A fact from Green Guerillas appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 September 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
Horticulture and
Gardening 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.Horticulture and GardeningWikipedia:WikiProject Horticulture and GardeningTemplate:WikiProject Horticulture and GardeningHorticulture and gardening articles
I'll be taking a look at this article! Any section marked with a Working tag means that I haven't finished making comments, but feel free to address any suggestions that you do see, even if I'm not finished! — GhostRiver 16:11, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
"and saw an associated increase in abandoned buildings"
Done
"Many were demolished, sometimes because they had attracted crime, and the number of vacant lots increased." → "Some of these buildings attracted crime, leading the city to demolish the abandoned buildings and increase the number of vacant lots."
This is a change in meaning. I don't think the sourcing states that the demolitions were all necessarily due to attracting crime?
There should be a citation at the end of the first paragraph, per
WP:INTEGRITY
"recalling that "In"..." → "recalling that, "[i]n"..."
Done
"The group requested permission from the city, but it was denied so they proceeded outside of official channels." → "After the city denied the group permission to work on the project, they proceeded outside of official channels."
"Through their activities they taught communities not just about plants, but" → "In addition to teaching communities about plants, the Green Guerillas taught..."
Done
"the year after Christy died" → "the year after Christy's death"
""ecological restoration projects."" → ""ecological restoration projects"." per
MOS:LQ
Done I don't know why the MOS doesn't want punctuation within quotes when it appears that way in the source just because a word or two is missing from the front, but also don't care enough to argue. :)
References
In reference [1], I would make the title end at "Garden Movement", then have NYC Parks be the work, and New York City Department of Parks and Recreation be the publisher.
Done I've been told in the past that we should avoid having both a work and a publisher, but meh.
In reference [3], change "NEIGHBORHOOD REPORT: EAST VILLAGE" to title case, per
MOS:ALLCAPS
Done
Same deal in reference [13]
Done
In reference [5], specify that the article in question is in Vol. 15, No. 6 of the EPA Journal, which should be listed as the work and not the publisher.
Reference [18] is inconsistent with the citation style used in every other reference
Do you just mean it was missing a url and access date? I've gone ahead and added them. They were somehow tricky to find. Done?
General comments
Two photos are used. Both are relevant to the article. One is in the public domain and one is Creative Commons.
There are no issues with stability. The last non-bot edit was on August 2.
Earwig score is good, with the highest % matches tying back to attributed direct quotes.
Putting on hold to allow nominator to address comments. Ping me if there are any questions. — GhostRiver 16:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GhostRiver: Thanks for the review! I think I've taken care of nearly everything above. A couple minor responses, but otherwise pretty straightforward. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 21:52, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Rhododendrites: Thank you for making the changes! Regarding the one comment above, the exact quote in the source (p. 290) says, the number of vacant lots grew dramatically as the city razed abandoned structures that had become hubs for arson, vandalism, and socially undesirable activities. To me, that reads like the primary reason was crime. — GhostRiver 22:01, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GhostRiver: Sure, but I don't think that's strong enough to state cause and effect. It also only speaks to the buildings demolished by the city rather than when the city took ownership of an existing empty lot. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 22:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Rhododendrites: I do still think the sentence reads awkwardly as it is. Maybe try and saw an associated increase in abandoned buildings, some of which attracted crime. Many were demolished, and the number of vacant lots increased. — GhostRiver 22:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
Improved to Good Article status by
Rhododendrites (
talk). Self-nominated at 11:47, 3 September 2021 (UTC).reply
Article meets length and age requirements, article aligns with policies, and the hook is cited properly. QPQ review not yet conducted. Recommend adding the time period to the hook. I recommend also noting—perhaps in an alternate hook—whether the community gardening movement inspired was in the United States or worldwide. Let me know when ready and I'll come back and recheck.
@
Airborne84: QPQ done/underway. Added time period. It seems I have lost access to the book which made that claim directly about starting the community gardening movement. I've added ALT1 with just the first part of the hook, which seems "hooky" enough as it is. Thanks. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 16:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Please note which article you conducted the QPQ review on.
Airborne84 (
talk) 22:35, 10 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Shows how long I looked at the nomination @
Rhododendrites:. Indeed it was there, apologies. I think your original hook was sourced though. This source on the
History of the Community Gardening Movement says that the noted activity "not only beautified formerly vacant lots but soon became a grassroots program that fostered neighborhood participation." Is that what you were looking for?
Airborne84 (
talk) 00:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)reply
There was another source which stated it more clearly (community garden movement). My assumption is it's that Avant Gardening book that I don't seem to have preview access through gbooks anymore somehow. I'd rather just err on the side of leaving it off, I suppose. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 03:11, 11 September 2021 (UTC)reply
OK, passing with my support for ALT1. I think the community gardening movement bit would definitely be interesting to some readers, but I suspect the rest of the material is similar enough to draw them in as well. Thanks for your work on this.
