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

Reviewer: Asilvering (talk · contribs) 00:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	Most sections need work; see Specific Comments, below.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	Since you have a whole section about the renovation, I think you should mention it (briefly) in the lead. Right now it would work well at the end of the second paragraph. Then, can you make sure that all of the information that is in this lead already exists elsewhere on this page, and move the citations down to wherever that is? I don't see anything for the "design was influenced by" sentence anywhere else, for example. When you're done, there shouldn't be any citations in the lead, because every piece of info in the lead should be mentioned somewhere else in the article with a citation. This lead is much better than what used to be here already! -- done	Pass

2. Verifiable with no original research:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	Comments moved below	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	Comments moved below	Pass
(c) (original research)	Comments moved below	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	Some text has been directly copied, but it's appropriately licensed and tagged.	Pass

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	I find it odd that there is no information about public access or tourism, major events, or so on here. I understand that this is mostly an article about the architecture of the building, but would expect people might also visit this page to learn about basics like "what is this building for" (answered only briefly in the lead), "what happens there", and "(how) can I visit". I note that United States Capitol and White House both have "Security" headings, which is likely to be excessive here, but might be a useful comparison? Or compare the "Function" heading on Rideau Hall, for example, which addresses regular use of the building, events, and tourism. -- all done or otherwise addressed	Pass
(b) (focused)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has left no comments here	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Notes	Result
The reviewer has left no comments here	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	The reviewer has left no comments here	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Your call here, this is just my opinion: I think the "lady slipper on column" image from the gallery would be more relevant in "decorations and symbols" where it is mentioned. I'd remove the eight-pointed-star image so that there's "room" for the lady slipper one here. You've already got a photo of the Rotunda floor in the final gallery, but I think this photo (the one in "decorations and symbols") shows off the star better; I would swap it into the gallery instead. I don't think you need quite so many images involving Progress of the State either. Following the "less is more" principle, I'd remove the first three images in the gallery (but I would move the one of the dome up to the section describing the dome). Again, that's up to you.	Pass

Result	Notes
Pass	The reviewer has left no comments here

"Additionally, poor ventilation led in the push for a new Capitol building in 1893." -- three footnotes here. The third does not say anything about ventilation, which leads me to doubt the others. Can you please check that these citations are where they belong? I added the fourth one, which does mention the ventilation. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here is where I pulled the information out of:

The source for the third citation "Building History | Minnesota State Capitol" does mention ventilation

"...it was too small for the growing state almost immediately. It also had ventilation problems."

The source for the citation "Historic Structures Report for Repairs and Restoration to the Minnesota State Capitol, Introduction"

"Shortage of space, lack of fireproofing, and the presence of dry rot made the building ever more unsuitable for its function..."

The source for the citation for "Cass Gilbert, Life and Work: Architect of the Public Domain"

"...but overcrowding and poor ventilation led legislative recommendation for a new capitol..."

The the third citation "Building History | Minnesota State Capitol" simply may be overkill but it does mention overcrowding which while 'Shortage of space' is mentioned it my not always lead to overcrowding. Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great! -- asilvering (talk) 01:42, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"In 1893 Governor Knute Nelson appointed the seven-member Board of State Capitol Commissioners to oversee the construction of a new Capitol following the recommendation of the state legislature. The board oversaw every aspect of the work." -- source doesn't mention anything about who appointed the board. If you don't have a source for this, you can simply rewrite: "A seven-member Board of State Capitol Commissioners oversaw every aspect of the work." -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It does say it in the right sidebar Chronology. However, can find other sources however if you think it would make it stronger. Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, so it does! My bad. You're in the clear. -- asilvering (talk) 01:43, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"leading to requests for Gilbert to design Capitol buildings for other states, such as West Virginia and Arkansas, and other notable structures." -- source does not say anything about this at all. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops! Wrong source

I have added the correct source. Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Most recently, the offices of the Senate moved out when the Minnesota Senate Building was built in 2015." -- source doesn't mention anything about the move, just the date of the building. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have added a source about the move.Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've slightly modified that sentence to fit and pulled the old footnote. -- asilvering (talk) 01:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"which helps avoid the heaving problem created by the freezing and thawing of Minnesota winters" -- not mentioned in these sources -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Paragraph six.

"Gilbert's three-part dome construction incorporated a middle dome to support the lantern on top and an internal water drainage system."

