Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Lafayette Square (Buffalo)


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lafayette Square, Buffalo

 * Failed --Eurocopter (talk) 14:50, 22 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 

I am nominating this article for A-Class review because it is an interesting town square with a notable focal American Civil War monument. I would like to find better sources for the article, but I have been unable to.TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:29, 23 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose on criterion A1 - (this version)
 * Hmm. The two/three-in-one images are really distracting, IMHO. In order, I understand the need for the first and second ones (although in the first, what does the second picture ("Niagara Square to Lafayette Square") have to do with the article? If I'm reading the caption right, that is more of a picture of Niagara Square, not Lafayette). I don't see how the third really relates to the article (and how it helps a reader understand the topic), and same with the pictures of Gov. Grover Cleveland and Gov. John Hartranft in the fourth one (they attended a ceremony. IMO, that doesn't warrant their picture being in the article). The last three-for-one is alright.
 * The third mulitple image is a picture of the man for whom the square was named (is this lost on the reader) and a plaque signifying the squares notability.
 * Personally, this square is notable by its association with Grover Cleveland. Ellicott was the planner who made the map in the first three-in-one and is notable as the planner of the city. John Hartranft is somewhat relevant because I believe it is rare for dedications to include governors from neighboring states.  Thus, I believe that this square is notable by his inclusion.  I guess of all the images you you brought up for discussion, this is the only one I don't think is necessary, but I am not convinced it really needs to be removed.  Ask yourself, why is this square notable.  It is notable in large part for the attendees at its dedication, IMO.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:33, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Apologies @ the third, what I meant to say was that the plaque doesn't help much and just a pic of Lafayette might be better.
 * I'm not saying that it's bad for the governor's to be in the article, my friend; I'm saying that their photos aren't needed because they don't add much to a reader's understanding of this square. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  20:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I am a guy who often only reads the infobox and WP:LEAD. I know there are also people who just scan articles that have pictures.  Think like a scanner of articles.  Does "both Gov. Grover Cleveland and Gov. John Hartranft attended the square's Soldiers and Sailors dedication." help the reader understand about the square.  Things that get two governors to attend are extremely important.  The last state level or lower function that I am aware was attended by out of state governors was the David Paterson inauguration after the Eliot Spitzer scandal.  It might be common to get both your state senators to attend something, but to get an out of state gov is a really really big deal, AFAIK. Those pics with that caption says to the reader: "Pay attention to the fact that this is a notable subject because it of who felt it was important." In a sense it says this is a notable subject because an out of state governor says it is important.  Think about what types of functions a governor from a neighboring state would attend in your state and you will get the picture.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:56, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree with Ed on this. I don't believe either Governor's photograph warrants inclusion within the article if all they did was attend a dedication; to mee it seems like their photos are going slightly off topic. Also, I'm not sold on the plaque and also agree that just the image of Lafayette should suffice. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 23:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Re-reading the plaque I have added material sourced from it.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I have removed the less directly related governor.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:45, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The next problem is MOS:IMAGE problems - you've got image sandwiches in the article.
 * What is your screen resolution? I am not seeing sandwiching at any res between 1024 and 1600.  Where in the article are you seeing the sandwiching?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:36, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 1280 x 800&mdash;2 overlaps 3, 3 overlaps 4 and 5 overlaps 6 on my screen. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  20:34, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * At 1280, it seems that the images never take up more than half the width although for a few lines each side is affected. I don't think this is what the squeezing policy is about.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * There is also some sandwiching on my screen between the third and fourth image sets. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 23:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In truth, I wish I had more to add to this article so that there was more text for the given pictures. I have removed one picture so that there is less squeezing.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:48, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * What makes refs #1,2 and 13 (http://www.buffaloah.com/h/histindex.html) reliable?
