Talk:Safe Return (statue)

Safe Return (statue) 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: February 19, 2024. (Reviewed version).

United States: Washington 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.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Washington (assessed as Low-importance).

Sculpture

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sculpture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Sculpture 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.SculptureWikipedia:WikiProject SculptureTemplate:WikiProject Sculpturesculpture

A fact from Safe Return (statue) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 18 March 2024 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that names have been steadily added to a Bellingham fishermen's memorial as local fishermen are lost at sea?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2024/March. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Safe Return (statue).

Wikipedia

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Rjjiii talk 01:36, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that names have been steadily added to a Bellingham fisherman's memorial as local fishermen are lost at sea? Source: https://www.cascadiadaily.com/2023/dec/04/whats-the-deal-with-the-safe-return-statue-at-zuanich-point-park/
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Statue of George Washington (Perth Amboy, New Jersey)

Created by Generalissima (talk). Self-nominated at 20:02, 14 February 2024 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Safe Return (statue); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

What an interesting article. Hook is interesting, QPQ is done, hook verified/matches article. Earwig's is clean. Good to go. —Panamitsu (talk) 22:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- @Panamitsu: for the bot. Queen of Hearts (chat • stalk • she/they) 20:08, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. Ghosts of Europa (talk) 22:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

This review is transcluded from Talk:Safe Return (statue)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Taking up this review. No major issues jumped out on a first read. Ghosts of Europa (talk · contribs) 02:00, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

On the whole, this looks good. Earwig shows no issues. It's focused and easy to read. Nice detective work compiling these newspaper articles, including a classified ad!

I think some of your citations got mixed up, probably because you're mostly citing the same authors in the same newspaper. I fixed a few of these, but there are a few outstanding issues:

~~The first sentence says the statue is also called "Fishermen's Memorial". This isn't cited or mentioned in the body.~~
- Google Maps calls it this but I couldn't find a source so I'll just remove that. - G
~~The anchor's supposed 1900 date is cited to two sources, but I don't see where citation 3 ("Memorial") mentions a date for it.~~
- That was meant to be slightly earlier, oops. Good catch. - G
The granite plinth, trucked to the site from South Dakota, was installed on May 26, 1999, with the statue then hoisted atop the pedestal by crane - This cites an article from 1996, even though it happened in 1999.
- Oh, I didn't see this! Apologies, corrected the cite. -G
Six names have been added to the memorial since 2003 to commemorate other local fishermen who died at sea - The way I read this, the article implies there have been more than six names, and it's just listing six as examples.
- Oh, good point. Let me rephrase that. - G
~~The plaques on the memorial depict a purse seiner, Squalicum Harbor, a ship's wheelhouse, and a Native American fisherman - This source doesn't mention the plaques.~~
- It calls them panels, but I think those are synonymous here. Rephrased anyhow because I think panel is a better word. - G
  - My bad, I was scanning for the word "plaque" and missed this. - GoE

Once you fix up these citations, I'm happy to approve this!

@Ghosts of Europa: Thank you very much for your feedback! Responded. Generalissima (talk) 03:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

oh @Ghosts of Europa: i forgot to ping when i fixed that last bit. Generalissima (talk) 18:39, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.