# Talk:Soldiers' and Sailors' Arch

https://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&profile=ariall&source=~!siartinventories&uri=full=3100001~!20676~!0#focus
https://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&profile=ariall&source=~!siartinventories&uri=full=3100001~!20677~!0#focus
https://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&profile=ariall&source=~!siartinventories&uri=full=3100001~!5822~!0#focus
https://siris-artinventories.si.edu/ipac20/ipac.jsp?&profile=ariall&source=~!siartinventories&uri=full=3100001~!7113~!0#focus
---Another Believer (Talk) 20:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

Most of the sources are excellent. However, one source that is heavily relied upon is a tourist guidebook by illustrator Richard Berenson and journalist Neil deMause. The extent of editorial oversight is unclear (the title page says it is produced for the printer by Berenson's publishing company), and deMause (the writer)'s credentials as an architectural historian are undefined. Given the reliance upon this book (which, in reading the passages cited, appears to be appropriate as a source), some qualification might be in order in the text and some justification for the validity of this source given how strongly it is relied upon. Dclemens1971 (talk) 02:43, 28 September 2024 (UTC) 

@Dclemens1971: Thanks for pointing this out; I appreciate it. Since the /GA1 for this page hasn't been created yet, it shouldn't be marked as "on hold" until the review page is created. I've moved your comment to a new talk page section so I can respond to your concern.I didn't realize it, but now that you mention it, the book is basically all but self-published. Luckily, most of the article doesn't rely on that source, so I'll try to find replacements for it in a bit. Epicgenius (talk) 03:18, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
@Epicgenius. Thanks. This is my first time doing a GA review so I want to be sure it's done correctly. If I skipped a step please let me know. I basically think this passes with the one issue of this source. Keep me posted as my review is ready to go once the source is addressed. Dclemens1971 (talk) 22:08, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
Sounds good. I'll try to replace most of the remaining uses of that source by Monday, though there is still one quote for which I think the source may still be helpful. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:32, 28 September 2024 (UTC)
@Dclemens1971, thanks for opening the review (I'm responding on the talk page directly to keep the conversation about the source on one page). I've replaced almost all uses of that source now, except for one usage where a direct quote from that book is being cited. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:16, 29 September 2024 (UTC)