Talk:William R. Farrand

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:William R. Farrand/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AhmadLX (talk · contribs) 16:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I will review this. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 16:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• Lead is not the representative summary of the article (or maybe other way around; see below). Should be expanded.
• "Farrand was born in Detroit, Michigan, on September 9, 1853. His parents were Jacob S. Farrand and Olive M. Farrand." These two sentences should be combined into one: ...born in... on... to [parent names here]
• In the section "Early life", initial name should be used to distinguish from his parents.
• "Farrand received his initial formal schooling at the Detroit public schools when he grew up." Why do you need "when he grew up"?
• Section "Personal" has little info on personal life; that single sentence should be moved to some other section. In general, tiny sections should be avoided.
• Same with the section "Later life and Death".
• Seriously ill: from what?
• "His estate left to the heirs $200,000 at the time of his death. Bureau of Labor Statistics says that is equivalent to over $3 million in 2020." This should be rephrased.
• "He had a younger brother, Jacob S. Farrand Jr. and two younger sisters, Mary Coe and Olive C." Unless the siblings were notable, this is irrelevant here.
• Section "Clubs and Associations" is a collection of facts whose significance or notability is not established in the article.
• Same with much of the section "Mid life".
• Death of his wife, which happened after his own death, is irrelevant to this article.
• Lead states that he was "an American businessman, inventor, industrial designer, and manufacturer of pianos and organs". Article body fails to discuss these proportionally and much of the article contains irrelevant/trivial info.
• Broadness is defined by nature of the subject and not by, as some people erroneously believe, coverage in the sources. If the sources do not contain enough information, then an article cannot be promoted to GA.
• I am sorry if I am a little too harsh, but this article does not, at least in my opinion, meet the GA criteria. This is a quick fail in my opinion. Kind regards. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 17:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:William R. Farrand/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Hog Farm (talk · contribs) 03:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Criteria

1. Prose ✓ Pass

2. Verifiability ✓ Pass

3. Depth of Coverage ✓ Pass

4. Neutral ✓ Pass

5. Stable ✓ Pass

6. Illustrations ✓ Pass

7. Miscellaneous ✓ Pass

Comments

1.

• "The company was split up in 1897 by the two main partners, Edwin S. Votey and himself." - Is there a way to simplify the phrasing here?

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• "He then became the president of the Farrand Organ Company and specialized in manufacturing reed organs" - I think which would be a better word choice than and

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• Link reed organ

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• "In 1893 the Mayor of Detroit" - Comma after 1893

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• "In 1893 the Mayor of Detroit appointed him a member of the public lighting commission and was promoted president in 1897." - A literal interpretation of the clause order would suggest that the Major was promoted to president, can this be rephrased to make it clear the subject is Farrand?

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• Link Presbyterian

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• "Republican party" - capitalize party and link

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

2.

• Sources in alphabetical order

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:50, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• Add ISBN/OCLC where possible, the Junchen book at least has an ISBN.

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:50, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

3.

• "In 1893 the Mayor of Detroit appointed him a member of the public lighting commission and was promoted president in 1897." - Is the mayor's name known?

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

• Is there information with which his role in the companies can be expanded? He's most notable for that, and it only gets a few paragraphs

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:34, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

4.

5.

6.

7.

@Hog Farm: All issues have been addressed. Can you take a look at it now. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:34, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Still some ref OCLC stuff that can be added. With some of these older books, the OCLCs are important to identify the exact work. The OCLC for Moore is 657081089, [1]. [[worldcat.org] is very helpful with finding OCLCs for old works. Hog Farm (talk) 17:11, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

@Hog Farm: All OCLCs have been filled in. Thanks for the hint on how to find those on WorldCat. I didn't know.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:19, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Passing. In my opinion, it meets the GA requirement for coverage (although the previous reviewer seems to disagree). For A-Class or Featured Article, this would need some more information about his business activities, but in my opinion, this meets the GA standards. Hog Farm (talk) 21:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:37, 9 February 2023 (UTC)