Talk:Arrowhead (Herman Melville House)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Arrowhead (Herman Melville House)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 19:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this one. Comments to follow in the next 1-5 days. -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Initial comments

This appears at first pass to be your usual excellent work. I have two suggestions below, but this is seems ripe for promotion. I'll do some final checks in a moment. As usual, I've made some minor tweaks as I went; please check that I haven't accidentally introduced any errors, and feel free to revert anything you disagree with.

• "The family name was originally spelled without the final "e"; Melville chose to add it" -- not a necessary point for GA, but you might consider moving this out of the regular references and into an explanatory footnote.
• "homely features of Arrowhead into several stories" -- "homely" may be a mildly confusing word to use here; its most common definition is "unattractive", but I'm guessing you mean something like "domestic" here. Perhaps you might just say "features" and avoid the issue altogether. I don't think this is a problem for GA status, though. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:01, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Noted, thanks. I usually don't bother with separate "Notes" sections if there are only one or two short footnotes. Thanks for reviewing! Magic♪piano 14:48, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. I made a trip to Arrowhead about fifteen years back, and had a great time; it was a nice surprise to see it pop up on the list. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:50, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Spotchecks show no evidence of copyright issues.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Arrowhead (Herman Melville House). 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/20090606145047/http://tps.cr.nps.gov:80/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=53&ResourceType=Building to http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=53&ResourceType=Building

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 15:12, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Arrowhead (Herman Melville House). 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:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://tps.cr.nps.gov/nhl/detail.cfm?ResourceId=53&ResourceType=Building
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20141021162319/http://berkshirehistory.org/herman-melville/the-restoration-of-arrowhead/ to http://berkshirehistory.org/herman-melville/the-restoration-of-arrowhead/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130705001218/http://berkshirehistory.org/about to http://berkshirehistory.org/about/

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 09:05, 12 May 2017 (UTC)