Wikipedia:Peer review/Muisca raft/archive1

Muisca raft


I've listed this article for peer review because I'm hoping for GA down the line. I'm not asking for an in-depth review at this time (it's probably too soon for that), but rather a quick read and big picture comments. My main question: is there anything big that's totally missing? Grateful for your direction on where to focus my efforts.

Thanks, GuineaPigC77  ( 𒅗𒌤 ) ☕ 07:32, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Z1720
Not completing a deep read, but instead did a quick scan for major problems. Some things to consider:
 * "Father Santamaría arranged for the object to be acquired by the Bank of the Republic and placed in the Gold Museum[35] where it remains." Does cite 35 verify "where it remains"? If so, the cite should be at the end of the sentence. If not, a new citation is needed or it needs to be removed.
 * The looting section is mainly a block quote. Is this necessary, or can the information be summarised?
 * Many of your harv refs are broken, and do not point to the correct location.
 * "who established one of the great civilisations in the Americas" opinionated statements like this are not in WP:WIKIVOICE and should probably be removed.
 * Use Template:Convert for measurements to include imperial measurements

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 03:37, 29 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much Z1720 for your comments. This is exactly the kind of guidance I was looking for. I'll work on addressing each of these issues. GuineaPigC77  ( 𒅗𒌤 ) ☕ 10:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)

Comments by Richard3120
I live in Bogota, and have seen this piece several times in the Gold Museum, so I'm quite familiar with it. Generally I think the article covers everything... there were two points that struck me while reading it: Otherwise, this is a really good piece of work. :-) Richard3120 (talk) 01:30, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure you need to add a citation after every clause or sentence. For example, references 43 and 48 each appear consecutively three times after three clauses... I think they could just be cited once at the end of the three clauses, having so many citations in the text is a bit distracting.
 * Check the guidance at WP:GALLERY... I'm not sure so many pictures of the raft from different angles would be allowed in a GA-article.


 * Thanks so much for your comments @Richard3120! Your point about excessive citations is well-taken; as I'm going through fixing citations per Z1720's comment, I will combine identical citations and generally try to dial it back. I'll also check WP:GALLERY and make the necessary adjustments.
 * Note that I am in the process of inquiring whether the museum can provide additional photos. I am aware of excellent photos found in this source:
 * And I'm currently trying to figure out how to use those photos. In the meantime, if the gallery has too many angles, I will scale back.
 * Thanks again! Jealous that you get to see it in person! GuineaPigC77  ( 𒅗𒌤 ) ☕ 05:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, and I might need to post this at the top of the review, but I just discovered that an old version of the lead was blatant plagiarism from this website. The lead has been re-worked several times, but remnants of the lifted material were still present. I just did an emergency edit to remove all remnants. I opened a discussion on the article's talk page. GuineaPigC77  ( 𒅗𒌤 ) ☕ 05:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, and I might need to post this at the top of the review, but I just discovered that an old version of the lead was blatant plagiarism from this website. The lead has been re-worked several times, but remnants of the lifted material were still present. I just did an emergency edit to remove all remnants. I opened a discussion on the article's talk page. GuineaPigC77  ( 𒅗𒌤 ) ☕ 05:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks
Z1720, Richard3120, I believe I’ve addressed all of the concerns you raised here. Thanks again to both of you for your time. I think this article is much better now. I’m going to close the review and try out GAN. Thanks! GuineaPigC77 ( 𒅗𒌤 ) ☕ 04:19, 6 October 2022 (UTC)