Talk:Benjamin Loxley house

Minor Revisions

I've corrected two errors in the Notoriety section referring to George Washington as "Colonel" Washington. This is inconsistent with other references to him as "General" in the article (as well as with history). I double checked the Wikipedia article on George Washington which confirms that he was appointed General and Commander-in-Chief on or around June 14, 1775. This all seems common sensical, but I wanted to make sure anyway.Ber06122 (talk) 14:10, 21 August 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Benjamin Loxley house. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160819045225/http://www.ushistory.org//philadelphia/street_dock.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/philadelphia/street_dock.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150807042859/http://www.ushistory.org/people/darragh.htm to http://www.ushistory.org/people/darragh.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:43, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Benjamin Loxley house/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 10:04, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)}

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

• It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
• It contains copyright infringements -
• It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
• It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Prose

Lede

• The house is noted in history - fluff. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:48, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Quaker Patriot- what is a Quaker? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

• The house is also noteworthy because of its unique architectural design - fluff. We shouldn't be telling the user what is notable. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

• renowned - PROMO. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:26, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

• Lede seems a little short. The actual bit of importance is the overhearing on the army plans, so I'd start with that. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:29, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:46, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Lede doesn't cover anything about it not being there anymore. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:30, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:46, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

General

• The body should really start with the location first. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:33, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• The infobox seems a bit bare to me, do they usually look like that? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Notoriety is a weird section head.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• The house is notable as the residency of Quaker Lydia Darragh, a Patriot spy. - yeah, there are much better ways to say that. same as lede. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• One version of the historical record, which matches that told by her daughter Ann - is there a second version of the record? What type of record is this? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Images could do with a circa, Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:15, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Philadelphia.[28][38][39][40] - WP:CITEKILL. three is plenty. If you need four, use WP:BUNDLING. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:09, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

• Demise is a tiny section, could we not merge this? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 12:36, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:01, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Review meta comments

• I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have a list of nominations for review at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these if you get time. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 10:04, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

 Working Thanks for review. I'll start working on the issues. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:16, 11 March 2021 (UTC)

@Lee Vilenski: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:14, 12 March 2021 (UTC)

Happy to pass. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:50, 14 March 2021 (UTC)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)