Talk:Abraham Lincoln/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
I will be reviewing this article. Please allow me a while to gather my thoughts. I am a slow reader and this is a long and detailed article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 19:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Tony, I approached the nominator about a GA review for this article in this thread here a few days ago, noting there are large sections of uncited material in the article. I was encouraging the nominator to de-nominate when the only step to take was to quick fail. Now it's your call. --Moni3 (talk) 19:59, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
I would like to help improve the article and I am going to add comments. When I go through the checklist, I will look at the citations as a part of that process. I will require citations for promotion, but am commenting on other issues.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:09, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
first set of comments
  • I see you mention he served in the Illinois House of Representatives in the WP:LEAD, but not in the infobox. Can you add his service to the infobox.
  • It also seems that later you establish Lincolns rank in the militia but do not include it in the infobox.
  • "Thomas Lincoln, Abraham's father" and later "Lincoln's father, Thomas Lincoln" seems excessive since you already established one paragraph earlier who his father was. Just use his name.
Fixed Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
  • public land[9] and several later instances - refs should follow punctuation so move it somewhere else in the text.
Fixed #9
  • "desolate and especially brutal" seems overly wordy and could just be replaced by harsh without loss of meaning to the reader.
Fixed Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
  • The "Marriage and family" subsection should be put in chronological order.
  • Black Hawk War should be linked in its first instance in the text.
Fixed Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
  • he won an election to the state legislature - say which house and link it on its first instance.
  • four successive terms - say which years he served and include this in the infobox
  • Mexican–American War should appear in the text so the reader is not wondering and forced to click through.
Fixed Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
  • "Lincoln was still the only President of the United States to hold a patent", Chronologically, he has not yet become President at this point in the article so it should say something like "Lincoln would be the only President of the United States to hold a patent".
Fixed "Lincoln is still the only person to both hold a patent and serve as President of the United States" Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Fixed It had a paragraph on why he was chosen, just not that he was chosen. I added a couple of sentences about the stuff you mentioned. Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
You did not add any citation for the new content.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:48, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
second set of comments
  • What does "first major sectional party" and "politics became the stage on which sectional tensions" mean? Is there a link for the term sectional (if it is a real term)?
FixedSectionalism is a major theme in American politics, and is now linked Purplebackpack89 (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
  • "President-elect Lincoln evaded possible assassins in Baltimore, and on February 23, 1861, arrived in disguise in Washington, D.C." is a one sentence paragraph in need of either being merged or expanded. It also needs a citation as do each of the subsequent paragraphs.
  • "frustration for the president, and occupied nearly all of his time" should be conjoined without the comma.
  • I don't like the passive voice in consecutive sentences "After Burnside was stunningly defeated at Fredericksburg, Joseph Hooker was given the command, despite his idle talk about the necessity for a military dictator to win the war and a past history of criticizing his commanders.[47] Hooker was routed by Lee at the Battle of Chancellorsville (May 1863), and relieved of command early in the subsequent Gettysburg Campaign replaced by George Meade."
  • "At first Lincoln was reluctant" s/b "At first, Lincoln was reluctant"
  • "Fondly do we hope..." seems to be a speach that should be offset or italicized or otherwise indicated to be so.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:27, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
third set of comments
  • "Lincoln declared the final Thursday in November to be a day of Thanksgiving, and the holiday has been celebrated annually at that time ever since." at some point it was changed to the fourth Thursday, which 2 out of 7 times is not the last.
  • Can you add some links to "round-slug 0.44 caliber Deringer"
  • Why does the adjacent caption say "the casket of his son, William" and the text mentions nothing about this?
  • At one point you say "Lincoln believed in the Whig theory of the presidency" and later you say "Lincoln was a strong supporter of the American Whig version of liberal capitalism". I don't know what this means and neither will anyone but 19th century political historians.
  • "who, more than most politicians of the time, was able to express his ideas within the context of Nineteenth Century religious beliefs." seem to be poorly constructed.
  • can you link of explain "doctrine of necessity"
  • link the first instance of William Wallace Lincoln rather than a later one.
  • update "upcoming 200th birthday in February 2009" and mention Inauguration of Barack Obama, which was Linoln-themed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
  • Numerous refs have spaces before them. Citations should immediately follow a punctuation mark or the preceding citation.
  • Inline citations are needed in each paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I have now finished my basic review of the text. I will soon go through the images and then do a review of the WP:WIAGA criteria. If you would like to start working on the concerns outlined above, please comment below each line of my concern your action. I will strike through resolved issues or comment further.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:05, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

I have only found one problematic image: File:Mary Todd Lincoln.jpg does not have any licensing information.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:03, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

This is one of the most important biographies on all of wikipedia according to numerous accounts (200 most important biographies, 201 core biographies and 120 vital biographies). I commend the editors who have undertaking the enormous task of returning this article to the standards of reviewed article despite the ever rising bar of the review process. The article has come a long way, but still has a way to go to achieve WP:GA status according to the current interpretation of WP:WIAGA.

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    When it uses references they are reliable.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    There are many places where additional references are necessary to bring this up to standard.
    C. No original research:
    I do not feel that there is original research, but sources are not always cited.
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    For a biography of this importance, I feel very comfortable with the breadth and depth of coverage
    B. Focused:
    Despite the influence of Lincoln on American History, the article does not extend beyond the appropriate scope
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
    I have noticed no problems although there are numerous reversions in the history, it seems that this is the result of concerned editors attempting to maintain neutrality and othe MOS issues.
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    One image does not have proper licensing information
Which one? Purplebackpack89 (talk) 19:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
See comment above. (The last one before this checklist).--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:30, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
  1. B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  2. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:
    The article is on hold in large part due to the need for more adequate referencing. If this article is going to pass much work needs to be done in this regard. Everything else seems to be on track.—Preceding unsigned comment added by TonyTheTiger (talkcontribs) 18:22, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
It seems that the article has gone a week without any progress. I will check back in a few days to make my evaluation of this review.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:15, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
It seems that this nomination has been abandoned. I am failing this nomination.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)