I know their is at least one other source which I didn't cite but I am unable to find it at the moment. Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still missing the "heaving problem created by the freezing and thawing of Minnesota winters"? I know that freezing and snow cause these problems, but I don't know that because I read it in the article, so the citation doesn't work. I don't think this one is terribly contentious so I would say it's fine to leave this as "verifiable" if not "verified" for a GA, but if you do find that source it would be helpful to add it. -- asilvering (talk) 01:52, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Gilbert sought out many of the finest artists of the period, such as Kenyon Cox, Elmer Garnsey, Edwin Howland Blashfield, Henry Oliver Walker, Edward Emerson Simmons, John La Farge, Douglas Volk, Francis D. Millet, Howard Pyle, and Rufus Fairchild Zogbaum." -- can you double-check this for accuracy? The question I have is, did Gilbert himself seek every one of these individual people out? Or is this just a list of artists who contributed, who Gilbert may or may not have had much to do with hiring? -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Technically Gilbert did not do the hiring as that was the board's job. However, he did seek them out and they basically approved of his recommendations. There are quite a few sources that talk about his control of the art and design of the Capitol. I have added another source which goes more into depth on his selection of each artist. Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, works for me. -- asilvering (talk) 01:54, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"...that Daniel Chester French and Edward Clark Potter had modeled for the World's Columbian Exposition of 1893 in Chicago. Gilbert saw this quadriga group at and made plans to have artists adapt it for Minnesota." -- this doesn't quite agree with what it says in this source that you've also used on this page: [1]. Can you double-check this wording to make sure it is accurate? why doesn't the page I just linked mention ECP? Who exactly made the statue for the Capitol? -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am confused. The sources I cited are Minnesota's State Capitol: The Art and Politics of a Public Building and Minnesota's Capitol: A Centennial Story.

Potter sculpted the horses, as that was his speciality. It is explained on the Minnesota State Capitol artwork however, I did not explain it very well. And it is not explained at all on the Progress of the State page. I see I have more work to do. :-) Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The executive rooms should be finished in perfectly plain color without elaborate decoration of any kind," Gilbert wrote in a 1903 letter to the Board." -- can you clarify what source this is from by citing it at the end of this sentence? And double-check that the quote has been transcribed accurately? -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Myotus This one's still missing a footnote, and it's a direct quote so it does need one to pass GA criteria. If you're not sure and can't check, you could just remove this sentence for now and add it back later once you manage to find the original source. The paragraph will work fine without it and then we can pass the article. -- asilvering (talk) 01:59, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Gilbert had originally planned ... and include Civil War homages inside the Capitol building." -- needs a citation -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

check. -- asilvering (talk) 02:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"As time went on, ... the setting for the Minnesota State Capitol." -- do you have a citation for this? The one that was here actually belongs to the paragraph above, so I moved it. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

check. -- asilvering (talk) 02:00, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The project repaired and modernized ... and improved accessibility for people with disabilities." -- this link is a 404 error. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"During renovation, more than 30,000 pieces of marble were restored or replaced." -- that's not what this source says. Source: "The work included creating a database of the 30,000 marble pieces that make up the Capitol’s exterior, each one reviewed an average of 12 times." I would delete this sentence (I don't think the 30,000 figure is all that important), but this is a pretty interesting article on the restoration so it's probably worth writing a sentence or two about the work it's describing into the wp article and citing it for that. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The amount of public space in the building was doubled to nearly 40,000 square feet, with a number of new public spaces opened to the public for reservation and use year round." -- another 404 -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"...while others remained in place." -- another link error -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The renovation forced ... to the House chamber during the session." -- reference does not support text -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"The bulk ... to the public" -- both footnotes are 404s. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

all of these addressed! -- asilvering (talk) 02:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Gilbert's trips to Europe encouraged his ideas, but he was more directly influenced by the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago." -- I don't have any reason to doubt this is true or that the Historical Society would be incorrect, but surely this comes up in one of your more formally published sources? I would leave the MHS citation in, but adding another would be a good idea. -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"While this was the costliest of the four sites considered for the Capitol, it was the largest, and the Commission concluded that it was the best location for the building." -- can you supply the text from this source that supports this sentence? -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Care given in the construction of the original structure was so great that even far removed mechanical spaces not intended to be seen by the public were designed and built with a high standard of finish and design." -- this one too? -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"With a space shortage in the Capitol, Governor LeVander decided the room should be converted to office use and closed off to the public. There was strong public objection to this temporary solution. Legislators and civic leaders worked to dissuade LeVander, and kept the Reception Room open to visitors. This controversy helped facilitate the recognition for the historic preservation and restoration of many Capitol spaces in the 1970s." -- and this? -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"However, evidence suggests that it was less deliberate and more of an organic process." -- and this? -- asilvering (talk) 02:26, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: I have finished making your recommended edits. Thank you again for your thorough and very helpful review! Please let me know if there are other changes you think the page would benefit from.Myotus (talk) 20:45, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Myotus Back to you! You're almost there. -- asilvering (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Asilvering: I think I got everything on the list and then some. :-) Myotus (talk) 18:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I think my use of the table was confusing - I put a bunch of items in there that you haven't got to. I'll bring them down here out of that box so it's easier for you to check off each one. -- asilvering (talk) 02:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I can't believe I missed the stuff in table. Myotus (talk) 14:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, it's all good except that one direct quote without a footnote, so actually I'm going to remove that sentence right now, pass this, and then if you want to come by and add it back in once you find a specific source for it, you're welcome to do that whenever. Congratulations! You've put a tremendous amount of work into these state capitol articles. I see one still has some more work to go to pass the GA criteria, but you've made a huge difference to this one since it first went up. Grats again. -- asilvering (talk) 02:08, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for all your help and work in reviewing this! This article is much better for your work. This was the first article I have ever submitted for review and I am grateful you have been so helpful. The quote is from one of the two books cited at the end but I can't remember which one. I have them on order from the library so I will know soon enough. Myotus (talk) 18:16, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]