GA Review edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Astrocog (talk · contribs) 02:57, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Reply


Questions Before GA Review edit

I am an admirer of Wren's work, and have visited many buildings of his design, so I think it would be nice to review this article. However, I do have some important questions for the article's main contributors:

  • Do the main contributors agree that this article is ready for GA review? I ask because the nominator is not a major contributor and I don't want to write a full review for a "drive-by" nomination.
  • Are the main contributors ready to fix and expand this article as necessary within a 7 day window (I'm flexible)? As it stands right now, this article would not pass GA review. Eighteen references is pretty light for a historical figure of Wren's stature, and given the large amount of information in this article without citations, that alone would prompt me to fail the GAN if I just judged it on the spot. The reference section is...interesting. It needs some TLC to conform to MOS. Images should be placed in the article in appropriate places to illustrate it - the gallery section is an eyesore (painful for me to write, given the beauty of the buildings themselves). These are just the things that were red flags upon first glance, which doesn't bode well for a GAN.

If the answer is no to either or both of these questions, then I suggest withdrawing the GAN until a peer-review and copy-edit can be done. What say ye editors? AstroCog (talk) 02:57, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I nominated this article to see what improvements this article needs. I assure you it is not a "drive-by" nomination and that I am ready to listen to your suggestions so I can do what I can to improve this article. I have a great interest in the Renaissance period in history, and being a newly joined editor, I wanted to see how I could help. However, I do need to consult the article's main contributor(s) (I will leave a note on their talk page(s)), and to have the time to make the appropriate changes, and so I request that you place this article on hold for an indefinite period of time (a month maximum) until the necessary changes have been made to improve this article. I am prepared to expand this article until it meet GAN requirements. I am grateful for your time, and would like to ask you whether you could help to detail more of the problems that this article has as I start to fix them. I will reply when I receive answers from the main contributor(s) on whether they are prepared to help. Thanks, GoldRock23(talk - my page - contribs) 12:22, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Sounds like what you want is a peer review. A good article reviewer is just a volunteer who leaves some feedback on an article's quality as it pertains to the good article criteria. Reviewers are not expected to actively take part in the improvement of GANs which are well-below the threshold. Some reviewers may...I'm not one of them, though. Holding an article for a month is not typical. A week is standard, and that's for articles which just need some minor improvements or straightforward revisions to meet the GA criteria. Frankly, I think it's going to take some substantial research to improve this article, to meet #s 1, 2 and 3 in the criteria. Because you're new and eager, I think this could be good practice for you. I'm willing to be a bit flexible here, but I don't want to do a full peer review or copy edit at the moment. Let's see what the other contributors say, as well. AstroCog (talk) 13:13, 8 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Personally I think that the section on Wren's architectural career has major omissions, he designed over fifty parish churches, mainly in the City of London but a couple in Westminster as well, and nothing is said of his "Tracts" on Architecture, though only published decades after his death they are worth mentioning, other architectural designs that are over looked are his design of the new palace at Winchester, though this was abandoned half built due to the death of Charles II, later becoming barracks and burning down in Victoria's reign, also he executed a few domestic commissions, Marlborough House in London and Winslow Hall Buckinghamshire are the main survivors. More needs to be said about his chief architectural pupil and right hand man Nicholas Hawksmoor, he was also influential in the architectural careers of Sir John Vanbrugh and James Gibbs. unsigned comment by Architon

Well, this is not an answer to the questions I am asking. I want to know if editors are ready to make suggested changes in a timely manner once I do a GA review. Please sign your comments with four tildes. AstroCog (talk) 12:47, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I have asked the creator and one of the main editors but they are not responding. I'll try asking more of the editors and see if that works and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Thanks for your patience, GoldRock23(talk - my page - contribs) 15:35, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

That's ok, if you're the most interested editor in the article, that won't stop a GA review. I'll get my review up in the next few days and then you can decide how to address it. AstroCog (talk) 16:28, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

