Talk:Basil George Watson

Basil George Watson was nominated as a History good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (January 14, 2023, reviewed version). There are suggestions on the review page for improving the article. If you can improve it, please do; it may then be renominated.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Australia Low‑importance

	Australia portal Basil George Watson is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Aviation: Biography

This article is within the scope of the Aviation WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.AviationWikipedia:WikiProject AviationTemplate:WikiProject Aviationaviation

This article has not yet been checked against the criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar and style: not checked Supporting materials: not checked	To fill out this checklist, please add the following code to the template call: \| b1<!--Referencing and citation--> = <yes/no> \| b2<!--Coverage and accuracy --> = <yes/no> \| b3<!--Structure --> = <yes/no> \| b4<!--Grammar and style --> = <yes/no> \| b5<!--Supporting materials --> = <yes/no> assessing the article against each criterion.

This article is supported by the aerospace biography project.

Further images

State Library of South Australia have a few more images of Basil and his planes: https://www.catalog.slsa.sa.gov.au/search/d?Watson%2C+Basil+G.+%28Basil+George%29%2C+1894-1917 Jimmyjrg (talk) 00:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmyjrg -- Thanks so much for the suggestion. The photos, with better resolution, have just been included in the "External images" section (and one of them, taken at Elsternwick is ambiguously described in such a way that it may be thought that it was taken at Mount Gambier), while the "artistic depictions" supplied are really of little use. Thanks, again.Lindsay658 (talk) 07:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your work expanding the article. Some of those images in the External Images section are also on Commons under his own category https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Category:Basil_George_Watson. I uploaded them from Museums Victoria yesterday, but I also noticed the State Library Victoria has some of the same ones with slightly different dates. Jimmyjrg (talk) 23:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Houdini

Note that the considerable confused mess surrounding Houdini — in relation to the false claims for his priority w.r.t. first-ever flight in Australia, and the consistently misrepresented dates of flights, distances flown, minutes airborne, etc. that abound in the derivative literature — has been cleared up by the simple process of examining the details of the objective, independent reports of the relevant events made at the time. Lindsay658 (talk) 02:53, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Lindsay658 Could this be moved to the Houdini article or Aviation in Australia? I'm not sure it's relevant to Basil Watson. Jimmyjrg (talk) 03:03, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimmyjrg Done. Moved material to Houdini. Lindsay658 (talk) 06:00, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Unsuccessful. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 23:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will take this review. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:49, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
Many minor grammar, spelling, punctutation mistakes.

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
The lead is too short, failing to give a clear overview of the entirety of the article. The layout incorporates multiple single-sentence paragraphs and short sections.
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
The excessive reliance on newspaper clippings is not encouraging. I would suggest using the books in the references section instead.

C. It contains no original research:
Several notes contain original research. The paragraph beginning "It seems that Watson's family..." is total OR. The education section is unsourced

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Several lengthy quotes from this website means that the article fails the copyright violation guidelines.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Most of the gallery pictures do not "illustrate aspects of a subject that cannot be easily or adequately described by text or individual images" (WP:GALLERY)
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
I am putting this article on hold, and giving the nominator a period of time to execute the significant changes needed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:01, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am failing this GAR for lack of improvement. I hope you will consider actioning them in the future. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:01, 14 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.