Opothleyahola

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Virginia Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Virginia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Virginia 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.VirginiaWikipedia:WikiProject VirginiaTemplate:WikiProject VirginiaVirginia articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Military history: North America / United States / American Civil War This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles Associated task forces: /  North American military history task force United States military history task force American Civil War task force National Register of Historic Places Start‑class Low‑importance 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 articles Start This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Pritzker Military Library Low‑importance This article is related to the Pritzker Military Museum & Library WikiProject. Please copy assessments of the article from the most major WikiProject template to this one as needed.Pritzker Military LibraryWikipedia:GLAM/PritzkerTemplate:WikiProject Pritzker-GLAMPritzker Military Library-related articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

This article appeared to be mostly copied verbatim from the National Park Service website on Chatham Manor. While government documents are in the public domain, this seems unusual for Wikipedia. Additional sources would be welcome.--Parkwells (talk) 20:36, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm glad this article is up for GA status, and probably can't review it for that status as needed because my changes in 2015 and 2016 removed this problem. IMHO, I don't believe the Virginia Low-importance tag deserved, for the reasons I stated in the revised lede.Jweaver28 (talk) 14:56, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chatham Manor. 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/20050613082214/http://www.nps.gov:80/frsp/chatham.htm to http://www.nps.gov/frsp/chatham.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050613082214/http://www.nps.gov:80/frsp/chatham.htm to http://www.nps.gov/frsp/chatham.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

• 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) 20:22, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Chatham Manor/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MrLinkinPark333 (talk · contribs) 18:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Thank you for submitting this article to Good Articles Nominations. Unfortunately, I will have to quick fail this review due to Wikipedia:Good article criteria#Immediate failures per #1 "It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria". Specifically, this article is a long way from passing criteria #2 Verifiable with no original research. Here is a summary of the verification issues, sorted by ones that have are partially cited and ones that have no citations.

Parts that are partially cited and missing citations

• Antebellum: Last sentence of 2nd paragraph.
• Slavery at Chatham: Last sentence of 6th paragraph, most of last paragraph.
• Postwar years: Most of last paragraph.

Parts that have no citations

• Antebellum: 1st and 4th paragraph
• Slavery at Chatham: 1st and 2nd paragraph.
• American Civil War: 2nd, 3rd, 5th, 6th, 7th and last paragraph.
• Postwar years: 3rd, 4th and 5th paragraph

Overall, I'm mostly concerned about the 13 paragraphs that have no citations. With the American Civil War and Postwar years sections alone, these 2 sections have 9 uncited paragraphs. There are also 2 uncited paragraphs each in the Antellum and Slavery at Chatham sections.

In terms of partially cited sections, Antebellum, Slavery at Chatham and Postwar years have uncited sentences. Of these 3 sections, Slavery at Chatham and Postwar years have a paragraph each that are mostly uncited. There is also an uncited sentence each at Antebellum (2nd para) and Slavery at Chatham (6th para). As there are many paragraphs that have zero citations, I will have to quick fail this nomination as this article is a long way from passing criteria #2 Verifiable with no original research.

I hope this review does not discourage you from improving this article. Please feel free to read Wikipedia:Good article criteria to find out what Good Article reviewers are looking for in a nomination. Thank you for nominating this article to Good Article Nominations! :) --MrLinkinPark333 (talk) 18:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]