Talk:White House Historical Association

United States: District of Columbia Low‑importance

	United States portal 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. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Washington, D.C. portal This article is supported by WikiProject District of Columbia.

Organizations

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations 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.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

MaryGaulke (talk · contribs) has been paid by Nobody Media on behalf of the White House Historical Association. Disclosures made below and on userpage.

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:White House Historical Association/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

This artical really helped me. Well, I mean, it could have helped me more I guess. But, now I know some books to locate, and a couple of things about the curator's job. I admit, it could use some more information, but I think it's a good start.

Last edited at 19:32, 8 June 2009 (UTC). Substituted at 10:31, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

COI edit requests

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. Per WP:CLOSEPARAPHRASE.

Hi! The WHHA is a client of mine, and I've drafted an updated version of this article in my sandbox. Typically I would created a marked up version of this mockup with all the changes from the current article annotated, but in this case I can't because it's a complete rewrite of the existing article. Changes include:

Adding an infobox
Adding sources and citations throughout
Organizing into sections
Fleshing out history and scope of current activities based on available sources
Rewriting in accordance with sources and with attention to avoiding plagiarism

Sorry this one's a bit tougher to review, but I think it's a big improvement! Looking forward to your feedback. Mary Gaulke (talk) 04:20, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 8-FEB-2020

Edit request declined

For future reference, a diff of the requested changes may be found here.
Text from the proposal was found to be insufficiently paraphrased from the source material. Needless to say, text which is proposed to be added to an article needs to be written using an editor's own words and phrases.

Regards, Spintendo 16:03, 8 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest was declined. A reviewer felt that this edit would not improve the article.

@Spintendo: Hi, and thank you for flagging that – when I updated the sources and made sure the wording aligned I lost track of checking for additional copyvio. Those sentences are updated now and I'm reopening the request. Here's a link to an updated diff. Thanks again! Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:22, 17 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reply 27-FEB-2020

Below you will see where proposals from your request have been quoted with reviewer decisions and feedback inserted underneath, either accepting, declining or otherwise commenting upon your proposal(s). Please read the enclosed notes within the proposal review section below for information on each request. Spintendo 09:30, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal review 27-FEB-2020

The White House Historical Association, founded in 1961 through efforts of First Lady Jacqueline Kennedy, is a private, non-profit organization that works to preserve the history of the White House and make that history more accessible to the public. The current president of the association is Stewart McLaurin.
Declined.^{[note 1]}

After moving into the White House in 1961, Jacqueline Kennedy founded the White House Historical Association, which was chartered on November 3 of that year. The initial goals of the association were to raise private funds for maintaining and renovating the White House and to create an official White House guidebook.
Declined.^{[note 2]}

In 1981, under First Lady Nancy Reagan, the association began its current practice of selling a unique White House Christmas ornament to the public each year....As of 2019, hundreds of thousands of ornaments are sold each year. The White House Historical Association also produces the wooden eggs distributed during the annual White House Easter Egg Roll.
Unable to implement.^{[note 3]}

Beginning in 1982, each year's ornament honors a different president in sequential order.
Declined.^{[note 4]}

Since 1981, the ornaments are primarily manufactured at ChemArt in Providence, Rhode Island.
Clarification needed.^{[note 5]}

Financier and former White House staffer David M. Rubenstein donated $10 million to the association in 2011 to establish the David M. Rubenstein National Center for White House History, an educational institute under the White House Historical Association's purview. In 2016, the association created a Digital Library, currently hosted on Amazon Web Services (AWS). The partnership between the association and AWS expanded the following year. In 2018, the association shared a collection of roughly 25,000 photographs of White House history that it had organized and digitized for the first time. The association also created a monthly podcast, called 1600 Sessions, in 2017.
Declined.^{[note 6]}

In its work, the White House Historical Association collaborates with the first family, the National Park Service, the White House chief usher, and the curator of the White House.
Declined.^{[note 7]}

___________

^ This proposed lead section includes ref tags, when none should be included here. The lead section also uses the term current, which is not as precise as stating "In 2020 the president was..."

