Talk:Cottontail on the Trail/GA1

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Reviewer: LunaEatsTuna (talk · contribs) 22:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

• Hoping to get to this within a few hours. 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 22:35, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
• Thanks for the fun read! I wish my area had public art like this… anyways, I have placed this article on hold for now and left some comments below. Please ping me once you have addressed my concerns so that I can know when to reevaluate. Thanks, 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 00:19, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
• Thank you for the fast response :) I am now happy to pass this article for GA status per the changes implemented. Congrats! 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 07:17, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Copyvio check

Earwig says good to go. Quotations used in-line with WP:COPYQUOTE.

Files

• File:Cottontail on the Trail with mask.jpg: Good, relevant and valid fair use rationale.

Prose

• "The piece was commissioned as part of city's Art in Public Places" – change to "The piece was commissioned as part of the city's Art in Public Places"
• "was designed by Jeff Barber of Cannon Falls, Minnesota." – makes him sound like a random local. Do the sources say if he is an artist? Than I would describe it as "was designed by artist Jeff Barber of Cannon Falls, Minnesota."
• "and an outdoor living room were among those not selected." – how about "and an outdoor living room were among those considered."?
• "more abstract than Cottontail on the Trail." – given the context already stated in the section I would remove "than Cottontail on the Trail." Also:
• Wikilink to abstract art.
• Replace the %s with "percent" per MOS:%.
• "contributed to the surrounding area." – this could mean a few things; maybe "positively contributed to the surrounding area."?
• I am sure you have already checked, but are there any other free images available of the statue? Relatedly:
• Any more coverage from any RS sources that could possibly be added to this article?

Refs

All sources used are RS. As there are only six refs I decided to spotcheck each of them and they all support the article's content.

• Refs 2 and 3 are live and should not have url-status=dead.
• Is a more exact publication date available for ref 4?

Other

Infobox, See also, coords, other templates and cats good.

• Recommend adding Template:Use X English
• Recommend adding Template:Use mdy dates

Thanks for the WP:ALT text!

Hi LunaEatsTuna, thanks for taking the time to conduct this thought-out review. I've responded to everything unless otherwise noted here:

• Re "contributed [positively] to the surrounding area", the source is somewhat ambivalent about the positive nature of the contribution, only asking "Does this artwork contribute to this place?" I'd rather pass along the source's ambiguity than try to say conclusively something it doesn't, if that's okay with you.
• Re free images: the short answer is yes, there's this one; the longer answer is even so, the artwork itself is copyrighted and without freedom of panorama in the US for sculpture, it's probably going to be an either/or situation on these images. Happy to swap them out if you prefer the other one.
• Re additional sources: alas, no! No further luck in the Newspapers.com database or elsewhere online. It's possible there's some offline stuff in local papers from 2002 but I'm not in Minneapolis right now so I've got very limited access there.

Thanks again and let me know if you have any more questions or thoughts! Kindly, —⁠Collin^{t c} 05:31, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Ah, of course! As for the picture I will let you decide. Personally I prefer the one you just linked as having a better angle of the statue, brighter lighting and showing the bunny without the cloth, which IMO slightly obstructs the view. Thanks for your efforts regarding the citations nonetheless! 𓃦LunaEatsTuna (💬) 07:17, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.