Talk:Andrew Wodrow/GA1

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

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Seabuckthorn (talk · contribs) 21:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Nominator: Caponer (talk)

Hi! My review for this article will be here shortly. SFriendly.svg --Seabuckthorn  21:23, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


1: Well-written

WP:LEAD:

Check for WP:LEAD:

  1. Check for Correct Structure of Lead Section: Yes check.svg Done
  2. Check for Citations (WP:LEADCITE): Yes check.svg Done
  3. Check for Introductory text: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Provide an accessible overview (MOS:INTRO): Yes check.svg Done
      • Major Point 1: Early life and education "" (not a concise summary of the corresponding section in the body) Face-sad.svg
      • Major Point 2: Business career "" (not a concise summary of the corresponding section in the body) Face-sad.svg
      • Major Point 3: Political career "Wodrow was the first resident Clerk of Court for Hampshire County, Virginia (now West Virginia), a position in which he served for a tenure lasting 32 years (1782–1814). Prior to his service as Clerk of Court for Hampshire County, Wodrow served as a Lieutenant Colonel in command of cavalry in the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. Wodrow represented Hampshire County at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, which was held to ratify the United States Constitution in 1788." (summarised well in the lead) Face-smile.svg
      • Major Point 4: Land affairs and holdings "" (not a concise summary of the corresponding section in the body) Face-sad.svg
    • Check for Relative emphasis: Yes check.svg Done
      • Major Point 1: Early life and education "" (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body) Face-sad.svg
      • Major Point 2: Business career "" (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body) Face-sad.svg
      • Major Point 3: Political career "Wodrow was the first resident Clerk of Court for Hampshire County, Virginia (now West Virginia), a position in which he served for a tenure lasting 32 years (1782–1814). Prior to his service as Clerk of Court for Hampshire County, Wodrow served as a Lieutenant Colonel in command of cavalry in the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War. Wodrow represented Hampshire County at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, which was held to ratify the United States Constitution in 1788." (the lead gives due weight as is given in the body) Face-smile.svg
      • Major Point 4: Land affairs and holdings "" (the lead does not give due weight as is given in the body) Face-sad.svg
    • Check for Opening paragraph (MOS:BEGIN): Yes check.svg Done
      • Check for First sentence (WP:LEADSENTENCE): Yes check.svg Done
        • Andrew Wodrow (1752–1814) was a prominent Scottish American merchant, militia officer, clerk of court, lawyer, and landowner in the colony (and later U.S. state) of Virginia.
      • Check for Format of the first sentence (MOS:BOLDTITLE): Yes check.svg Done
      • Check for Proper names and titles: Yes check.svg Done
      • Check for Abbreviations and synonyms (MOS:BOLDSYN): None
      • Check for Foreign language (MOS:FORLANG): None
      • Check for Pronunciation: None
      • Check for Contextual links (MOS:CONTEXTLINK): Yes check.svg Done
      • Check for Biographies: Yes check.svg Done
      • Check for Organisms: NA
  4. Check for Biographies of living persons: NA
  5. Check for Alternative names (MOS:LEADALT): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Non-English titles:
    • Check for Usage in first sentence:
    • Check for Separate section usage:
  6. Check for Length (WP:LEADLENGTH): Yes check.svg Done
  7. Check for Clutter (WP:LEADCLUTTER): None
WP:LAYOUT:
Yes check.svg Done

Check for WP:LAYOUT: Yes check.svg Done

  1. Check for Body sections: WP:BODY, MOS:BODY. Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Headings and sections: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Section templates and summary style: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Paragraphs (MOS:PARAGRAPHS): Yes check.svg Done
  2. Check for Standard appendices and footers (MOS:APPENDIX): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Order of sections (WP:ORDER): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Works or publications: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for See also section (MOS:SEEALSO): None
    • Check for Notes and references (WP:FNNR): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Further reading (WP:FURTHER): None
    • Check for External links (WP:LAYOUTEL): None
    • Check for Links to sister projects: None
    • Check for Navigation templates: Yes check.svg Done
  3. Check for Formatting: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Images (WP:LAYIM): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Links: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Horizontal rule (WP:LINE): Yes check.svg Done
WP:WTW:
Yes check.svg Done

Check for WP:WTW: Yes check.svg Done

  1. Check for Words that may introduce bias: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Puffery (WP:PEA): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Contentious labels (WP:LABEL): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Unsupported attributions (WP:WEASEL): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Expressions of doubt (WP:ALLEGED): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Editorializing (WP:OPED): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Synonyms for said (WP:SAY): Yes check.svg Done
  2. Check for Expressions that lack precision: Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Euphemisms (WP:EUPHEMISM): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Clichés and idioms (WP:IDIOM): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Relative time references (WP:REALTIME): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Neologisms (WP:PEA): None
  3. Check for Offensive material (WP:F***): Yes check.svg Done

Check for WP:MOSFICT: Yes check.svg Done

  1. Check for Real-world perspective (WP:Real world): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Primary and secondary information (WP:PASI): Yes check.svg Done
    • Check for Contextual presentation (MOS:PLOT): Yes check.svg Done
WP:EMBED:
Yes check.svg Done
  • Prose is preferred over list (WP:PROSE):
  • Convert the list in the Personal life section into prose. Remove details of children except their names.