Airborne84 (
talk) 23:20, 11 September 2021 (UTC)reply
A fact from Green Guerillas appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 20 September 2021 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
New York City-related articles 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.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horticulture and Gardening, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to
Horticulture and
Gardening 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.Horticulture and GardeningWikipedia:WikiProject Horticulture and GardeningTemplate:WikiProject Horticulture and GardeningHorticulture and gardening articles
I'll be taking a look at this article! Any section marked with a Working tag means that I haven't finished making comments, but feel free to address any suggestions that you do see, even if I'm not finished! — GhostRiver 16:11, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
"and saw an associated increase in abandoned buildings"
Done
"Many were demolished, sometimes because they had attracted crime, and the number of vacant lots increased." → "Some of these buildings attracted crime, leading the city to demolish the abandoned buildings and increase the number of vacant lots."
This is a change in meaning. I don't think the sourcing states that the demolitions were all necessarily due to attracting crime?
There should be a citation at the end of the first paragraph, per
WP:INTEGRITY
"recalling that "In"..." → "recalling that, "[i]n"..."
Done
"The group requested permission from the city, but it was denied so they proceeded outside of official channels." → "After the city denied the group permission to work on the project, they proceeded outside of official channels."
"Through their activities they taught communities not just about plants, but" → "In addition to teaching communities about plants, the Green Guerillas taught..."
Done
"the year after Christy died" → "the year after Christy's death"
""ecological restoration projects."" → ""ecological restoration projects"." per
MOS:LQ
Done I don't know why the MOS doesn't want punctuation within quotes when it appears that way in the source just because a word or two is missing from the front, but also don't care enough to argue. :)
References
In reference [1], I would make the title end at "Garden Movement", then have NYC Parks be the work, and New York City Department of Parks and Recreation be the publisher.
Done I've been told in the past that we should avoid having both a work and a publisher, but meh.
In reference [3], change "NEIGHBORHOOD REPORT: EAST VILLAGE" to title case, per
MOS:ALLCAPS
Done
Same deal in reference [13]
Done
In reference [5], specify that the article in question is in Vol. 15, No. 6 of the EPA Journal, which should be listed as the work and not the publisher.
Reference [18] is inconsistent with the citation style used in every other reference
Do you just mean it was missing a url and access date? I've gone ahead and added them. They were somehow tricky to find. Done?
General comments
Two photos are used. Both are relevant to the article. One is in the public domain and one is Creative Commons.
There are no issues with stability. The last non-bot edit was on August 2.
Earwig score is good, with the highest % matches tying back to attributed direct quotes.
Putting on hold to allow nominator to address comments. Ping me if there are any questions. — GhostRiver 16:39, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GhostRiver: Thanks for the review! I think I've taken care of nearly everything above. A couple minor responses, but otherwise pretty straightforward. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 21:52, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Rhododendrites: Thank you for making the changes! Regarding the one comment above, the exact quote in the source (p. 290) says, the number of vacant lots grew dramatically as the city razed abandoned structures that had become hubs for arson, vandalism, and socially undesirable activities. To me, that reads like the primary reason was crime. — GhostRiver 22:01, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
GhostRiver: Sure, but I don't think that's strong enough to state cause and effect. It also only speaks to the buildings demolished by the city rather than when the city took ownership of an existing empty lot. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 22:30, 28 August 2021 (UTC)reply
@
Rhododendrites: I do still think the sentence reads awkwardly as it is. Maybe try and saw an associated increase in abandoned buildings, some of which attracted crime. Many were demolished, and the number of vacant lots increased. — GhostRiver 22:09, 30 August 2021 (UTC)reply
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.
Improved to Good Article status by
Rhododendrites (
talk). Self-nominated at 11:47, 3 September 2021 (UTC).reply
Article meets length and age requirements, article aligns with policies, and the hook is cited properly. QPQ review not yet conducted. Recommend adding the time period to the hook. I recommend also noting—perhaps in an alternate hook—whether the community gardening movement inspired was in the United States or worldwide. Let me know when ready and I'll come back and recheck.
@
Airborne84: QPQ done/underway. Added time period. It seems I have lost access to the book which made that claim directly about starting the community gardening movement. I've added ALT1 with just the first part of the hook, which seems "hooky" enough as it is. Thanks. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 16:43, 9 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks. Please note which article you conducted the QPQ review on.
Airborne84 (
talk) 22:35, 10 September 2021 (UTC)reply
Shows how long I looked at the nomination @
Rhododendrites:. Indeed it was there, apologies. I think your original hook was sourced though. This source on the
History of the Community Gardening Movement says that the noted activity "not only beautified formerly vacant lots but soon became a grassroots program that fostered neighborhood participation." Is that what you were looking for?
Airborne84 (
talk) 00:54, 11 September 2021 (UTC)reply
There was another source which stated it more clearly (community garden movement). My assumption is it's that Avant Gardening book that I don't seem to have preview access through gbooks anymore somehow. I'd rather just err on the side of leaving it off, I suppose. — Rhododendritestalk \\ 03:11, 11 September 2021 (UTC)reply
OK, passing with my support for ALT1. I think the community gardening movement bit would definitely be interesting to some readers, but I suspect the rest of the material is similar enough to draw them in as well. Thanks for your work on this.
Airborne84 (
talk) 23:20, 11 September 2021 (UTC)reply