Talk:Wellington Botanic Garden/GA1
Appearance
GA review
[edit]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.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Wainuiomartian (talk · contribs) 22:04, 14 February 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Jonathanischoice (talk · contribs) 03:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Happy to review this, looks pretty good so far; I will probably not get much chance before this weekend, however. — Jon (talk) 03:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- Hi. Thanks for reviewing the article. I've attended to most of the comments, and rewrote/expanded the first part of the history section. I could go through looking for alternatives to WCC articles (primary sources) but I believe they are all basic and non-controversial, and in the case of the management plan, relevant. Please let me know what else needs doing. Wainuiomartian (talk) 04:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Wainuiomartian: I think this is meeting all the criteria, with only one point left, about the early British colonial gardens' connection with Kew. I don't have the history book to hand, but this paragraph in the Hector book on p. 78 seems relevant:
- “During the 1870s and ’80s, the Wellington Botanic Garden’s connection with the Royal Botanic Garden at Kew made it part of a network of botanic gardens in British possessions around the world. This led to it becoming an active participant in the international exchange of plants, which became particularly intense during the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. During Hector’s time the trade was not one way. Hector had become a personal friend of the Kew director, Joseph Hooker, after agreeing to host Hooker’s son when he came to New Zealand for the benefit of his health. Hooker subsequently took an interest in the development of the garden, advising Hector on how to use some of the difficult sites, suggesting plants to grow, and sending seed of rhododendrons from Sikkim. In addition, Hooker wrote about and sent sketches of the pinetum—a plantation of pine trees and other conifers—he was developing at Kew.”[1]
- Amusingly, there's also this quote on p. 71, “In 1866 Joseph Hooker, the director of B&W Gardens in London, wrote that he was ‘glad you [Hector] have started the museum at Wellington’ because ‘there is nothing like a museum and gardens to screw money out of the public for science’”! Thoughts? — Jon (talk) 02:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC) Jon (talk) 02:52, 14 March 2025 (UTC)
- @Wainuiomartian: I think this is meeting all the criteria, with only one point left, about the early British colonial gardens' connection with Kew. I don't have the history book to hand, but this paragraph in the Hector book on p. 78 seems relevant:
Review criteria
[edit]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. | Good prose, conforms to specified NZ English. |
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | lead ok; watch words ok; layout ok; fiction n/a; lists n/a. |
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | References conform to layout guidelines. |
![]() |
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). | RS ok; coverage ok. |
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | No original research, spot check ok. |
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | The Copyvio report returns 24% and matches are mostly proper nouns. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Coverage ok. |
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | No over-detailed sections. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | No evident controversial or biased content. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | No evident current controversies or disputes. |
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. | All images are on Commons with appropriate licenses. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | Images are good, relevant, with captions. |
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. |
Comments
[edit]Book now in Wikidata.[2]
Lead/introduction
|
---|
|
History
|
---|
|
Features
|
---|
|
Visitors and tourism
|
---|
|
References
|
---|
|
Not required for GA, but while we're about it
|
---|
|
References
- ^ a b Winsome Shepherd; Walter Cook (2008). "Planting for Prosperity". In Simon Nathan; Mary Varnham (eds.). The amazing world of James Hector. Wellington: Awa Press. p. 73-82. ISBN 978-0-9582750-7-1. Wikidata Q133105219.
- ^ a b Winsome Shepherd; Walter Cameron Cook (1988). The Botanic Garden, Wellington: A New Zealand History 1840–1987. Wellington: Millwood Press. ISBN 978-0-908582-79-2. OCLC 21271594. Wikidata Q133247623.
- ^ See template documentation: Adjective
- ^ E. C. Nelson (February 1992). "SHEPHERD, W. and COOK, W. The Botanic Garden, Wellington. A New Zealand history 1840–1987. Millwood Press, Wellington: 1988. Pp 396; illustrated. Price: none stated. ISBN: 0-908582-79-X". Archives of Natural History. 19 (1): 132. doi:10.3366/ANH.1992.19.1.132A. ISSN 0260-9541. Wikidata Q96149067.
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.