Talk:Forest Park Carousel/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Unexpectedlydian (talk · contribs) 20:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

This looks like a fun one :) I'll be reviewing this using the table below. Comments to follow shortly! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 20:23, 3 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey @Epicgenius, initial review is finished, I'll put the article on hold now. Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 22:26, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

@Unexpectedlydian: Thanks for the review. I've addressed the remaining issues that you've brought up. Epicgenius (talk) 23:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response :) I went ahead and added alt descriptions to the images. All good to go now, happy to promote to GA. Well done! Unexpectedlydian^♯4talk^‽ 16:00, 5 January 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Lead Wikilink Forest Park maybe? Description Y Original carousel Y Current carousel Y
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead sections Y Layout Y Words to watch None identified. Fiction N/A List incorporation Y
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Sources cited correctly and in the correct place. Bibliography in the correct place.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Source check Due to the quantity of citations, I will mainly be checking citations that are used multiple times in the article. Landmarks Preservation Commission 2013, p. 3. Y National Park Service 2004, p. 3. Y Landmarks Preservation Commission 2013, p. 4. The pavilion was originally designed by Victor Christ-Janer as an octagonal structure In the source, it states that the design was a "circular structure". Not sure if these are essentially the same. I got it mixed up; the current pavilion is octagonal. My bad. Epicgenius (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2024 (UTC) Landmarks Preservation Commission 2013, p. 5. Two other horses were made of fiberglass and may have been manufactured by the Fabricon Design Group, which renovated the ride in the late 1980s. I think this info comes from a citation on p.9 of the source. Good catch; I've fixed this. Epicgenius (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2024 (UTC) Farrell, Paul (May 27, 1999). Afterward, the groups asked the New York state government to place the ride on the New York State Register of Historic Places and, by extension, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). I can't see this references in the article (apologies if I'm missing something!). The first sentence of the source says, "The campaign to designate the Forest Park Carousel a special landmark has shifted its focus to New York State because city officials say the ride doesn't qualify." The context is that they sought city landmark status and failed, so they began seeking state landmark status. As for the NRHP status, I just copied this source from somewhere else, which does mention the status. Epicgenius (talk) 00:19, 4 January 2024 (UTC) Lubrano, Alfred (May 28, 1989). Y Holland, Beth (May 15, 1989). Regional newspaper Newsday wrote that he was "instrumental in bringing the carousel to Forest Park". The actual quote from the Newsday article is "instrumental in bringing the Muller carousel to Queens." My bad, I copied what the LPC source said rather than the original quote. Epicgenius (talk) 23:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC) A Newsday reporter said the carousel's valuation was "like finding a carton of Faberge eggs in the bottom of the corner grocer's dairy case" This quote should be attributed to Lubrano (citation 14). Fixed. (I also changed Newsday reporter to New York Daily News reporter; I don't know how that got mixed up). Epicgenius (talk) 23:04, 4 January 2024 (UTC) Guberman, Ira D. (November 25, 1973). Y National Park Service 2004, p. 4. Y Landmarks Preservation Commission 2013, p. 6. Y Hanc, John (July 24, 2003). Y Wagner, Patricia (May 1, 1972). Y Hogwood, Ben (December 18, 2008). Y Colangelo, Lisa L. (May 24, 1989). Y Colangelo, Lisa L. (November 29, 2011). Y
	2c. it contains no original research.	From source spot checks, happy that there has been no OR.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Copyvio detector brings up nothing of concern. From spot checks, happy that there is no plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Content after source check that this article covers the history of the carousel.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article is detailed but not unnecessarily so.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is presented neutrally.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No evidence of edit wars or disruptive editing.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Images are tagged with copyright status. All images need alt text.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Images are relevant and have captions.
	7. Overall assessment.