2: Verifiable with no original research

WP:RS:
Yes check.svg Done

Check for WP:RS: Yes check.svg Done

Cross-checked with other GAs: Virginia Argus and Hampshire Advertiser, Confederate Memorial (Romney, West Virginia), Wirgman Building, Wappocomo (Romney, West Virginia), Christian Streit White, Valley View (Romney, West Virginia), Alexander White (Virginia), Francis White (Virginia)

  1. Check for the material (WP:RSVETTING): (not contentious) Yes check.svg Done
    • Is it contentious?: No
    • Does the ref indeed support the material?:
  2. Check for the author (WP:RSVETTING): Yes check.svg Done
  3. Check for the publication (WP:RSVETTING): Yes check.svg Done
  4. Check for Self-published sources (WP:SPS):
WP:MINREF:
Yes check.svg Done

Check for inline citations WP:MINREF: Yes check.svg Done

  1. Check for Direct quotations: Yes check.svg Done
  2. Check for Likely to be challenged: Yes check.svg Done
  3. Check for Contentious material about living persons (WP:BLP): NA
WP:NOR:
Yes check.svg Done
  1. Check for primary sources (WP:PRIMARY): Yes check.svg Done
  2. Check for synthesis (WP:SYN): Yes check.svg Done
  3. Check for original images (WP:OI): Yes check.svg Done


3: Broad in its coverage

a. Major aspects:
Yes check.svg Done

Cross-checked with other GAs: Virginia Argus and Hampshire Advertiser, Confederate Memorial (Romney, West Virginia), Wirgman Building, Wappocomo (Romney, West Virginia), Christian Streit White, Valley View (Romney, West Virginia), Alexander White (Virginia), Francis White (Virginia)

  1. Check for Article scope as defined by reliable sources:
    1. Check for The extent of the subject matter in these RS:
    2. Check for Out of scope:
  2. Check for The range of material that belongs in the article:
    1. Check for All material that is notable is covered:
    2. Check for All material that is referenced is covered:
    3. Check for All material that a reader would be likely to agree matches the specified scope is covered:
    4. Check for The most general scope that summarises essentially all knowledge:
    5. Check for Stay on topic and no wandering off-topic (WP:OFFTOPIC):
      • Fix the Personal life section. Remove details of children except their names.
b. Focused:
Yes check.svg Done
  1. Check for Readability issues (WP:LENGTH):
  2. Check for Article size (WP:TOO LONG!):


4: Neutral

WP:NPOV:
Yes check.svg Done

4. Fair representation without bias: Yes check.svg Done

  1. Check for POV (WP:YESPOV): Yes check.svg Done
  2. Check for naming (WP:POVNAMING): Yes check.svg Done
  3. Check for structure (WP:STRUCTURE): Yes check.svg Done
  4. Check for Due and undue weight (WP:DUE): Yes check.svg Done
  5. Check for Balancing aspects (WP:BALASPS): Yes check.svg Done
  6. Check for Giving "equal validity" (WP:VALID): Yes check.svg Done
  7. Check for Balance (WP:YESPOV): Yes check.svg Done
  8. Check for Impartial tone (WP:IMPARTIAL): Yes check.svg Done
  9. Check for Describing aesthetic opinions (WP:SUBJECTIVE): Yes check.svg Done
  10. Check for Words to watch (WP:YESPOV): Yes check.svg Done
  11. Check for Attributing and specifying biased statements (WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV): Yes check.svg Done
  12. Check for Fringe theories and pseudoscience (WP:PSCI): None
  13. Check for Religion (WP:RNPOV): None


5: Stable: No edit wars, etc: Yes

6: Images Yes check.svg Done (Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license)

Images:
Yes check.svg Done

6: Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content: Yes check.svg Done

  1. Check for copyright tags (WP:TAGS): Yes check.svg Done
  2. Check for copyright status: Yes check.svg Done
  3. Check for non-free content (WP:NFC): Yes check.svg Done
  4. Check for valid fair use rationales (WP:FUR): Yes check.svg Done

6: Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions: Yes check.svg Done

  1. Check for image relevance (WP:IMAGE RELEVANCE): Yes check.svg Done
    • Image (Wilson-Wodrow-Mytinger House Romney WV 2009 1 25 04.JPG): Relevant.
  2. Check for Images for the lead (WP:LEADIMAGE): None.
  3. Check for suitable captions (WP:CAPTION): Yes check.svg Done
    • Caption: "In the 1780s, Wodrow built his "clerk's office" (pictured) adjacent to his residence in Romney. Together with the kitchen building, the three structures constitute the Wilson-Wodrow-Mytinger House." succinct and informative


Caponer, I'm happy and inspired to see your work here. The prose quality in particular has been fantastic in all your articles. As per the above checklist, I do have some insights that I think will be useful in improving the article:

  • I think the lead can be improved in order to provide an accessible overview and to give relative emphasis.
  • I think the lead can be expanded. It only summarises the Political career at the moment.
  • I’ve one doubt regarding the timeline of the lead. I noticed in a few of your articles that you begin the timeline at a particular date and then go back. Why not keep it simple and linear in progression? For instance in this article, "Wodrow was the first resident Clerk of Court … . Prior to his service as Clerk of Court …". Any particular reason you are choosing this approach?
  • Move all the inline citations towards the end of the sentence to improve the flow.

Besides that, I think the article looks excellent. Caponer, please feel free to strike out any recommendation you think will not help in improving the article. All the best, SFriendly.svg --Seabuckthorn  20:56, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Seabuckthorn, thank you for taking the time to conduct this very comprehensive and thoughtful review. I promise to address all the above issues you've listed within the next few days. Thanks again! -- Caponer (talk) 14:25, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
Seabuckthorn, I've completed addressing all your above concerns and suggestions. I tidied up and added to the article's lead, I converted the personal life list into prose, and I consolidated internal citations in the end of sentences rather than in the middle. Please take a look at the article to make sure my edits are in line with your suggestions and let me know if you have any outstanding comments or concerns. Thank you again for taking the time from your schedule to review this article! -- Caponer (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2014 (UTC)