Talk:James Rumsey Monument/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Ganesha811 (talk · contribs) 04:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article, using the template below. Ganesha811 (talk) 04:03, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , first and foremost, thank you so much for taking the time to engage in this thorough and comprehensive GA review.
 * Since your review began, I've taken the steps to address as many of your comments and suggestions as time allows. Regarding the cited maps, I cited both the USGS topographical map and Google Maps, since the latter is easier for users to access, has current street names, and enables users to quickly verify the surrounding locations mentioned in the article. With that said, I am fine with removing this citation if you see fit.
 * Per your comment about the Rumseian Society, I am working to replace and remove instances where the Rumseian Society website is cited, so I will be adding additional citations and references in the meantime and should have this completed for your re-review shortly.
 * Per your suggestion, I removed the other maps from the infobox, so that only the West Virginia state map appears.
 * Per your suggestion, I have updated the Boteler caption so that it is more descriptive of his role in the monument's establishment. -- West Virginian   (talk)  16:38, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , I removed most of the content sourced from the Rumseian Society website where I could not find another source to substantiate that content. However, I did keep some citations from the Rumseian Society, which concern the transition of the monument property from the society to the corporation of Shepherdstown, since the society was directly involved in this transaction, and the society's information on the monument's plaques. Please let me know if this would be acceptable, or if further modification is required. Thank you again for your suggestions and guidance throughout this process. -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:10, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that's ok - thank you for your work. I'm going to go through and do a prose review tonight or tomorrow. My usual practice is just to make small changes and nitpicks myself, and if there's anything big or that you object to, we can discuss it. It saves us both time (hopefully!). Ganesha811 (talk) 21:12, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , thank you again for taking the time to perform this thorough review, and I look forward to your changes and any further comments. -- West Virginian   (talk)  23:45, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * , I concur with your edits related to criterion 1a. I also removed several names which were not mentioned throughout the article. Please re-review and let me know if there are any outstanding issues. Thank you again! — West Virginian   (talk)  11:26, 1 March 2022 (UTC)
 * - this article passes GA! Congrats to you and everyone else who worked on it. I'll do the needful now. Ganesha811 (talk) 13:06, 1 March 2022 (UTC)