Talk:Likelike/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 22:15, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello again KAVEBEAR, I will review by section, and then assess the article against the GA criteria. I am looking forward to this review. Likelike seems incredible.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:15, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Collapse detail temporarily

Introduction It looks like the infobox is for royalty vs. officeholder, so "reign" is one of the parameters for her period as a governor. Should she have an infobox like Samuel Kipi, the previous governor? If there are some fields that you want for her role as a princess - perhaps the {{Infobox officeholder}} could be imbedded for the Governor information. I would be happy to help with that if you have not imbedded infoboxes before. I see this is  Done. Great, simple solution!–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I wonder about changing the first sentence, Likelike (Hawaiian pronunciation: [likeːlikeː]; Miriam Likelike Kekāuluohi Keahelapalapa Kapili; January 13, 1851 – February 2, 1887) to: Miriam Likelike Kekāuluohi Keahelapalapa Kapili, commonly known as Likelike (Hawaiian pronunciation: [likeːlikeː]; January 13, 1851 – February 2, 1887) ? Per MOS:FIRST: While a commonly recognizable form of name will be used as the title of biographical articles, fuller forms of name may be used in the introduction to the lead. For instance, in the article Paul McCartney, the text of the lead begins: "Sir James Paul McCartney ...". --- Another good example is Madonna (entertainer) Prefer emphasis on the shorter name much like Liliuokalani or Queen Victoria. Generally all royal bio article bold the most common name and does not bold the full name. KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:56, 9 May 2020 (UTC) I am not sure that Queen Victoria is a good example. I couldn't find her full name until I did a search on "full name". IMO, you did a better job of it. Okay, I get your point.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Since her date of birth has just been stated about about saying: "Likelike was born in Honolulu, ..."? -- I made that and a couple of other changes here. What does "prayed to death." mean?–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: that is explained by a sourced note at the end of the sentence where it is mentioned in the Death and state funeral section. "Black magic, evil sorcery by means of prayer and incantation". — Maile (talk) 23:46, 9 May 2020 (UTC) I added "malevolently" to the sentence. How does that work?–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I consider this section  Done, but feel free to adjust as you wish.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Early life and family Is there a way to put her full name up with the birth info in this section? I can but I have to split the first paragraph because it is too long. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I am not understanding this sentence Two of her namesakes were Likelike, an earlier Hawaiian chiefess and wife of Kalanimoku, and Miriam Auhea Kekāuluohi, Kuhina Nui (premier) and the mother of King Lunalilo (r. 1873–74).[5] Doesn't namesake mean named after someone? The wife of Kalanimoku was born before this Likelike. I would this it would be the reverse. Was this Likelike named after the wife of Kalanimoku? It goes both directions. Please see Namesake. — Maile (talk) 23:48, 9 May 2020 (UTC) I, personally would tighten this up, perhaps: Two of her namesakes were Likelike, an earlier Hawaiian chiefess and wife of Kalanimoku, and Miriam Auhea Kekāuluohi, Kuhina Nui (premier) and the mother of King Lunalilo (r. 1873–74).[5] to: An earlier Hawaiian chiefess and wife of Kalanimoku, had the name Likelike.[5] and unless Miriam Auhea Kekāuluohi was specifically named Miram after her, I wouldn't mention that.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:58, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I am not convinced. Too many run ons. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC) What??? I am guessing you meant to put that comment somewhere else. So: I really like the edit you made, it looks good and I think flows better - at least as far as her birth information and full name. Great job!–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC) In what way is Miriam Auhea Kekāuluohi a namesake of Likelike or Miriam Likelike Kekāuluohi Keahelapalapa Kapili - the name Miram? If so, is this notable? Her name was Miriam Likelike Kekāuluohi Keahelapalapa Kapili. She was named after Kekāuluohi. See this source. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Okay. Good.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I made two minor edits here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:57, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Excellent, this section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Education Looks good. I tightened up the ellipses in the quote due to a line wrap issue.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Betrothal to Albert Kūnuiākea Please disambig Galatea or perhaps use wikt:Galatea - I couldn't figure out what it was from the disambig page, but the ship / man-of-war makes the most sense in the context of the sentence, but it's not in italics... and there are a of Royal Navy ships named Galatea.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:14, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Added link.KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:53, 9 May 2020 (UTC) I added a link to lūʻau.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Excellent, this section is  Done–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Marriage to Archibald Scott Cleghorn In On a few occasions of domestic arguments between the two, the princess simply returned to island of Hawaii and refused to return.[8] does it mean that she never returned? i.e. would you please reword this so it's a bit clearer. If she refused to return, she could only do that once, right?–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Changed. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I made these minor edits [1].–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Excellent, thanks! This section is  Done–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:15, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Public life In After his accession, Kalākaua bestowed... does it make sense to add David to his name... or perhaps remind the reader that this is her brother? No to addition of David. Seems redundant since siblings is mention in the same sentence. KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:53, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Yes, but Likelike isn't mentioned in the sentence. So, if someone is scanning this article, or forgot the siblings names, they have to figure out who Kalākaua is - which is also a family name, which adds a level of complexity.