 * For 13 see http://www.buffaloah.com/index.html . It seems he is an award-winning internet historian.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 18:50, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Winning one award from the city doesn't automatically make him reliable; "if a site is written by a noted expert who has been independently published by reliable sources in the field, or is hosted by a college or university institute concerned with the field, it may be reliable, depending on the text cited or whether there should be other, more reliable (for example, peer-reviewed) sources available." (for more, please see Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches.) — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  22:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I am working on swapping out refs. The remaining refs from 1, 2 & 13 are now 3, 14 & 15.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:42, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I am having a heck of a time replacing refs with online sources here in Chicago. This may be a problem that can only be corrected by a visit to the Buffalo Public Library.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:32, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thought: stop searching for Lafayette Square directly. For example, use Google Books and search for a biography of Van Buren or a history of the Free Soil Party to replace this sentence's ref: "Presidential history was made in Lafayette Square when former United States President Martin Van Buren received the Free Soil Party nomination for the 1848 election." — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  04:42, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref #6 isn't reliable&mdash;just read the home page...it's a self-published site run by an embittered former employee.
 * I have swapped out this ref.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:27, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * What makes ref #7 (http://world.nycsubway.org/index.html) a reliable source?
 * I have swapped this ref out with a Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority ref.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:24, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * What makes refs #8–11 (http://www.emporis.com/en/) reliable?
 * Last time I checked almost all of the articles in the Template:US tallest buildings lists use emporis and most of those are featured class.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * See my above reply to refs 1,2 and 13. I'm still wary here because the FL's I looked at were passed in '07 and '08 and did not appear to have a thorough reference review. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  22:53, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Newspaper titles should not be fully capitalized like they are. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  13:49, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:02, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, forgot the disambig and link check: a few disambigs need to be addressed, and a few external links need checking. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  20:42, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 * done.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:24, 24 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Second review - (this version)
 * Two external links need attention.
 * Still wanting to see why refs #8–11 (http://www.emporis.com/en/) are reliable...
 * What is ref #13 referring to...?
 * What makes refs #15 and 16 (http://www.buffaloah.com/index.html) reliable?
 * Cheers, — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  04:33, 3 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Third review - (this version)
 * Three concerns remain above, although they are refs #10–13, 19, and 5 now, respectively.
 * It is not very clear to my why 19 (now 20) is a problem. I consider the source of the unconventional publication a WP:RS.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:38, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I got 10, 12 and 13.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I got 11.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:26, 15 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Book references! Yay! :-)
 * More forthcoming.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Any page numbers for the newspaper articles (refs #4 and 15)?
 * No. The Grosvenor Collection room at the Buffalo & Erie County Public Library just has a scrapbook system for that era.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:20, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref #14 (http://www.ci.buffalo.ny.us/) doesn't exactly cover what it cites. — Ed 17  (Talk /  Contribs)  19:45, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I have swapped this one out for a better ref that has a permalink so that the fact will not be edited away again.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:15, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak Support
 * "an arch by Henry Richardson at Niagara Square in front of Buffalo City Hall faded." How does an arch "fade"?
 * Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:15, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
 * "In 1873, the square was named for American Revolutionary War veteran and French General Lafayette, who gave a speech at the square in 1825.[8]" and "In 1879, the name of the square was changed from Court House Park to Lafayette Square." These seem to be contradictory.
 * I think I have cleared that up.
 * The prose could use a copy-edit, for flow and style.
 * I'd also like to see Ed's issues above resolved.
 * I apologize. I am in Buffalo and got sidetracked on other Buffalo related articles (Southtowns, Snyder, New York and John Beilein). Snyder was especially time consuming because it is where I was raised and I felt obligated to get the proper pictures.  I am going to spend some time with this one tonight provided nothing else comes up.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:25, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


 * However, besides these, it is good and nearly ready for A-Class. – Joe   N  14:57, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

I have swapped out some more refs. I continue to believ that the plaque is a WP:RS, which just leaves us a few citations.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:29, 15 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Support with some comments:
 * This image doesn't give the source where it came from in order to allow it to be checked to see if it's for real or not.
 * That is not my image. I could swap in a new map image such as this if you like.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:27, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure what this sentence, from the 2nd paragraph of the History section means: "The courthouse was used as the place for the determination of justice for the American side of the Niagara River until it was abandoned on March 11, 1876."
 * What is "Buffalo Place, Inc"?
 * Probably not significant enough to warrant the redlink I created.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:30, 16 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The Chris Andrle website doesn't appear to be a reliable source, instead just someone's private site.
 * Otherwise, looks good and appears to cover the subject well. Cla68 (talk) 06:38, 16 April 2009 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.