Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/George Escol Sellers/1

George Escol Sellers edit

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 • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Delisted per WP:DCGAR and lack of improvement. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:50, 26 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article was not on the original list of 223 Doug Coldwell GAs as part of DCGAR, but a third of the content is DCs, so I am submitting it for review per the Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment drive of all DC content. Talk page, reviewer and nominator already notified.

DC was not the nominator, but they created the article (with copyright issues in the first version), and have still about a third of the content. The article has the usual mix of problems associated with DC editing: citations are not attached to the content they intend to verify, resulting in source-to-text integrity problems, there is failed verification and uncited text, and one of the main sources is an incomplete citation (when searching for "American Machinist" by the generic McGraw-Hill for checking copyvio, there are over 3,000 entries at archive.org; the citation gives no volume, etc. ~~And it is unclear what makes http://www.twainquotes.com/ColonelSellers.html reliable.~~ Without having a lead on the "McGraw-Hill" source, it can't be easily determined to what extent presumptive deletion applies. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:39, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

On reliability of Twainquotes, see https://www.jstor.org/stable/44504992 (courtesy of EEng). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:01, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Looking closer, it appears that most of The Gilded Age section was taken from the Schmidt website, but with other citations tacked on instead, that don't verify the text (something frequently seen in DC's work, that makes copyvio checking hard and obscures too close paraphrasing). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:23, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.