^ The proposal uses the phrase initial goals which implies that it is no longer a goal, however, the source states that this goal's reason was due in part which implies a continuing reason,

^ This claim is acceptable; however, it was part of a passage discussing the ornaments in general, and the other parts of the passage were not approved — meaning the implementation of this portion could not take place coherently in the article.

^ This assertion is not supported by the provided reference. The Parade article is dated 2018, but states It started with Washington and we have now worked our way up to Harry Truman" which would have placed the year as 2014 — meaning 3 presidents are unaccounted for.

^ The Wikilink for ChemArt needs to be provided.

^ This item is referenced by the Washington Post; however, the Post has received its information from a press release. The other reference provided for this information is the subject organization itself.

^ This claim was not confirmed by the supplied reference, with the source only stating that "She (Melania Trump) also said she works closely with the White House Historical Association to keep the famous property "in perfect shape." The source says nothing about the National Park Service, the usher, or the curator. As this is the second claim within this request which was not verified by the provided references, the review will be postponed at this point to allow the COI editor to perform the needed edits to improve their proposal.

@MaryGaulke: in looking at a few of the claims in the unreviewed section, I would see running into problems where a source makes one claim regarding the White House Endowment Fund and the proposed text uses that source to make a claim about the Historical Association, a circumstance which happens more than once in that section. I understand that one administers the other, but the closenes of the two as implied in this edit request lends weight to the argument that the two articles ought to be merged. As it stands, both articles are fairly weak with references when in their separate states, even with an un-altered proposal factored in (the use of the Melania article as reference for claims it does not make is one example of this; the articles on the Endowment Fund used to reference claims about the Association is another.) I believe that they might both be strengthened if they were merged into one article. I'd like to hear your thoughts on this when you get a chance. Thank you! Regards, Spintendo 16:16, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

revised edit requests

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Hi! Again, COI editor representing the WHHA here. I've incorporated Spintendo's feedback above and revised my proposed updated draft of this article. Here's a link to a current diff. Updates include:

Adding an infobox
Adding sources and citations throughout
Organizing into sections
Fleshing out history and scope of current activities based on available sources

Thanks so much for any time/feedback. Mary Gaulke (talk) 18:07, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

MaryGaulke, please replace the sources from the Daily Mail and Newsweek. Per WP:RSPSOURCES, the Daily Mail has been deprecated and usage generally prohibited; Newsweek after 2013 is not considered generally reliable.

Sdrqaz (talk) 15:48, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdrqaz: Hi, thanks for reviewing! I've now replaced both those sources in the draft – here's an updated diff. Please let me know if you have any other feedback. Mary Gaulke (talk) 23:08, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, MaryGaulke. I am now happy to fulfil that edit request. Sdrqaz (talk) 14:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] This proposed lead section includes ref tags, when none should be included here. The lead section also uses the term current, which is not as precise as stating "In 2020 the president was..."

[2] The proposal uses the phrase initial goals which implies that it is no longer a goal, however, the source states that this goal's reason was due in part which implies a continuing reason,

[3] This claim is acceptable; however, it was part of a passage discussing the ornaments in general, and the other parts of the passage were not approved — meaning the implementation of this portion could not take place coherently in the article.

[4] This assertion is not supported by the provided reference. The Parade article is dated 2018, but states It started with Washington and we have now worked our way up to Harry Truman" which would have placed the year as 2014 — meaning 3 presidents are unaccounted for.

[5] The Wikilink for ChemArt needs to be provided.

[6] This item is referenced by the Washington Post; however, the Post has received its information from a press release. The other reference provided for this information is the subject organization itself.

[7] This claim was not confirmed by the supplied reference, with the source only stating that "She (Melania Trump) also said she works closely with the White House Historical Association to keep the famous property "in perfect shape." The source says nothing about the National Park Service, the usher, or the curator. As this is the second claim within this request which was not verified by the provided references, the review will be postponed at this point to allow the COI editor to perform the needed edits to improve their proposal.

[note 1]