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Kalākaua bestowed royal titles and ranks upon his siblings: sisters Princess Lydia Kamakaʻeha Dominis (Liliʻuokalani) and Princess Miriam Likelike... KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I think there is a misunderstanding about what I was talking about, so I made the minor edit here since this person's name is the same as a family name [2]–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC) It is a little more complicated than that. Hawaiian surnames weren't formally adopted until the 1850s. Kalakaua did use his name as a surname until his ascession as king then it became a regnal name much like Elizabeth II. It is bad practice (Hawaii MOS and also from a historiographical sense toward Native Hawaiian naming practices) to refer to the king during his reign David or Liliuokalani as Lydia. So I changed it to remind reader that he is her brother. KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Excellent, thank you! It looks good.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I keep trying to figure out if there is a better heading than "Public life"... but no luck. It seems a good heading for the combination of topics in the section.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:39, 9 May 2020 (UTC) This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:36, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Travels Minor edits [3].–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Death and state funeral No comments or suggestions.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:45, 9 May 2020 (UTC) Funeral and burial Minor edits [4]–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Compositions Looks good.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:15, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Legacy Should the paragraph about the charity go in the Public life section... since it seems to be more about what she did while she was alive?–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Not necessarily. She organized it and was its first president. But it was pretty much run by women of good financial means in Honolulu. There were subsequent other presidents, and the good it did lasted beyond her death. I look at it this way: Danny Thomas built St. Jude's Hospital in his lifetime. But St. Jude's is still there and is very much a part of his legacy. — Maile (talk) 00:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Good example, in the Danny Thomas article, it figures in the body of the article, here:Danny Thomas#Philanthropy.–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC) @KAVEBEAR: Is there a way you would like to handle this? Should it be moved up to Public life? I can see it in either section, but should only be in one of them, I think. Whatever you think, I'll go along with. — Maile (talk) 01:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I reckon we keep it where it is for balance otherwise, she doesn't have much of a legacy. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Here is my thinking: I had a hard time understanding from the article why she was so revered. This helps explain it. It's my theory, based on info about people quickly scanning articles, that it is less likely to be read in the legacy section. You could put the part about her founding the org in the body of the article and in the legacy section that she is remembered for this work. This does not sound like a neutral comment. It's isn't the purpose of Wikipedia to promote people. That shouldn't be a decision criteria. Besides, her legacy isn't made or diminished by what is written in Wikipedia. Her legacy is the way she lived her life - and readers should get a sense of that as they read the article - they don't need to be spoon-fed what her legacy is. I am not really understanding why there is reluctance on this article. I have backed off on a number of suggestions. Did you just want a rubber stamp for a review? I am not sure if I should pass the article because I am concerned that it will not be stable for future editors who may have a different approach. None of my suggestions have been major issues - so I am a bit gobsmacked.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Do you think it would serve better in the Public life section? I can see it both ways. My reluctance was that it would diminish the legacy section. Lot of contents can go in one or more places. See these changes. KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I think that looks really good! Did you want to add something to the Legacy section about how her philanthropic work lived on after her death? Since there is now a Philanthropy section, what do you think about adding a heading for "Governor"?–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Done.KAVEBEAR (talk) 09:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Changed section to "Memorials and namesakes" since legacy is more in her musical compositions and her daughter. KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:59, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I saw that and like it!–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Excellent, this section is  Done–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Ancestry If you are interested, there's a legend template {{Legend}} for the colored boxes. See Procuratie#Construction for an example. An example of the format is {{legend|#ECC199|procurators ''de supra'' }} Always "legend" - color - label"–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC) This is just an FYI. Not even a suggestion.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Is there a source for the Ancestors of Likelike info?–CaroleHenson (talk) 00:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Do you mean the ahnentafel? I added the source from her sister's article. I am also not oppose to removing it since I am not a big fan of ahnentafel. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC) If you go to Ancestry and then "Ancestors of Likelike" - now the first item, that is what I am talking about. It's up to you, but it either needs citations where there are none, or to be removed. I know it's a pain, I recently cleaned up ancestral info for Thomas Jefferson and Abraham Lincoln and when I had to find sources, I found that some info was wrong. So, it's good to ensure it's properly cited.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I just removed it and left the actual family tree which is cited. KAVEBEAR (talk) 04:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC) Okay, sounds good.–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:08, 10 May 2020 (UTC) This section is  Done–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC) New edits I see you have been hard at work polishing up the article. Here's a take on the recent edits per this diff I see that there are changes to piped values for links, a caption, A quote about her daughter Edits re: the family estate Participation in Kalākaua's coronation Some minor edits Edits to citations / references, in some cases to add archive links, in some cases to change citation style, and in a couple of places to add/change citations Prophesy on her deathbed After reviewing the edits, I don't have any comments or suggestions. They look good.–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I missed this Photographers, and one sketch artist, were there en mass to chronicle the historic event. in the Funeral and burial section. Do you have a citation for it?–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC) I made a few minor edits here–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:33, 10 May 2020 (UTC) @CaroleHenson: Added source. KAVEBEAR (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): } It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: } It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: 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):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Comments

