Talk:John F. Adams House

John F. Adams House has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: November 14, 2014. (Reviewed version).

A fact from John F. Adams House appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 27 November 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that the John F. Adams House has been described as the "finest late Italianate dwelling still standing in Pawtucket"?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/November. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John F. Adams House.

Wikipedia

National Register of Historic Places Low‑importance

	National Register of Historic Places portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject National Register of Historic Places, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of U.S. historic sites listed on the National Register of Historic Places on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.National Register of Historic PlacesWikipedia:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesTemplate:WikiProject National Register of Historic PlacesNational Register of Historic Places
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Rhode Island Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Rhode Island portal This article is supported by WikiProject Rhode Island (assessed as Low-importance).

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:John F. Adams House/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: 3family6 (talk · contribs) 00:51, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Decent prose, no copyvios or close paraphrasing. Layout fine.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
The Hotpads listing is no longer available. It just says "Darn. This listing is no longer available."--¿3family6 _contribs 20:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC) Other than that, the referencing is solid. I'm AGF accepting the first reference, which is a downloadable data file with NRHP codes. I'm assuming, again on good faith, that this is where the listing error noted in the lead is located.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
Deals with major aspects, doesn't get side-tracked.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
Neutral, encyclopedic tone.--¿3family6 _contribs 01:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
Highly stable.--¿3family6 _contribs 01:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Suitable captions, illustrate the subject, no copyvios.--¿3family6 _contribs 01:20, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Overall: Just deadlink holding this up.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:23, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Deadlink and minor grammatical error resolved.--¿3family6 _contribs 04:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Pass/Fail:

@3family6: - I just removed it because even Archive.org messed up the image and data capture. The modern fixtures and such are not really important. I do not feel like putting "Land Records" as a source for someone to follow and it is really trivial for a historic home that the details inside be "updated" from time to time. The NRHP cares more about the structure. The problem with these listings from the NRHP is that the surveys done on the properties are really sparse in comparison because they are private residences that are in use. I live in a historic home and we can refuse examination at any time - our objection to NRHP alone would prevent listing. The acceptable public details on these properties is sparse, but the NRHP compiles the private records which I rather not list on Wikipedia (for obvious reasons). I keep watching to see if they are doing a historic house tour, but so far I'm out of luck unless I decide to rent it! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:53, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh and as for the data surrounding the name, yeah the NRHP never fixed it, but the actual nomination and details (viewable in the link) all say John F. Adams. Lovely ain't it? Also, if you use the MPS sheet - it is page 61 on the online documentation and continuation sheet 57 otherwise. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 20:58, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to head to work now, I'll take a look at this when I get back. Thanks, --¿3family6 _contribs 21:01, 13 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks all set. It's fine if those details are omitted for lack of a decent source.--¿3family6 _contribs 04:24, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on John F. Adams House. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140517130254/http://www.pawtucketfoundation.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/River%20Corridor%20Development%20Plan_DRAFT_09-25-13-2.pdf to http://www.pawtucketfoundation.org/Portals/0/Uploads/Documents/River%20Corridor%20Development%20Plan_DRAFT_09-25-13-2.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:45, 27 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]