Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Ayn Rand/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review‎ | Ayn Rand

Ayn Rand edit

This was nominated at WP:FAC on 20 March, prematurely in my view, and I voted against with a number of others. Since then it has undergone extensive referencing and editing, but mostly by a small group of editors. Some broader feedback would be appreciated. Kaisershatner 14:40, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice work. A few minor comments:

  • In the "philosophical influences" section, it first states that she "claimed to share intellectual lineage with John Locke...". But this is not expanded upon. Could this statement at least have a reference?
  • Toward the end of the "Childhood & education" section, the word "university" is used without an article (i.e. "a", "the").
  • There are a number of year entries (such as 1979) that could be linked. Also Patrecia Scott can be linked. See WP:CONTEXT. I think wikilinking just years by themselves is discouraged. Kaisershatner 14:05, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Must be a new policy then. No problem, it's not a major issue. :) — RJH 14:40, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Literary criticism" section begins with the words "Other critics argue...". Is there a paragraph missing here? Or were the sections re-ordered at some point?
  • What was her age in the publicity photo? Are there any more images of Ayn Rand that could be included? If not then perhaps a relevant book cover?
  • Finally, does there really need to be that many categories? Perhaps some can be consolidated where one is in a superset of another. You can probably get rid of the "Articles lacking sources" tag.

Thanks! — RJH 17:56, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the comments, I'll get to work on those. NB that there was a huge controversy about categories, much of which predated my involvement, I think it's still on the Talk:Ayn Rand page. And the "lacking sources tag" is there because there's still a "citation needed" template in there ({{fact}}). I'm looking for that reference. Kaisershatner 18:22, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Noticed a few things...
Thank you very much. Comments interspersed where further discussion might be warranted. No comment means fixed. --Wilanthule 19:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. She believed that man must choose his values and actions by reason; that the individual has a right to exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing self to others nor others to self; and that no one has the right to seek values from others by physical force, or impose ideas on others by physical force. Wrong use of semi-colon. The text after a semi-colon is always an independant clause.
  2. but who nevertheless perseveres to achieve his goals.But and nevertheless in the same sentence is like a double negative, you use one or the other but never both.
  3. From an early age, she displayed a strong interest in literature and films. I'd cut out strong, and other extraneous adjectives in the article for that matter.
    • Good comment, but I'm kind of on the fence on this one. We woudln't say that someone demonstrated "ability in mathematics" from an early age if he started proving big theorems at age 8. Sometimes intensifying adjectives are justified. What do others think? --Wilanthule 19:35, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, if he really did start proving theorems at age 8, one would include that in the article. Then readers would then know how strong his ability was. I think that, as a general comment, you should inform your reader of the ability and let your reader make his/her own judgements about the extent of the ability. --Osbus 21:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  4. Alissa burned her diary, Refer to her by Rand, her last name.
  5. She arrived in the United States in February 1926, at the age of twenty-one, entering by ship through New York City, which would ultimately become her home. A bit choppy, so I'd revise it as At the age of 21, she arrived in the United States in Feb. 1926 by ship through New York City, which would ultimately become her home.
  6. The novel deals with issues as complex and divergentCut out complex, and just say divergant issues.
    • Is "complex" really fluff? They can be divergent without being complex, but here they're both. --Wilanthule 19:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Well, you haven't really shown how they are more complex, but you have shown that they are divergant. Again, I'd trust my reader to make their own judgement. --Osbus 21:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  7. , She seems also to have respected the American rationalist Brand Blanshard. First, that should be a period, not a comma. Second, I don't know what you mean be "seems to have respected". Either explain it, or cut it out.
  8. stated that he was the only philosopher who had influenced her What? In the previous paragraph, you said "Rand also claimed to share intellectual lineage with John Locke, and more generally with the philosophies of the Age of Enlightenment and the Age of Reason.".
  9. Rand herself The herself is extraneous
  10. including such prominent anti-Communists as Put the such right before as.
  11. although there are pockets of interest in Europe Not sure what you mean by pockets. How about saying there was interest in Europe.
    • I think the usage is fairly common for "localized interest" as opposed to more widespread, diffuse familiarity with her work. The word does add some extra information. --Wilanthule 19:53, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Yeah, I understand what you mean now. --Osbus 21:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  12. Rand and Objectivism are less well known outside North America, although there are pockets of interest in Europe, and her novels are reported to be popular in India[54] and to be gaining an increasingly wider audience in Africa. Split this sentence in two.
  13. Not sure if Bibliography is the right word. Rename it Rand's Works.

This is a clear, well-written article, though it is a bit long (68 kb). But in my opinion, the length is justified, and this article is on its way to FA. --Osbus 00:11, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help and attention. Your suggestions improved this article substantially. --Wilanthule 19:52, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. --Osbus 21:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You have convinced me on the remaining points. The changes have been made. :) --Wilanthule 23:27, 8 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Great...I'll be supporting this once it's on FAC. --Osbus 01:23, 9 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Ayn_Rand/archive1&oldid=191825583"