance that it's an 1886 book, among other things. Also, remember that others will add refs in the future. Using {{cite book}} in the ref list gives consistency. I use a bibliography only sparingly and only for things that are not in the reflist.. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 10:56, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
        • I've worked my away from that method. Just referencing the name of the author, and listing the complete citation in a separate bibliography section leaves the References section shorter so there aren't any repeats of the long citation, which exists once below it. Then, when you look at the Bibliography section, you see the list of documents cited, with the last name shown first, to connect from the Ref section. upstateNYer 02:25, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
• I'd probably use only one cite for most of the works cited. In the old days, when you actually looked something up in a paper book that might not have a good index, a page cite was essential. Now that you can just do a word search on most things, it's not so necessary, particularly when the pages are close together.
  • For all the historical articles I work on, I link directly to the page in the citation given if the book is hosted at Google Books (for example: Brunswick, New York, Kiliaen van Rensselaer (Dutch merchant). It gives you immediate access to the page that is being referenced. If the source isn't at Google Books, I still ref the same to keep things consistent. upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

. . . . Jim . . . . Jameslwoodward (talk • contribs) 15:41, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

• • Thanks for the comments, Jim! upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Quick comments by doncram

• It looks really good!
• I like the overall layout, and the use of photos and informative captions.
• The map of the cemetery prepared by ZooFari, with its identification of locations such as The Panorama mentioned in the article, is super great.
  • IMO, this map makes the article. :-) upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• I think the intro paragraph is super great too: it is both info-packed and well-written. It perhaps has too much detail on the different areas in acres and in hectares and in the whole vs. the NRHP-listed portion of the cemetery. Maybe just mention the overall area and also mention NRHP listing in the lede, but save the additional details for later. In fact i see the later NRHP mention already states the size of the portion that is listed, so reduce in the lede.
  •  Done upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• The body is all interesting; i have nothing to add.
• There are multiple notes to the NRHP nomination document like "NRHP nomination, p.5", but then finding the NRHP nom doc in the bibliography is not immediately obvious. If a note was to "Harrison, p. 5", or if the bibliography entry was upfront labelled "NRHP Nomination:", then the correspondence would be more clear. I assume you want to give some credit to Harrison but not too much by repetition in the notes. I don't know what is the best way to handle this. Maybe it is not a problem.
• The ordering in the Bibliography section is not apparent. Perhaps give the NRHP nomination document first, then the rest alphabetically? But a non-alphabetical order is used, a label naming the type of ordering is needed, i think.
  • Ah, never thought of that. The documents are in order of reference under the References section. Moving to alphabetical by author (then title when no author). upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Jameslwoodward (thanks for also commenting!) prefers to move references to end of paragraph, and I can understand that perspective. It would be most appropriate if this was a sole-authored, printed article, but here where others will probably want to cut up and move stuff around, I would keep the source for each sentence right with it.
• Asking for comments here at the Talk page is fine, but you could already be asking for comments at wp:PR, and inviting others like me to comment within that. doncram (talk) 20:01, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, Doncram! upstateNYer 03:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Comments

• Perhaps redlink Jacob Lansing so we can remember to make a page on him?
  • Considering I'll be taking this to GAN soon, I don't think a red link is a good idea. I'll remember he's there though, if someone does make the article. :-) upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• "With these additions, Oakwood now represents burials that span the entire history of the city of Troy". Kinda awkward to me at least, I personally prefer more simple language. Perhaps- "With these additions, the burials of Oakwood span the entire the history of the city of Troy".
  •  Done with minor change. upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Stage coach service began in 1908, but no mention of when it ended or if there is a modern equivelent. Was the stage coach ever replaced by electric trolley? Did the CDTA or its predecessor (I think Troy was under United Traction) ever have buselines with a stop at the cemetary? Does CDTA today have a stop at the cemetary?
  • No mention of electric trolley, and I doubt it anyway. I don't know for sure, but I doubt CDTA stops. What's the point? Americans today don't want to walk a quarter mile if they don't have to and if CDTA dropped off at Oakwood (it would have to be on Oakwood Ave, otherwise it would be a 0.75-mile hike uphill from Lansingburgh) people would have to walk literally miles to get to many graves. I haven't noticed any CDTA bus signs before, but I'll look next time I'm there. upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Article delves into past uses of recreation at the cemetary as a park, but other than benches incorporated into the statuary does the park today have any amenities used for recreation? Plays, programs, or even uses not officially sanctioned; such as kids playing ball? (I know the Old Mt Ida Cemetary near the intersection of US 2 and NY 66 (Pawling Ave) has kids playing ball amongst the old headstones; perhaps similar situation?)
  • Some walking tours, to gain some free money. Not really room for games or anything. And where did these kids play ball in Mt. Ida? There's no space there! upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

