Talk:Royal Ontario Museum/GA1
GA Review
editGA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Anne drew Andrew and Drew (talk · contribs) 16:00, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
- Well written
- Overall:
Resolved
|
---|
|
- Lead section:
It is one of the largest museums in North America and the largest in Canada.
- This information is not in the articles body and is not sourced. It is also unclear what "largest" means here; does it mean the museum's footprint, square-footage, collection size, or something else? If possible, I think it would be useful to say what rank it is among the largest museums in North America.
- The lead does a decent job of summarizing the History and Galleries sections of the article, but it should also summarize the Buildings and architecture section.
- Article layout:
- Lead section:
Resolved
|
---|
|
Resolved
|
---|
|
...to display the strength and weaknesses of the collections and strongly reflect the French and British cultural heritage of Canada
- Is "strongly" necessary here?
- Now this has been rephrased to
The displays are split up into sections to display the strength and weaknesses of the collections reflect the French and British cultural heritage of Canada
, but honestly I'm still not sure what this is meant to mean – Anne drew 23:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
- Writing about fiction: N/A
- List incorporation:
Resolved
|
---|
|
-
The displays became more descriptive and interpretive...This trend continued and up until the present time...This trend arguably came to a culmination in the 1980s with the opening of The Bat Cave
- This is interesting information, but we need a source to back up our claim that ROM exhibits are becoming more descriptive and interpretive.
- Broad in coverage
- All major aspects:
- No unnecessary detail:
Resolved
|
---|
|
- Neutral point of view
- Overall:
- Due weight given to topics:
- Stable:
- Images
- Well illustrated (if possible):
- Images tagged with copyright info:
- Fair use rationale given for non-free content: N/A
- Images are relevant:
- Comment: Nice article, but there are a few issues that need to be addressed before it is promoted to GA. In particular, the citations need some work. If you have any questions, feel free to leave them on this page. – Anne drew 14:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail: Fail. The article is pretty close but there are a few outstanding issues. This GA assessment has been going on for a long time so I have to fail it for now. Please address the issues here and renominate when you think the article passes all of the Good Article Criteria. Thank you for contributing! – Anne drew 17:24, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
Threaded discussion
editFeel free to respond to specific points above, or you can leave longer replies here. – Anne drew 17:42, 16 July 2019 (UTC)
- Sorta noticed this wasn't getting worked on in the past few days, so I fixed the corrections pointed out so far except for the sentence,
took the form of layered volumes, each rising layer stepping back from
, as I'm not sure whats actually being described here. Haven't worked on the citations though, but I can get around to it at a later point.
- Also, as opposed to rewording the
birth of Western art
and the first prose on Korean buddhism, I just opted to remove them entirely (the former is contentious without further contextualization on what that means; for the latter... not wrong, but seems rather tangential considering the topic is the museum's collection... which could also be said for the Western Art thingy). Leventio (talk) 21:35, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
- A few years ago, I believe that a ROM intern (MJMcGowan) substantially expanded the article, albeit with some formatting and style issues. I have corrected some of these issues and she was thankful. Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:35, 22 July 2019 (UTC)
- Updated the following dead links (most were just caused by the ROM randomly making page moves)/no citations, so I think we should be up to date with the review for the most part. However, I wasn't able to fix up the five proses including; "
The campaign aimed not only to raise annual visitor attendance from 750,000 to between 1.3 and 1.6 milli...
", "The overall aim of The Crystal is to provide openness and acc...
", "The project also experienced budget and constructio...
", "In September 2009, the gallery received an Award of Excellence by...
", and "The displays became more descriptive and interpretive...This trend contin...
.
- Updated the following dead links (most were just caused by the ROM randomly making page moves)/no citations, so I think we should be up to date with the review for the most part. However, I wasn't able to fix up the five proses including; "
- Couldn't find sources for the first four (I mean, I assume for the most part their true, although cursory Googling brought me nothing). As for the last highlighted prose... I don't really know where to begin without reading an actual book on exhibit developments or the museum. I'd be in favour of removing those proses if they become an issue to this GAN. Leventio (talk) 13:52, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
- I agree. Those proses sound a little promotional (especially if sourced to ROM documents). Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 01:31, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
- Couldn't find sources for the first four (I mean, I assume for the most part their true, although cursory Googling brought me nothing). As for the last highlighted prose... I don't really know where to begin without reading an actual book on exhibit developments or the museum. I'd be in favour of removing those proses if they become an issue to this GAN. Leventio (talk) 13:52, 29 July 2019 (UTC)
- Leventio and Johnny Au, nice job! The article is nearly there, just a few more minor issues left to be resolved. I'll see if I can find sources for the remaining sentences that need citations. – Anne drew 23:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you so much, Anne drew Andrew and Drew! Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:45, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- No prob! I went ahead and removed this sentence:
The overall aim of The Crystal is to provide openness and accessibility, seeking to blur the lines between the threshold linking the public area of the street and the more private area of the museum
. I couldn't find a source and honestly it sounds kinda promotional. I also moved the "Offsite storage" section to make it a subsection "Buildings and architecture"—let me know if you disagree with this change. – Anne drew 20:03, 1 August 2019 (UTC)
- No prob! I went ahead and removed this sentence:
- Thank you so much, Anne drew Andrew and Drew! Johnny Au (talk/contributions) 00:45, 1 August 2019 (UTC)