Talk:Isabella quarter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Featured article Isabella quarter is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophy This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on June 13, 2013.
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Chicago (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Numismatics (Rated FA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Numismatics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Numismatism-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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United States (Rated FA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon 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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Mark Arsten (talk · contribs) 17:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

  • Will review, comments to follow within the next few days. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:59, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
Watching, thanks.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:44, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
  • Ok, sorry for the wait, but I'm finally almost done. I can't say much negative, the article seems very well written and comprehensive. Only a few minor suggestions/questions. I'll make a few copyedits, feel free to revert if I mess anything up. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:03, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Lead

  • Might want to note that they're popular with collectors at the end of the lead.
  • In the infobox you note the Mass, Diameter, Edge, and Composition, but these don't seem to be mentioned in the article's body. Is that typical for coin articles? Might be nice to have in the body, too.
The specifications are for the standard silver quarter. I generally don't bother to cite them, but I have several sources if necessary. I feel that the footnotes clutter up the infobox and it's not a controversial matter. I might add that the 1893 act required the standard specs.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:15, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Inception

  • "Palmer commissioned Peddle to do the design work by letter in late March." Did he commision her by letter, or was it that she'd do the design by letter?
  • "Carlisle had no objection to a coin being designed by a woman, or to the use of Isabella's head, but told Palmer that the reverse, with its long inscription, would appear like a business advertising token, and he asked that it be revised." Is there a way to rephrase this without so many commas?
  • "She also met with Illinois Congressman Allen Durborow, chairman of the House of Representative's Fair Committee and a former colleague of Secretary of the Treasury John G. Carlisle, Leech's superior, to suggest that Durborow advocate for the Lady Managers with Carlisle and Leech." You might think about breaking or simplifying this sentence, it's a bit long.

Design and reception

  • "The American Journal of Numismatics had other criticisms of the quarter..." Instead of using a large block quote here, I'd consider summarizing some with prose and quoting some. Just a suggestion though.
I think I'll keep it, on consideration. I don't see any way of shortening it which would have the impact.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:43, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

References

  • Minor issue, but check "Atlanta, GA" vs "Atlanta, Ga".

Misc

  • Dabs, links, and images are fine.

Spotchecks

  • Did 21, 22, and 24, no issues with CP or accuracy.
Thanks for the review. I think I've fixed or commented on everything.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:43, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
Alright, I'm satisfied with the fixes and explanations. Passing this as a GA now. Mark Arsten (talk) 14:33, 22 October 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that. I'll probably take it to FAC. I appreciate your review and help.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:17, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

Image

Problems with Other sources / cite web[edit]

The three items listed under 'Other sources' are using a non-existent 'note' parameter on the cite web template (and prominently showing error messages about it). Colonies Chris (talk) 08:19, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. BencherliteTalk 08:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)

Spelling[edit]

A good-faith effort was made by an unregistered user to change the spelling in this article to British English, but this is a US coin. I have changed the spelling where I have seen British spelling. Any other uses of British English should be changed to American English. Robert McClenon (talk) 12:33, 13 June 2013 (UTC)