| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chatham Manor article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | Chatham Manor was nominated as a Geography and places good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (March 1, 2021). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated. |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Literal copy
editThis article appeared to be mostly copied verbatim from the National Park Service website on Chatham Manor. While government documents are in the public domain, this seems unusual for Wikipedia. Additional sources would be welcome.--Parkwells (talk) 20:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
- I'm glad this article is up for GA status, and probably can't review it for that status as needed because my changes in 2015 and 2016 removed this problem. IMHO, I don't believe the Virginia Low-importance tag deserved, for the reasons I stated in the revised lede.Jweaver28 (talk) 14:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)
External links modified
editHello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Chatham Manor. 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/20050613082214/http://www.nps.gov:80/frsp/chatham.htm to http://www.nps.gov/frsp/chatham.htm
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050613082214/http://www.nps.gov:80/frsp/chatham.htm to http://www.nps.gov/frsp/chatham.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
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) 20:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC)
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Chatham Manor/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: MrLinkinPark333 (talk · contribs) 18:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Thank you for submitting this article to Good Articles Nominations. Unfortunately, I will have to quick fail this review due to Wikipedia:Good article criteria#Immediate failures per #1 "It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria". Specifically, this article is a long way from passing criteria #2 Verifiable with no original research. Here is a summary of the verification issues, sorted by ones that have are partially cited and ones that have no citations.
Parts that are partially cited and missing citations
edit- Antebellum: Last sentence of 2nd paragraph.
- Slavery at Chatham: Last sentence of 6th paragraph, most of last paragraph.
- Postwar years: Most of last paragraph.
Parts that have no citations
edit- Antebellum: 1st and 4th paragraph
- Slavery at Chatham: 1st and 2nd paragraph.
- American Civil War: 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th and last paragraph.
- Postwar years: 3rd, 4th and 5th paragraph
Overall, I'm mostly concerned about the 13 paragraphs that have no citations. With the American Civil War and Postwar years sections alone, these 2 sections have 9 uncited paragraphs. There are also 2 uncited paragraphs each in the Antellum and Slavery at Chatham sections.
In terms of partially cited sections, Antebellum, Slavery at Chatham and Postwar years have uncited sentences. Of these 3 sections, Slavery at Chatham and Postwar years have a paragraph each that are mostly uncited. There is also an uncited sentence each at Antebellum (2nd para) and Slavery at Chatham (6th para). As there are many paragraphs that have zero citations, I will have to quick fail this nomination as this article is a long way from passing criteria #2 Verifiable with no original research.
I hope this review does not discourage you from improving this article. Please feel free to read Wikipedia:Good article criteria to find out what Good Article reviewers are looking for in a nomination. Thank you for nominating this article to Good Article Nominations! :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)