When I was younger I had a three friends who lived somewhat across the street on Pawling Ave and there would be kids probably no older than 7 throwing around a ball and hitting off a tee-ball with their parents in the area right next to the road among the oldest headstones that had worn down and fallen over. Dont know if it was always just the one family or if different families were doing it. I always thought it was a little creepy. But that is prime real estate if they could ever get the cemetary to move all the graves.Camelbinky (talk) 21:43, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

• Should the cemetary be described, as currently worded as being "east of Lansingburgh" or should it be considered to be "in the eastern part of Lansingburgh", Im unsure of just what is considered actually Lansingburgh other than that it is anything north of 101st.
  • Good question... I assume Lansinburgh's borders were the same as Troy's current borders, so I'll go with "eastern Lansingburgh". upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Perhaps there is information on the hike-bike path that replaced the railbed along the western edge of the cemetary that is relevant to the cemetary? Seems a shame it is only mentioned in a footnote.
  • Umm, not that I can think of. It seems informational, but incidental to the cemetery itself. upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• This is me being anal, but the Mohawk and Hudson confluence is not the terminal of the Erie Canal, the NYS Barge Canal System (Erie Canal) leaves the Mohawk just north of Cohoes and travels in an artifical waterway canal through the town of Waterford and dumps into the Hudson miles north of the Mohawk Delta, then the Hudson IS the Erie Canal until the Canal officially ends at the Federal Dam (unofficially called Lock 1, officially there is no Lock 1 of the Erie Canal)
  • You know, I was thinking about that when I worded that. Glad you caught it. Easy fix. upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• When did Lansingburgh get annexed by the Troy? I believe the cemetary predates annexation (which I think took place in 1900), perhaps mentioning the cemetary was in the town of Lansingburgh is appropriate? (but I believe it would not have been in the village of Lansingburgh)
  • I don't currently have a source for that (referencing Oakwood and Lansingburgh's history). If you have one, I'll squeeze it in. upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• Might need to put some non-breaking spaces to connect up "orphaned" footnotes that are on lines seperate from their intended sentences. Looks bad and awkward in my opinion to have just an entire line with just a footnote and it is referencing the sentence above it.
  • Yea, I know you like non-breaking spaces, but they never seem to work right for me? upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
• I seem to recall a rash of vandalism in the cemetary not too long ago, within the past 5 years, maybe just a year ago. With such a large area and so close to an urban environment what is the situation with vandalism and maybe cover some of the notable cases?
  • Various stones were knocked over, though many topple due to trees falling in heavy winds (and especially last year's ice storm). I'm not really aware of any notable string of vandalism in the past few years. I looked up oakwood in the TU's archives (though it's difficult because it brings back hundreds of obits). I didn't notice anything in the TU. I wish the Record had archives listed that went way back. Would be helpful for these local articles. upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Here's a snippet from the TU regarding the case of vandalism I was thinking of "On March 18, 2005, Ricky Rockenstire - in the company of his 17-year-old stepson - trashed 50 gravestones. He knocked the wings and head off an angel statue and destroyed graves", I can have links to the specific TU articles (though there are many, you may want to do a search of the archives using Oakwood Cemetery vandalism and narrow the search to 2005 and 2006). 50 gravestones and the wings and head off an angel sounds major to me, and may have been worse as there is a later article that starts off "Cemetery vandalism may have been worse than first reported". I dont know if this is all that relevant but at least its here on the talk page in case you find enough relevant information to put in.Camelbinky (talk) 03:30, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

These are nitpicky things, but I hope they help or give better ideas of things to do.Camelbinky (talk) 23:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the help! upstateNYer 04:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Todo

Looks excellent in general. I think the lead could go with some expanding. Perhaps three moderately sized paras? –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:40, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Review by Finetooth

Finetooth comments: This is quite well done and beautifully illustrated. I think it's close to ready for FAC. Here are my suggestions for further improvement.

• The alt text viewer that lives here shows that most of the images need alt text, meant for readers who can't see the images. Alt text, which is required for FA articles, is not the same as captioning. WP:ALT has details, and you can see examples of recent alt text in articles at WP:FAC.

 Doing... This... will take a while...

• The article has no dead links and no disambiguation problems; all good.

• You might consider adding the "other places" template to the top of the article, just below the infobox, to produce this:
  For other places with the same name, see Oakwood Cemetery.

 Done good point

Lead

• "at least fourteen members of the United States House of Representatives" - Digits (14) for consistency?

Comment: Anything under twenty or a multiple of ten I almost always spell out.

History

• "The first rural cemetery in the United States was developed in the 1830s, being Mount Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge, Massachusetts." - Rather than using "being" as a connector, I'd recast. Here's a possibility: "The first rural cemetery in the United States—Mount Auburn Cemetery in Cambridge, Massachusetts—was developed in the 1830s."

