Talk:The Boy with the Leaking Boot/GA1

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


 * 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:
 * 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) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * The lead mentions some of the possible inspirations for the statue, but this isn't really covered in the main body of the article. The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article, so the origins of the The Boy with the Leaking Boot – although obscure – need to be discussed in greater detail. The associated stories, regardless of truth, could have played a part in the "life" of some of the statues, for example why did Carlborn think it was an appropriate gift for Cleethorpes? Why was one of the statues erected to honour Queen Victoria golden jubilee? In some cases, it was no doubt chosen simply because someone thought it looked nice, but in other cases perhaps the people who paid for it wanted to evoke something in particular.
 * It's going to be tricky but I'll see what I can do. PamD (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * "In 2002 the Fire Department reported that "We expect to have him back up and emptying the water from his boot by the end of next week".": eight years on, is the statue back in public?
 * Have updated this section from the Fire Dept's updated page. PamD (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Were there five statues at one time in New Orleans, or did they succeed each other? If there were multiple statues of The Boy at one time, this might require an explanation (if the sources go into the matter); otherwise, I think that bit could be made clearer.
 * Will have another look at the source - I think it did explain in detail. PamD (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * "A statue stood in City Hall Park, El Paso, Texas, United States for 50 years before being moved to San Jacinto Plaza, in the 1950s. It is now in El Paso City Hall.": this requires a source.
 * I think I lifted the info from San Jacinto Plaza where it is unsourced, but have asked on that article's talk page and at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Texas whether anyone can find me a source. PamD (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)


 * Most of the examples come from North America, although the statues crop up elsewhere including England and apparently Sweden, could something be added on the distribution of these? Problematic perhaps because the exact number isn't known, but worth looking into I think. The impression is that North America favours them, but is there a particular reason for this?
 * I've asked at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Venezuela whether anyone knows anything about the Caracas statue - can't find anything by Googling, but statue name may be different.PamD (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

This article is pretty well written and nicely illustrated, but at the moment the content is a bit thin. The statues section reads a bit like a list, and considering the statues are artwork there needs to be something on the provenance and inspiration, even if it's pure speculation (sourced of course). The use of sources is good, and there are no POV problems, but without the criterion 3a issues sorted, I don't think the article can pass. The Rosson book mentioned at the end of the article may help with missing aspects of the article if you can get hold of it. Without something to pull the examples together with a bit of analysis, it will be difficult to sort out 3a, although perhaps not impossible. The article will be on hold for a week, but as I've got the article on my watchlist I can provide feedback sooner if requested here. Good luck, Nev1 (talk) 22:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
 * I wondered whether I ought to reframe the article as a list, and try for Featured List (there isn't a "Good list", I think?). I'm a bit hazy about the borderline between article and list: any thoughts? PamD (talk) 23:15, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
 * That is one option; as you say, there's no equivalent Good List process. If the article was to be converted, it'd need some formatting changes, and the information more or less standardised (ie: dates, locations, and notes for each one, perhaps in a table but not necessarily). What might be a problem if you try to go down that route is comprehensiveness, criterion 3. From the article, the exact number of statues isn't known, so the important consideration is "It comprehensively covers the defined scope, providing at least all of the major items and, where practical, a complete set of items; where appropriate, it has annotations that provide useful and appropriate information about the items" (emphasis mine). Deciding which are "major" would probably be a matter of seeing which ones are mentioned in reliable sources. It's a while since I've been involved in lists, so it might be an good idea to ask for some input from WT:FL. I don't think there's a solid line as such, it's basically what the main author thinks: the requirements for GA and FL are different, but in cases where a list has few entries an a lot of analysis, or an article has lots of examples it's pretty much the author's discretion which process they go for by my understanding. Nev1 (talk) 23:27, 26 August 2010 (UTC)

As the article hasn't progressed much since the review was opened, I'm closing it. I'm afraid the article has not passed due to concerns about coverage. I you disagree with the outcome you may as for a reassessment, but I hope you continue to work on the article regardless. [[User:Nev1|Nev1 (talk) 16:30, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Comments from nominator
I tried! I left messages on relevant article and project pages to ask for sources about the Caracas and Stockholm statues, but had no help. I emailed the library in Ellenville to ask for sources for the article written by their retired librarian, but had an unhelpful reply with no further information. I fixed a broken link re the Cleethorpes one by emailing the council webmaster. I could pull out more information from one or two of the sources to expand the stories of the individual statues, and will clarify the New Orleans one when I've time, but there seems to be nothing available about the inspiration for the original statue, or indeed nothing to identify which was the original one. I doubt that the Rosson book will have much more info, and I think it would be very difficult/expensive to source a copy. You say "there needs to be something on the provenance and inspiration, even if it's pure speculation (sourced of course)", but it doesn't appear as if any reliable source offers this, beyond what's already in the article.

Thanks for your input and help. I might think about reformatting it as a list sometime, though not right now. It looks like the poor little fellow is destined not to be "Good" in the foreseeable future. PamD (talk) 13:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)