Talk:Rice Northwest Museum of Rocks and Minerals/GA1

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

I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:50, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for criteria)

Specific concerns
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * One weird spot that needs clarification
 * 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:
 * 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:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * History : "Richard and Helen Rice both died in 1997 and transferred the home to the non-profit museum." if they were dead, how did they transfer the museum? Was it by will? Or their children?
 * Programs : "Rudy Tschernich is the Rice Museum's curator, hired in 2003." duplicates information in the history section. Suggest cutting it here.
 * I've done some copyediting, but the prose is still somewhat stilted. Its not bad enough to hold back GA status (after the above concern about the transfer is fixed) but I strongly suggest a good copyedit by someone not familiar with the text. Neat article though, I may have to visit if I get out that direction!
 * I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:05, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review and the copyediting. I took care of the two items above. I'll see if I can get someone to read through and further copyedit the prose. I did leave the transfer somewhat ambiguous, as the sources do not specify how it was transferred. My personal guess is that they had set up a life estate when they made the non-profit with the remainder passing to the museum at their death as that is generally a good estate planning method, but they could have left it as a bequest to the museum. The newspaper though does not say, and they likely wouldn't know the difference anyway. Let me know if the wording works for you in the article. Aboutmovies (talk) 19:03, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Excellent compromise there. Looks good, congrats! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:36, 9 March 2009 (UTC)