• The article is well-written. There are a couple of suggestions for tweaks to the article. (1a)
• The article conforms to MOS guidelines. (1b)
• Content is properly cited to reliable sources, there is no evidence of original research. (2a, 2b, 2c)
• The copyvio report only shows source info that is both in the article and the source. (2d)
• It covers the majors aspects, without going into too much detail. For future reference, if possible, it would be nice to have a little more info about her time as a governor, why she was asked to leave, and a bit more info about why she was so revered. (3a, 3b)
• The article is neutral and is stable right now. Based on the degree of inflexibility to find compromise solutions / wording, I wonder how it will be when someone other that the two recent editors (who absolutely have done a great job!) want to make a change. See Wikipedia:Ownership of content. (4, 5)
• The images are properly licensed, relevant, and had good captions. I added the husband's name and a link to one caption.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Okay, I am done and will put the article on hold.–CaroleHenson (talk) 01:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson and Maile66: Addressed all comments. KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks! I will take a look.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

I am going to take a break and come back to this tomorrow - because tomorrow is always a new day always has a possibility of turning over a new leaf and new attitude (and I am including myself in that transformational possibility)!–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

KAVEBEAR, Thanks so much for your edits / great solutions based upon my comments — and new edits. The article looks great! There is just one open question about a citation in the New edits section... and I gave you a diff to some minor edits that I made. I highlighted recent comments in purple to make them easier to find.–CaroleHenson (talk) 09:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)

Excellent, the article passes as a good article!–CaroleHenson (talk) 10:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)