User talk:Colegradyjohn/sandbox

Article Evaluation
Article Evaluation: American Historic Carpentry

There are multiple links that could be integrated to other wikipedia pages. For example, balloon framing could be linked to framing page where a paragraph describes it; timber framing could be related to the timber framing page. Links included are also oddly placed - when a word is used five times for example the link appears at third usage instead of first. This should be corrected.

Mention of pattern books should be integrated into the background section as should the gentleman architect.

The background section aligns with what I have read thus far on the subject. It should contain more source citations though as to where this information can be supported.

“History of many regions” this reads awkwardly and should reference more global perspective.

“Notable examples of structural carpentry which were not used in America include cruck framing” - Was this the only notable type not used in America? Where is this information coming from? Needs to cite. Also maybe not include this item unless going to dedicate a paragraph/section to what Americans did not do and why it is notable.

In defining difference between carpenter and joiner / cabinetmaker need to site where this information coming from; this is a comment throughout article - there should be at least one citation per paragraph.

Additionally, when referencing board and plank sizing - where is this coming from? How does this person know this and why should we trust this information? Needs citation.

Gallery of wall types - this would be helpful to be consistent throughout - either all drawings or all images.

Some run on sentences that could be divided up. For example, “Timber framing, historically called a braced frame, was the most common method of building wooden buildings in America[2] from the 17th-century European settlements until the early 20th century when timber framing was replaced by balloon framing and then platform framing in houses and what was called plank or "joist" framing in barns.”

Citations should not interrupt a sentence but follow the end of a sentence.

A drawing of post in ground should be included.

“Earthfast” construction needs to be explained as has been noted by other reviewers noting “dubious - discuss”.

Order of common framing in U.S. (timber framing, log framing, etc.) is not supported; this could be assumed to be an opinion or personal observation as no citation to source.

Balloon framing section should be expanded; calls this a rare type - not sure if this is true -would need to fact check.

The corner post construction section is very long. It might be more useful as this is an overview to summarize this section and make a separate page dedicated to it.

Additionally included in this section is the Swedish for this type of construction but included is a “?”; this seems inappropriate to include here and should be fact checked before included

In Plank-framed barns section a citation is written out; instead this should be in a proper citation link.

The article was not wrapped up well and gets very spotty at the end. The section “wooden bridges” needs to be expanded as does “other wooden structures” and “traditional carpentry tools” if they are going to be included here.

Either, this page, American historic carpentry, should be made specific to housing or each section concisely shortened linking out to other pages. At a point it needs to be tailored as it becomes too lengthy for reference. Either way sections of different framing vary in length and should be more uniform.

The article appears to be neutral, although needs backing by citations and as it covers a wide range of topics found elsewhere on Wikipedia could use more links to other pages.

The person seems informed on the history, but did not fully do the work of integrating citations in order to back up the work. Additionally, the article could be grammatically refined through editing.

The citations that are included seem reliable and appropriate for inclusion. Both Dell Upton and Fiske Kimball are referenced, who are reputable American architectural historians.

The article is rated C and is a wikiproject “architecture”, “United States”, and “Woodworking” with mid importance.

The article seems to align with what has been discussed in classes, but is missing some information and could be refined as discussed above.

In reviewing the talk page, it appears only edits made so far have been to add citations or links to other pages.Colegradyjohn (talk) 15:09, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

Peer Review Comments - Pendant Vault Article
Hello!

The article is great! I recommend you to revise the first paragraph and consider change the order of the first and second sentences. Consider adding a section titled "Origins" when you mention the history/origins of the Pendant Vault. Also, consider adding a section with a select list of buildings that have any Pendant Vaults rather than mentioning them in a paragraph. I suggest fewer direct quotes from authors in the article. Lastly, consider adding some drawings or diagrams to show visual and structural characteristics of the Pendant Vault. All the information in the article is relevant. The article is neutral and have balanced viewpoints. You have great scholarly and reliable sources.

Excellent and keep the good work!

Best,

Ciaberde (talk) 17:26, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Instructor comments
This will be an impressive contribution to Wikipedia and greatly exceeds expectations for this project! I agree with your peer reviewer's comments, except that it does seem appropriate to discuss a few selected examples in prose in addition to maintaining the more extensive bullet lists in the existing article. As you finalize, please review the guidance on repeated citations. Elizabeth Linden Rahway (talk) 11:35, 3 December 2018 (UTC)