Talk:Thomas Stephens (historian)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:33, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I will post my comments soon. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 18:33, 18 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Okay so here are all my comments. No copyvio concerns, dablinks, duplinks, broken external links detected. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:11, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citations are generally omitted from the lead and all facts in the lead are included in the main text.

Citations removed. ~ RLO1729^💬

apprenticed as a chemist and druggist Why not directly mention 'apothecary'? (Also in infobox)

The earlier sources use the words "chemist" and "druggist" as did Stephens' own shop sign, and none uses "apothecary", so I would prefer to leave the text as is in this case. ~ RLO1729^💬

Maybe Background and Death sections should be merged, they are both short and seem to be connected. Maybe just call it 'Life'

Done. ~ RLO1729^💬

Link 'eisteddfodau' on the first mention in the main text. It begins with a capital 'E' in places, it needs to be consistently 'e' or 'E'

Done, now only capitalised in the name "National Eisteddfod". It could also be considered as a name in "the 1848 eisteddfod" and "the 1858 eisteddfod", so would you suggest capital or lower-case there? ~ RLO1729^💬

If we look at the article eisteddfod or run a Google search the word mostly looks like a common noun. So unless you're explicitly using it as a proper noun somewhere like the national edition, I would say it's better to stick to 'e'. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 00:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I'll leave it as is. ~ RLO1729^💬 01:06, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Stephens' 1858 Eisteddfod essay "Madoc: An Essay on the Discovery of America by Madoc ap Owen Gwynedd in the Twelfth Century" In italics here but not in lead

Now italicised. ~ RLO1729^💬

However, he also notes the contrasting view presented by Emyr Humphreys What view? Should be mentioned in the article

The Oxford Companion (ref [1]) says "For a less favourable view of Thomas Stephens see Emyr Humphreys, The Taliesin Tradition (1983)." I have been unable to obtain a copy of this book (physically or online) to see exactly what is said but still wanted to alert readers to its existence. Hopefully, future editors will be able to provide more detail. ~ RLO1729^💬 I have also revised the text relating to Humphreys. ~ RLO1729^💬

Oh, good that we know the name of the work which holds the criticism. You can word it like 'However, he also notes that author Emyr Humphreys presents a "less favourable view" in his 1983 work The Taliesin Tradition.' This would directly mention the name of the book for any interested reader and is well within what your source says. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 00:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thanks. ~ RLO1729^💬 01:06, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for these helpful comments. ~ RLO1729^💬 22:17, 20 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this pleasant read :) Sainsf (talk · contribs) 00:19, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great, all my concerns have been adequately addressed. The article passes. Cheers, Sainsf (talk · contribs) 01:13, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]