Talk:Ballard Carnegie Library/Archive 1

This article is now a Good article

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Coverage: You might expand on the sort collection they had and the size the collection grew to during its existence.
 * 6a is not applicable, none of the images are fair use. Captions are suitable, but a tad short. - Mgm|(talk) 11:54, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Peer review

 * Expand the intro to summarize the entire article.
 * Explain the "big picture." How does the library impact the community?  How does it fit in with the entire Seattle library system?  Why was it built and maintained in the location where it is currently?  What is the future of the library?

Good start on the article. Cla68 07:02, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

GA reached
I've left notes on Lawrence Cohen's talk page. Let me know if those points have been addressed. - Mgm|(talk) 11:41, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Copied from my talk page
I've reviewed the article, but there are a few things that are keeping me from promoting it.
 * 1) "Together with their work and a $15,000 grant from Andrew Carnegie, the library was built on a lot 100 feet square, which was purchased for $2,100 raised by local businesses and citizens." Not only does this imply that the library was built together with money (since when is money built), it also makes no distinction between the reading room the women collected for and the actual library, in fact thee reading room isn't even mentioned.
 * 2) "Initially, the library had a cache of books waiting for the completion and grand opening that was provided by local residents and schools, as Carnegie's gift for the construction did not cover the initial costs of new books.[6] A call was also put out for citizens to bring free books to donate to the new facility." If you already have a cache of books, then why would you put a call out for donations? I'm not sure but I suspect that the cache is the pile of donated books, in which case you might want to get rid of the duplicate mention.
 * 3) The lead section doesn't accurately summarize the article. - Mgm|(talk) 11:31, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I'll have a go at these. • Lawrence Cohen  15:04, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

1st point - library funding
Take a look, I think I have that sorted out more clearly now. What do you think? • Lawrence Cohen  15:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

2nd point - the book cache
That was based on a paraphrasing and condensing of this passage:
 * "Ballard school children had been selling 10-cent membership cards to fund a school library. Five hundred dollars of this money was given to the free public library and Ballard businesses also gave money. When the library opened, The Ballard News announced, "It is hoped each visitor will bring a book to start the collection." East Side School teacher Blanche Dunmore ledhttp://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ballard_Carnegie_Library&action=edit a student drive and collected 500 books from residents."

The cache of books I was referring to was that 500 book collection, and the call for new books was the Ballard News statement (they read to me as being distinct). Do you have any suggestions on the wording for that...? • Lawrence Cohen  15:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

3rd point - lead section
I'll rewrite it. • Lawrence Cohen  15:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * OK, I've expanded out the lead. How does it look? • Lawrence Cohen  15:23, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

GA
Just leaving a note that this reached GA. I just noticed this section made it look like it hadn't. • Lawrence Cohen  19:46, 27 November 2007 (UTC)