Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Augusta, Lady Gregory/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article review
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was kept by Marskell 22:48, 21 September 2009 [1].

Augusta, Lady Gregory edit

Toolbox
Notified: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ireland, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Theatre, User talk:Filiocht, User talk:Ceoil , User talk:DrKiernan.

FA from 2004. Primarily 1c issues. Image File:Augusta, Lady Gregory - Project Gutenberg eText 19028.jpg could be standardized using commons:Template:Information, same goes for File:Lady gregory.jpg, and File:Abbey1.jpg. Locally, image File:Lady gregory1.jpg could be improved using {{Information}}. Cirt (talk) 03:33, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Fixed. Images need alt text as per WP:ALT. Eubulides (talk) 04:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have jusr re-read this page for the first time in years, I can see no problems at all. Giano (talk) 16:29, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I never read this article before and found it to be very informative. If there are problems with the images, why not just make the necessary changes to them instead of nominating the article for review? This question is coming from an editor unfamiliar with the process, so please don't criticize me for thinking my solution seems like an obvious one if for some reason it isn't. Thanks! LiteraryMaven (talk • contrib) 17:13, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Actually, SlimVirgin just did a wonderful job fixing the referencing problems since the article was nominated. It was filled with {{citation needed}} tags, whereas now there is only one, last I looked. —Mattisse (Talk) 17:57, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes Mattisse, indeed it was [2]. You realy must obtain some reference books sometime, just think what even more of an assett to the project you would be. Giano (talk) 18:01, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Lady Gregory has a "receding chin" as described in the alt text. —Mattisse (Talk) 15:08, 7 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
She most certainly had not. I would agree with removing this. Ceoil (talk) 13:41, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Removed; in future please just fix problems like this directly. Eubulides (talk) 19:58, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
K. Ceoil (talk) 20:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I see roughly 6 or 7 places that need citations at the end of paragraphs. However, that is a very easy remedy. If these aren't filled in after a while, I will do it myself so there should be no reason to delist it if it comes down to it. I will be checking later in the week. Ottava Rima (talk) 18:46, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe that I have done much of this. However, there is another issue and I wont discuss that here. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:05, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ottava, you have indicated in your edit summaries that there are copyvio problems. Have you checked the entire article? —Mattisse (Talk) 15:17, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • That was a mistake. I thought I was looking at material that was added in 2007. I was actually looking at the original 2004 material. The source was from 2007. I have contacted a variety of individuals about the matter as the page was being used by an Irish literature academic that did not cite Wikipedia. I am currently trying to find out if there was a source that they both took from, if this was originally published somewhere else, or if the 2007 source did take word for word the Wikipedia source without attributing. Ottava Rima (talk) 15:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • We seem to be stepping on each other's toes here. Ottava, can you say why you removed some of the references I added? Also, what is the copyright violation you mention here? SlimVirgin talk|contribs 20:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

We should be careful that the writing doesn't suffer when we fix citations. For example, the article said:

Her Galway home had long been a focal point for the writers associated with the Irish Literary Revival and this continued after her retirement. On a tree in what were the grounds of the now demolished house, one can still see the carved initials of Synge, Æ, Yeats and his artist brother Jack, George Moore, Sean O'Casey, George Bernard Shaw, Katharine Tynan and Violet Martin. Yeats wrote five poems about or set in the house and grounds: "The Wild Swans at Coole", "I walked among the seven woods of Coole", "In the Seven Woods", "Coole Park, 1929" and "Coole Park and Ballylee, 1931".

This was changed to:

Her Galway home had long been a focal point for the writers associated with the Irish Literary Revival and this continued after her retirement. Many of the writers connected to the Irish revival of literature used her house as a focal point. In particular, one tree contains the initials of many of the writers, including Violet Martin, George Moore, Sean O'Casey, Russell, George Bernard Shaw, Synge, Katharine Tynan, Yeats and his brother Jack, and many others. Also, Yeats used the home as the setting for many of his poems, including "The Wild Swans at Coole".

SlimVirgin talk|contribs 20:49, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Posted on your talk page. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Copied it below so that others will see it.
Please don't until we can determine which took the text from which. This source is an exact copy of what was on the page. It does not attribute Wikipedia and the writer claims to be a scholar who was working on this for a while. I have already contacted a few people about figuring out how to deal with the matter. She either took from Wikipedia without attributing or the Wikipedia page took from her without attributing. Or, they both took from the same third party. Either way, this needs to be dealt with. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:01, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Could we deal with it here, rather than privately? If the Sigillito was published in 2007, that might be a copy from us. But regardless of that, the writing of the replaced text was awkward. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 23:06, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The WP text has been in the article since September 2004. [3] Can you type up here the sentences that are direct copies? SlimVirgin talk|contribs 23:09, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, interesting. [4] SlimVirgin talk|contribs 23:14, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
[5] and [6] SlimVirgin talk|contribs 23:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If this is a reliable method, then this from the lede: "is mainly remembered for her work behind the Irish Literary Revival. Her home at Coole Park, County Galway, served as an important meeting place for leading Revival figures, and her early work as a member of the board of the Abbey was at least as important for the theatre's development as her creative writings" is from [7] from a review comment for a book published in 1970, according to the publication date at Amazon.com. This may be crazy-making. Who knows what came first? —Mattisse (Talk) 00:12, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The ones you linked to are from Wikipedia, and say so. I'm guessing that the book cited above is also from Wikipedia, given that we predate it by three years, but it doesn't say so, and it ought to, unless it came first. The point is that it's unusual for anyone to copy word for word. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 00:37, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Never mind! You are right. —Mattisse (Talk) 01:11, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mattisse, stick with searching at google books and not the full google site, as the google site tends to kick back a lot of Wiki clones. I tend to lump together phrases or terms when searching. I just happened to lump the list of names for the initials on the tree when I discovered the duplication. I lost internet before because of the weather, so sorry for the tardy response. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:28, 23 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment What's the status here? Dabomb87 (talk) 02:18, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Discussions are continuing about how a chapter in a book came to be a copy of this article, but as things stand, based on the history of this article and the timing of it, not to mention who it was written by, there's no indication that this piece was taken from elsewhere. As for the rest, in terms of FA criteria, it seems to be well-sourced, well-written and properly formatted. As I'm not really familiar with FAR, I don't know what else should be done. SlimVirgin talk|contribs 02:26, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Mattisse seemed to be one of the few with outstanding issues, but she is currently blocked - perhaps a user talk page discussion could clarify if she has any more concerns. I am convinced that our Wikipedia article came before the clone, so I have no concerns. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:53, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Many of the citations/references are missing accessdates, and date formatting in them should be consistent. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:08, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is close to Keep, has there been an image review? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:08, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image review. All PD or free, no problems. Black Kite 00:38, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Are the various issues that popped up weeks ago still present? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:30, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/Augusta,_Lady_Gregory/archive1&oldid=1138476525"