Talk:Henry Edwards (entomologist)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:58, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

• Technical stuff No dabs, no deadlinks. No WP:Alt - not compulsory for GA, but for the sake of a few words the accessibility could be improved. Images appropriate and licences OK, but image descriptions incomplete. Could you please clarify what was scanned for the second picture? For the first image, did you scan a physical object, or download the image? If the latter, please add site
• The article is written in AE (or is it?-"theatre" in the lead), seems slightly odd for a British entomologist. Do we really need to wikilink common words like England, Australia, California, Peru?
• References are a mess. The order of author, year and title varies at random, Edwards is bolded contra MoS. If you are uncertain about formatting, use citeweb, citejournal, citebook templates. Only websites need retrieval dates, on-line copies of journals and books don't. Refs 8, 10 and 12 lack page numbers. Why are refs 5 and 13 RS? Several of the links go to a Google book summary page, no accessible text, so does not verify the referenced content. If you have used a hard copy source, remove link. If not, replace with a link that has content.
• Edwards went up in a hot air balloon while in Sydney, and befriended William Sharp Macleay in the balloon? Is this a non-sequitur, if not please make explicit
• Freely flowing liquor and some Japanese lanterns put a glow on the festivities, and club members retired at a late hour to the modest comfort of blankets on the bare earth. If this is a quote, make that clear, otherwise rewrite in an encyclopaedic style.

I don't think your edit to this really addresses the problem Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:27, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

I replaced my flowery writing with that of Porter Garnett, with a cite. I'm certain you'll agree it now addresses the problem. Binksternet (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

• Please check these changes. I haven't attempted to sort out the AE/BE mix of spelling
• Lead is a bit thin, in particular it doesn't mention New York, his major book or his legacy, all of which have sections

I'll go though the text later Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:36, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I see your comments and will get to them after my holiday travels have settled me back into the comfy chair at home. Binksternet (talk) 09:14, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Theatre => theater. I wrote the article in American English. Removed non-MOS bolding of name. Binksternet (talk) 00:18, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Lead fleshed out with some NYC and legacy. Binksternet (talk) 01:32, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

1871 souvenir image sourced to 1907 Pacific Monthly magazine, public domain due to age. Binksternet (talk) 02:35, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

• please confirm that California Theatre Stock Company is correct spelling Jimfbleak - talk to me?

• Here's a link to an 1888 list of companies including the one in question. A Google search for the "California Theatre Stock Company" yields a bunch of hits, while a similar search for "California Theater Stock Company" brings up nothing. Did you want this link used as a reference in the article, or just here where we are discussing it? Binksternet (talk) 17:12, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

• just checking that it wasn't an oversight Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:17, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

• Added alt text to images. The first image source is an actual theater card scanned by myself—I wrote on the image page that it was from a private collection. In the process of hunting for more images, I found another one from a New York theater magazine: The theatre." Binksternet (talk) 16:37, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

<=I put in some more information about the man's time in Boston and his life in New York. In hunting down supporting sources to answer your questions, I bumped into more publications that have been scanned and placed online. It's like a bonus... Binksternet (talk) 20:47, 31 December 2009 (UTC)

Please take another look at references. I don't know if I've satisfied all your concerns, though I've taken out unneeded access dates and added page numbers where I think appropriate. The SFGenealogy website is city-run and reliable. If there's a question about Bill Oehlke's Catocala website, I'm not sure what it is. Binksternet (talk) 03:05, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I think the main problem is the lack of consistency - the order of author, date , title and publisher seem to vary from one ref to the nest. The order I've just given is normal, eg, Smith, J (2010) "The morphology of the Spotted Woozlum" Journal of Morphology 45 102–106, but any recognisable system would be better than at present Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:11, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Okay, all the refs have been slotted into template form. Binksternet (talk) 23:49, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

GA review

(see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:  

   Pass/Fail: