Talk:Harrison family of Virginia/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: David Fuchs (talk · contribs) 15:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

{{in progress}} Look for a review end of this week. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:14, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I am grateful for the review. Look forward to addressing suggestions or questions. Hoppyh (talk) 20:02, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, there's a lot of solid content in the article. I have some concerns, which I'll go into below:

  • General and prose:
    • There's some unclear prose throughout along the lines of "Others say", "another source", "Isaiah is thought to", etc, that should be clarified as to who is saying what.
Done. Hoppyh (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • In a similar vein, I think there's some less-formal language that should be avoided for encyclopedic tone, e.g. "In any case". Just state the facts.
Done. Hoppyh (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm not sure why The Harrisons are among three other families to have two presidents in their number, the others being the Adams, Roosevelt, and Bush families. is off by itself in the lead. If it's not important enough to mention, it shouldn't be there. If it's relevant, it needs to fit somewhere else (perhaps after the first line?)
Moved to first paragraph. Hoppyh (talk) 17:47, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • None of the successive Benjamins used the numerical suffix; it is employed by historians as a convenient tool for distinguishing them—this bit confuses me because you use II for Benjamin, don't disambiguate Benjamin III with the Roman numerals, and then link IV and V, but I'm not sure if these Benjamins went by the numerals or not.
Numerical suffix is now consistent. Non use by Benjamins confirmed by biographer Dowdey. Hoppyh (talk) 17:56, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Removed, at least until licensing issues resolved. Hoppyh (talk) 19:20, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Removed at least until licensing validated.Hoppyh (talk) 19:20, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • As a minor stylistic thing, the number of images sort of collides with the text oddly at various screen sizes given the short amount of prose to images. I'd look to reducing the vertical space taken up by images and perhaps trimming some so it's a bit cleaner (this isn't really a matter with GA criteria, just presentation.)
See removals above and other image layout adjustments Hoppyh (talk) 19:20, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • References:
    • You've got a citation error in the references section.
Fixed. Hoppyh (talk) 19:33, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Given that it's self-published, what makes Hooker, Mary G.'s inclusion meet WP:SPS?
Valid point—the particular facts for which she is cited are readily verifiable, being the official positions of Benj.V, Nathaniel, and Edmund. Refs added—I’m happy to remove the Hooker ref if appropriate.Hoppyh (talk) 19:33, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
If there's better sources than yes, remove. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 16:23, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Hoppyh (talk) 18:51, 27 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • I may be missing something, but I don't see where Willard (missing a page number, btw) mentions the womens rights angle for Mary Stuart Smith.
Ref. for MSS speech to Women’s Congress added; Willard page # added.Hoppyh (talk) 19:53, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I’ve addressed everything. Let me know if additional work is needed, and thanks again for your time. Hoppyh (talk) 19:58, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to do a copyedit pass tonight and see if there are any remaining issues. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 16:02, 3 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 15:35, 26 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay. I have a qualm with the slavery section as written: do you think you could quote the material used to cite it? As written, it feels a bit non-neutral in trying to mitigate their slaveholding. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 21:54, 7 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Quotes added. Hoppyh (talk) 01:43, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but you don't explain who Dowdey is prior to that (he's only mentioned as a biographer in the footnotes.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:44, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Try this...see note “b”...I expanded Dowdey's qualification a bit and added a cite and external link to the note. I’m glad to adjust further.Hoppyh (talk) 19:06, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On another note, I have attempted to address NPOV. Hoppyh (talk) 22:23, 8 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. With that concern addressed, I am passing the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:46, 9 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Harrison_family_of_Virginia/GA1&oldid=930014237"