Cloudflare fetched the original article and streamed it through HTMLRewriter to apply an entirely new visual system without rebuilding the source page.
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
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.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Archaeology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Archaeology 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.ArchaeologyWikipedia:WikiProject ArchaeologyTemplate:WikiProject ArchaeologyArchaeology
Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion
I've removed four attribution-needed tags from this article, attached to four direct quotations: see diff. All of these quotes have citations attached, so the only question seems to be whether in-text attribution is necessary.
Per Template:Attribution needed, "Do not demand in-text attribution for simple, non-controversial facts... In-text attribution is normally reserved for minority views, controversial claims, and other widely disputed material." None of the four quotes seems to put forth such a view. Two of the quotes are factual, if somewhat colorful, contemporary descriptions of aspects of the Western Engineer. The other two are statements of opinion, but not especially controversial; the phrasing introducing the quotes makes it clear that they're opinion ("has been described as"); and neither source is so well known that including their name would enlighten many readers. Per WP:INTEXT, "It is preferable not to clutter articles with information best left to the references"; I think that these are cases in which in-text attribution would amount to such clutter. — Ammodramus (talk) 15:49, 11 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