 Done No objection there.

Geography

• "opposite the junction of the Hudson and Mohawk" - Maybe confluence rather than "junction"?

 Done Excellent call.

• "while the central and eastern portions of the cemetery comprise rolling hills littered with trees and vegetation" - "Littered" doesn't seem quite right. Would "covered" be better? Or "graced"?

 Done Also good.

Landmarks

• "In 1862 the Troy Cemetery Association set aside an area in Section P, called the Soldiers' Plot, for deceased Army and Navy officers and soldiers from Rensselaer County." - The Manual of Style generally advises against extremely short paragraphs such as this one-sentence orphan. Two solutions are to expand or merge. Could something be added about the plot? How big is it? How many soldiers and sailors are buried there?

No idea; will have to merge this above then.

Gardner Earl Memorial Chapel and Crematorium

• "comprised of more than twenty colors of marble" - Digits (20) for consistency"

Comment: Again with the less than twenty or multiples of ten, like above

Warren Family Memorial Chapel

• "The Chapel contains stained glass windows above the altar designed by artist Robert Walter Weir." - It's not clear from this whether Weir designed the stained glass windows or the altar.

 Done Yea, good point.

• "Former member of the United States House of Representatives Joseph Mabbett Warren (1813 – 1896) is interred in the chapel." - I think you could safely merge this orphan with the paragraph above it.

 Done Good call.

• The complete-sentence captions need terminal periods.

 Done Did all the gallery images that needed it.

The Panorama

• The smaller image needs a caption.
  • Hmm, you think so? I don't really think it does. The object couldn't be any more obvious and the caption would essentially be the title of the section. I'll think about it.
• It's possible to install even larger panoramas by using the {{wide image}} template. If you click on the wide image link, you'll see an impressive Helsinki panorama and instructions for using the template.
  • Yes, I've used that for very short, very wide panos. This, on the other hand, is tall enough that you get a feel for the image at article size, I think.

Notable interments

• WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists says in part, "Do not use lists if a passage reads easily using plain paragraphs." - I'd be inclined to try to render this list as straight prose. My first thought would be to put the 14 state reps together in one paragraph, the Troy founders in another, and the others in a third paragraph.

 Doing... Since so many of them are similar, this shouldn't be a problem.

References

• Wikipedia uses title case even if the source uses all caps. For example, citation 40 should use "Cluett" rather than "CLUETT". In cases like this, house style takes precedence.

 Done

• Page ranges like "pp. 94 – 95" in citation 30 take unspaced en dashes rather than spaced en dashes.

 Done Fixed another one

• You may be asked what makes the dot-com of citation 1 reliable. The dot-com might get through FAC, but if you have a government source or other source for the NRHP ref number, it would be worth using to make sure that WP:RS is satisfied.

 Done More official source found.

Bibliography

• For books that have no ISBN, you can add the OCLC number to help identify it. I'd recommend doing this. You can find the OCLCs via WorldCat. For example, the Bliss book is OCLC 123756902.

 Done Never heard of that. Will have to implement it. Good tip

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR. We have a hard time keeping up. Finetooth (talk) 05:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the review, and on such short notice! upstateNYer 23:13, 5 January 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations

What an unusual article to be featured on the main page... I'm very impressed to see a historic cemetery brought to featured article class. My congratulations to all those involved with improving this article. --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:28, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Oakwood Cemetery (Troy, New York). 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/20081121184406/http://www.rpi.edu/dept/metasite/news/magazine/winter2005-06/pdf/28-33.pdf to http://www.rpi.edu/dept/metasite/news/magazine/winter2005-06/pdf/28-33.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111210082731/http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=7627 to http://www.oprhp.state.ny.us/hpimaging/hp_view.asp?GroupView=7627

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) 22:09, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 7 external links on Oakwood Cemetery (Troy, New York). 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 {{dead link}} tag to http://archives.timesunion.com/mweb/wmsql.wm.request?oneimage&imageid=8017665
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904010348/http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/about.php to http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/about.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120616030534/http://troyny.gov/Departments/Parks_Recreation/Bikeways.aspx to http://troyny.gov/Departments/Parks_Recreation/Bikeways.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101127020223/http://oakwoodcemetery.org/images/07news3.pdf to http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/images/07news3.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111105134738/http://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/Spring11Noms/GardnerEarl.pdf to http://www.cr.nps.gov/nhl/Spring11Noms/GardnerEarl.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904014348/http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/history.php to http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/history.php
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101127020400/http://oakwoodcemetery.org/images/07news4.pdf to http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/images/07news4.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904014348/http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/history.php to http://www.oakwoodcemetery.org/history.php

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) 21:27, 6 October 2017 (UTC)