It seems like the main contributors contributed years ago! If I don't post here saying they've replied by Friday, I would be happy for you to start the review. I am, I think, currently the only editor who seems to be interested in the article at the moment excepting Architon, who posted here earlier and is a main contributor to the article. I'm still waiting for his reply, though. Thanks, GoldRock23(talk - my page - contribs) 17:30, 12 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

I'm a little concerned with this article as sections of it seem to be a barely re-written version of that which appears in the Dictionary of National Biography (see DNB entry here, although you'll need a subscription). The real kicker is that the DNB isn't cited once! I'm not blaming the more recent editors as I think they been updating etc the version that has been on for a while. A few select comparisons appear below, (none of which have been cited) but there are a lot of others which I could have included.

Wiki text DNB text
"As a child Wren "seem'd consumptive".[2] Although a sickly child, he would survive into robust old age" "As a child Wren ‘seem'd consumptive’ (Wren, 346)—the kind of sickly child who survives into robust old age."
"Little also is known of Wren’s schooling. The story that he was at Westminster School from 1641 to 1646 is unsubstantiated." "Little is known about Wren's schooling. According to Aubrey, Sir Christopher determined to give his son the public education he himself had not received. The story that he was at Westminster School from 1641 to 1646 is unsubstantiated"
"St Paul's has always been the touchstone of Wren's reputation. His association with it spans his whole architectural career, including the 36 years between the start of the new building and the declaration by parliament of its completion in 1711." "St Paul's has always been the touchstone of Wren's reputation. His association with it spans his whole architectural career, including the thirty-six years between the start of the new building in 1675 and the declaration by parliament of its completion in 1711"
"During the 1670s Wren received significant secular commissions which manifest both the maturity and the variety of his architecture and the sensitivity of his response to diverse briefs" "During the 1670s Wren received significant secular commissions which manifest both the maturity and the variety of his architecture and the sensitivity of his response to diverse briefs"

I'd be very careful with this article: it needs a complete overhaul to avoid justifiable accusations of plagiarism before it should be considered to be of any standard at all. - SchroCat (^@) 15:23, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Ok, I'll try to alter those problems as soon as I get to the weekend and thanks for informing me. Thanks, GoldRock23(talk - my page - contribs) 15:34, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

The problem is that it's much, much more than these ones: if pushed I'd guess that about 30 - 40% of the article is far too close to the DNB copy to avoid any suspicion of plagiarism. - SchroCat (^@) 16:56, 13 October 2011 (UTC)Reply
Hmm, this is a problematic development, and I'm glad someone has pointed it out. This underscores for me my original feeling that this article is going to need a substantial amount of work. More than can just be addressed by a GA review. This article needs a complete peer review. Editors, there is no hurry for GA status. Will you object to me doing a quick fail on this nom? Alternatively, the nomination can be withdrawn. It won't reflect poorly on the article or on the nominator, GoldRock23. I just think is going to require more than the standard 7 days of fixes...and more than just suggestions from a GA review. Here are my recommendations:
  1. Take out all copyvios or "close paraphrasing" sentences and replace them with original writing.
  2. Make sure that all claims, facts, and statements about Wren's life are suitably referenced.
  3. Clean up the images, including that hideous gallery at the bottom.
  4. It would be worthwhile to study a model FA article, such as Samuel Johnson, another larger-than-life Englishman of the era.
  5. Get a peer review of this article, especially from somebody who has experience with one of the most relevant WikiProjects to the subject, such as Oxford or History of Science.

Let me know what you think.AstroCog (talk) 02:02, 14 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

Withdrawal of Christopher Wren for GA Nomination edit

Thanks for all the suggestions, and I can see it's going to need a lot of work. Thanks for the advice, and I'll get to work, hopefully renominating again when it has had a peer review that suggests it is ready. Again, thanks! Thanks, GoldRock23(talk - my page - contribs) 16:16, 14 October 2011 (UTC)Reply

After you've gone through my suggestions and feel it's ready for a GA review, feel free to contact me on my talk page, and I'll start on it when requested. Good luck! AstroCog (talk) 17:46, 14 October 2011 (UTC)Reply