This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment. |
Courtnye, I think you did a very thorough job with your outline! For me I think that I would move the hazardous materials to before notable examples as that seems like a more natural flow. I feel that the conservation and restoration treatments should go after causes of deterioration, unless the hazardous material directly relates to either topic. I was also wondering if you have come across any research that mentions any sacred/religious aspects to taxidermy that would prevent certain type of work being done on them? There may not be any with actual taxidermy specimens but more with objects from animals. Another thought I had is that you could include a history section or notable taxidermists (Carl Akeley, Leon Pray, etc.) to expand on the topic. I also included some additional links for sources.
Overall, I think you did a good job with your outline and that it will follow the Wikipedia guidelines. You included your sources in external links right now but you should also include them in the resources section as you start working on the content. I think with your topic you should not have a problem with keeping opinions out as the information will be pretty straightforward. http://www.conservators-converse.org/2014/05/recoloring-faded-taxidermy-research-into-the-properties-and-applicability-of-dye-materials-for-conservation-treatment/ http://wildlifepreservations.com/port_restoration.html https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-technology-old-dioramas/ http://conservation.myspecies.info/node/32 LaurenAnibas ( talk) 21:25, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Courtnye,
I agree with Lauren. I may add to what Lauren has said in terms of how to determine any type of deterioration due to time, environment, etc. (primarily) as damage due to mishandling or other "trainable" type of damage is much more apparent to what needs to be done.
Sources look great, I'd add more natural history collections (e.g the Field, I think there's a Natural History museum in LA), and proper handling even though it sounds somewhat obvious.
Davidsclapp ( talk) 02:07, 1 April 2017 (UTC)
This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This article is currently the subject of an educational assignment. |
Courtnye, I think you did a very thorough job with your outline! For me I think that I would move the hazardous materials to before notable examples as that seems like a more natural flow. I feel that the conservation and restoration treatments should go after causes of deterioration, unless the hazardous material directly relates to either topic. I was also wondering if you have come across any research that mentions any sacred/religious aspects to taxidermy that would prevent certain type of work being done on them? There may not be any with actual taxidermy specimens but more with objects from animals. Another thought I had is that you could include a history section or notable taxidermists (Carl Akeley, Leon Pray, etc.) to expand on the topic. I also included some additional links for sources.
Overall, I think you did a good job with your outline and that it will follow the Wikipedia guidelines. You included your sources in external links right now but you should also include them in the resources section as you start working on the content. I think with your topic you should not have a problem with keeping opinions out as the information will be pretty straightforward. http://www.conservators-converse.org/2014/05/recoloring-faded-taxidermy-research-into-the-properties-and-applicability-of-dye-materials-for-conservation-treatment/ http://wildlifepreservations.com/port_restoration.html https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/new-technology-old-dioramas/ http://conservation.myspecies.info/node/32 LaurenAnibas ( talk) 21:25, 31 March 2017 (UTC)
Courtnye,
I agree with Lauren. I may add to what Lauren has said in terms of how to determine any type of deterioration due to time, environment, etc. (primarily) as damage due to mishandling or other "trainable" type of damage is much more apparent to what needs to be done.
Sources look great, I'd add more natural history collections (e.g the Field, I think there's a Natural History museum in LA), and proper handling even though it sounds somewhat obvious.
Davidsclapp ( talk) 02:07, 1 April 2017 (UTC)