Talk:Johann George Luehmann

Johann George Luehmann was nominated as a Natural sciences good article, but it did not meet the good article criteria at the time (June 26, 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: Science and Academia

	Biography portal 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 articles
	This article is supported by the science and academia work group.

Plants Low‑importance

	Plants portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Plants, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of plants and botany 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.PlantsWikipedia:WikiProject PlantsTemplate:WikiProject Plantsplant articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is about a botanist or someone who contributed to the field of botany.

Australia: Melbourne / Biota Low‑importance

	Australia portal Johann George Luehmann 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 articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Melbourne (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian biota (assessed as Low-importance).
	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.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Vaticidalprophet (talk · contribs) 08:57, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, this article is currently too far from the GA criteria for a full review. It's in a difficult position, as it's not certain from the sourcing that the potential for a truly broad article with GA-quality prose and depth exists. While the subject is notable under WP:NPROF, the reliable sources are virtually all passing mentions that don't pass WP:GNG, forcing the article to be fairly brief, decontextualized, and WP:PROSELINE-focused. Particular issues include:

The prose is extremely repetitive, due to the paucity of sourcing. The section about his marriages particularly stands out in this respect.
All the sources checked are bare passing mentions, though most support the statements. However, despite the length of the article, it still includes significant unsourced passages (e.g. the first para in #Family). Some areas are also underdetailed even within the context of the little-detailed article, such as the lack of detail on his mother's death.
In an attempt to pad out the apparent length, the article is presented mostly in the form of single-sentence paragraphs that make it difficult to compare and contextualize different elements of the subject's life.

Situations like the one this article is in are difficult. Unfortunately, not every article is necessarily well-suited for quality assessment processes. A subject with so little written about him is hard to write on. It's worth searching for additional sources -- I imagine the State Library of Victoria might have some relevant archival sources. Books especially are something worth looking at, if the newspaper sourcing is so sparse. As it stands, if not for the NPROF pass, this article would be closer to getting deleted at AfD than anything. Vaticidalprophet 09:10, 26 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]