Talk:The Mansion on O Street

Possible copyright violation
PLEASE NOTE THIS COPY IS PERMITTED TO USE SEE: http://www.omansion.com/museum/about/history/ - BOTTOM OF THE PAGE re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0 PLEASE RESTORE - THANKS (Sortiesimon (talk) 14:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC))
 * Thanks for pointing that out. The source page does show the copied text is released for use by per CC-BY-SA. There is no copyright violation and I have removed the template. Please note that, although the text is cleared for use, it may still require editing to meet Wikipedia criteria for neutral point-of-view, independent sourcing and non-promotional language. — Cactus Writer (talk) 17:38, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Advertising and reference problems
Articles need to adhere to independent sourcing and refrain from adding non-promotional language. For example, in the introduction alone I problems with these sources: I have reduced the introduction per Wikipedia manual of style. I'll get to the main body shortly. Until the article is edited, the tags for advertising and referencing should remain. — Cactus Writer (talk) 23:41, 5 November 2010 (UTC)
 * This reference is a two sentence blurb in a Conde Nast travel article which also mentions 6 other hotels. The hotel is certainly not "featured" in the magazine as stated.
 * This reference is a tag comment on google maps (anyone can add these). It is not an RS source and information it sources needs to be removed.
 * This reference has a single sentence in a 10-page article about Willis Edwards which merely mentions that Edwards paid for Rosa Parks to stay at the hotel once -- this is trivia at best. It is used here to falsely imply she has been there "since 1980". It needs to be removed from the introduction, if not from the entire article.
 * The Mansion has been a venue for artists, musicians, writers, dignitaries, scientists, business leaders, and heads of state... Which upscale hotel doesn't have these guests? This is meaningless spam and should be removed.
 * Articles in the National Geographic Traveler and Washington City Paper are acceptable as reliable independent sources, whereas a self-submitted blog piece by this person is not. (By the way, the Washington City Paper story is referenced three times and yet this article fails to mention the entire reason for that story -- neighborhood criticism of the hotel. That should be included.)

Further reference issues

 * This reference is used to cite the assertion that Edward Clark was the architect of the building when it in no way supports this claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:4040:2977:A700:2DE4:319D:11EC:9DCA (talk) 17:31, 17 November 2022 (UTC)