Talk:Crocheron–McDowall House

Crocheron–McDowall House was nominated as a Art and architecture good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (April 22, 2023). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

United States: Texas Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Texas portal This article is supported by WikiProject Texas (assessed as Low-importance).

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Did you know nomination[edit]

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: rejected by Narutolovehinata5 (talk) 11:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The article expansion was not a 5x one; the article may be renominated for DYK if brought to GA status.

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that the Crocheron–McDowall House is the "finest and most intact" Greek Revival building in the US state of Texas?

Source: National Archives Catalog

(Page 21): "One of the finest and most intact Greek Revival residences in the state [of Texas]."

(Page 4): "The Crocheron-McDowall house at 1502 Wilson is one of the finest examples of Greek Revival architecture not only in Bastrop, but in Texas as well"

- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/In Win Development
- Comment: This is my first article about a US historic landmark. Feedback is welcomed. Also, I'm open to using the image since it is under public domain.

5x expanded by MX (talk). Self-nominated at 23:47, 16 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]

Hi MX, I'm measuring just less than a 4x expansion from this version of the article. Could you check your calculation and confirm what character counts you are using for pre- and post-expansion? Thanks - Dumelow (talk) 11:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dumelow - Thank you for the review. I'd like to withdraw my nomination because I don't think I'll be able to expand 5x after further review of the sources available. I nominated this because most of the article was entirely unsourced and thought I had done enough. But I will consider this if/when it goes through a full GA review. Thank you. MX (✉ • ✎) 01:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MX, a number of years ago it was the case that unsourced content didn't count towards article length at DYK. It was gotten rid of because of the complexity of calculating this but it does discourage article improvement somewhat. Best of luck with the article - Dumelow (talk) 07:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Crocheron–McDowall House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Maile66 (talk · contribs) 21:09, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

To be determined after all the other editing below is taken care of.

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):

b. (citations to reliable sources):

c. (OR):

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
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 non-free use rationales):

b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/fail:

The biggest issue here is plagiarism. Much of it is word-for-word from the National Register Listing nomination form. I stopped reviewing after the History section, because the last two entire paragraphs of the History section are almost entirely lifted, with slight rewording, from the NRHP source. You know ... take a hunk of text and flip around the words/phrases in the sentence, etc. In addition, it flips back and forth on dates between the appropriate American MDY, and the European style of DMY. So please note, that because of the plagiarism issue, I did not go on reading through the sections on Historical designations and Architecture.

If you have not seen the NRHP source, please see https://atlas.thc.state.tx.us/Details/2078003357 To see the entire nomination form click on Files, then click on National Register Nomination File. That will bring up the PDF of the 1977-78 nomination form.

There is much work to do here to get the known issues corrected, and for any editor to give the remaining sections the same editorial scrutiny. It is do-able, but it will take work to get there. Good luck. — Maile (talk) 22:38, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(Criteria marked are unassessed)