Talk:Dupont Circle Fountain/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Caponer (talk · contribs) 21:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AgnosticPreachersKid, I will complete a thorough and comprehensive review of this article within the next 48 hours. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime. Thanks! -- Caponer (talk) 21:10, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to review the article! APK whisper in my ear 04:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

AgnosticPreachersKid, I have completed my review of the article, and while it looks like it meets the majority of criteria for passage to Good Article status, I do have some comments and questions that need to be addressed first. Great job on this one, as always! -- Caponer (talk) 22:45, 25 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Lede

Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section, the lede summarizes content from the three subsections of the "History" section and the "Design and location" section.
I would actually expound a bit more in the final sentence of the lede but reiterating that the fountain and surrounding park are owned and maintained by the National Park Service, a federal agency of the Interior Department.
This section is well-written and all content is verifiable and internally sourced below in the prose.
Done APK whisper in my ear 04:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

History Background

First use of Dupont Circle in the prose should be wiki-linked.
I suggest adding a sentence highlighting the notability of Du Pont's American Civil War contributions. Was Congress honoring him for a specific act during the war?
Is there an inline citation for the final sentence of the second paragraph of the Background subsection?
This subsection is well-written and all content is verifiable and internally sourced within the prose.
Done APK whisper in my ear 04:53, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dedication

This subsection is well-written and all content is verifiable and internally sourced within the prose. I have no further comments, questions, or suggestions.

Later history

Should the sentence read "It is one of the few Civil War monuments that is a not an equestrian sculpture." with the addition of few?
This subsection is well-written and all content is verifiable and internally sourced within the prose.
Done APK whisper in my ear 04:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Design and location

De-link Dupont Circle as its first usage should be linked further above in the prose.
For the geographical description of the fountain's surroundings, I would utilize the following USGS topo map citation to cover your bases:

Washington West Quadrangle, District of Columbia–Maryland–Virginia (Map). 1 : 24,000. 7.5 Minute Series (Topographic). United States Geological Survey. 2011. OCLC 777027791.

I would have the surroundings paragraph stand on its own, then move the physical description of the design down to a second paragraph in this section.
Done Thanks for the citation. APK whisper in my ear 05:02, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

AgnosticPreachersKid, everything looks good to go. Thank you for addressing each of my above comments and suggestions in such a timely manner! The article is a phenomenal portrayal of this D.C. landmark's history and design, and it is a privilege for me to pass this article to Good Article status. Congratulations! -- Caponer (talk) 08:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! APK whisper in my ear 08:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]