Talk:Nathaniel G. S. Hart/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 13:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
Looks interesting, will review. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 13:16, 30 May 2016 (UTC)
No dablinks, no copyvio detected. Fairly well-written, only a few comments: Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)
- Lead
often Nathaniel G. S. Hart May be unnecessary. It is understood. (also see info box)- Looking at the length of the article, and per WP:MOSLEAD, the lead should be two to three good paras long, covering all the major points of the article.
- Hart is rarely referred to in the historical literature by his full name, he is most often referred to by his first name/two middle initials/last name (and a persistent error has crept into some history books which mangles his two middle initials. If the Infobox is to be the the summary of the important points of the article, then his full name as well as his name with middle initials more commonly used should be delineated.
- Re: the lede &WP:MOSLEAD. I was following the parameters laid-out in MOS:BLPLEAD. Hart was well-connected & popular in his home state of Kentucky, his ignominious death along with the deaths of his fellow soldiers galvanized pro-war sentiment across the United States so I tried to cover these points - his wartime service and death are what make him notable in the history of the United States. However, keeping your comments in mind I'll take another look at it when I have some more time sometime within the next few days. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, I did not know of this misnomer business. Alright, we can retain the name. About the lead length, it is generally recommended to keep its length proportional to the article length, regardless of the topic of the article. So try to expand it to at least two good paragraphs covering most of the important points. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Take a look at the lede now, I've adjusted some of the content to be a bit longer. It seems to me that emphasizing why Hart's death was so shocking to the country and to the people of Kentucky is one of the most important aspects of the article. By the way, I looked around for the guideline about lede length and it's WP:LEADLENGTH. Taking a look at Page size, the readable prose size is 8656 B, so the now-present 2-paragraph lede seems appropriate. Shearonink (talk) 02:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Good job, but there seems to be some overciting near the name. You can do with three citations. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know it looks bunched now but there is a technical issue with using "sfn/Harvard" refs combined with "Notes" that I do not know how to resolve more cleanly. I can usually nest the refs using "refn" but these are sf's... nesting a noted reference is very complicated to me even in the best of circumstance sometimes I have used a magic word but I cam trying the refn template. I do not want to lose the refs presently attached to the information and what the refs specifically address but am not sure how to adjust everything. I am working on this issue but that but it might take me a few days to see if I can resolve it. Shearonink (talk) 17:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Alright, that should not be an obstacle in promotion. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Yeah, I know it looks bunched now but there is a technical issue with using "sfn/Harvard" refs combined with "Notes" that I do not know how to resolve more cleanly. I can usually nest the refs using "refn" but these are sf's... nesting a noted reference is very complicated to me even in the best of circumstance sometimes I have used a magic word but I cam trying the refn template. I do not want to lose the refs presently attached to the information and what the refs specifically address but am not sure how to adjust everything. I am working on this issue but that but it might take me a few days to see if I can resolve it. Shearonink (talk) 17:10, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Good job, but there seems to be some overciting near the name. You can do with three citations. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 09:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Take a look at the lede now, I've adjusted some of the content to be a bit longer. It seems to me that emphasizing why Hart's death was so shocking to the country and to the people of Kentucky is one of the most important aspects of the article. By the way, I looked around for the guideline about lede length and it's WP:LEADLENGTH. Taking a look at Page size, the readable prose size is 8656 B, so the now-present 2-paragraph lede seems appropriate. Shearonink (talk) 02:39, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
- Oh, I did not know of this misnomer business. Alright, we can retain the name. About the lead length, it is generally recommended to keep its length proportional to the article length, regardless of the topic of the article. So try to expand it to at least two good paragraphs covering most of the important points. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Duel
Looks like a very short section. Perhaps merge it with the next section?
- I combined the Duel section with his Personal Life section. The duel was not a military act so placing it within the PersonalLife made more sense to me. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- It still stands as it was? Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- I combined/merged it with Personal life - take another look. Seems to fit better there. Shearonink (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- It still stands as it was? Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- I combined the Duel section with his Personal Life section. The duel was not a military act so placing it within the PersonalLife made more sense to me. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Military service and death
Looks choppy, please combine paras.
- Did some combining. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- I can't see where you did this... Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Take another look please. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 16:51, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- I can't see where you did this... Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Did some combining. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
Wikilink Powatatomi
- Ah, good catch, don't know how I missed that. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Name
You need to introduce Kleber and the Heidlers.The paras can be combined.
- You're right...doesn't really fit as a paragraph. (Kleber & the Heidlers are some of the historians - well-researched too - that I came across in my research on Hart.) I am converting the information in that section to a note. Anyone doing research needs to be able to follow the breadcrumbs & the sourcing for what the man's actual name was since his wrong name has been repeated so often in various histories and in official pronouncements. Will take another whack at the nested-referencing within the next few days or so. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- Sure. And don't forget to add "historians" before their names, readers need to know who they are. Sainsf (talk · contribs) 08:35, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
- You're right...doesn't really fit as a paragraph. (Kleber & the Heidlers are some of the historians - well-researched too - that I came across in my research on Hart.) I am converting the information in that section to a note. Anyone doing research needs to be able to follow the breadcrumbs & the sourcing for what the man's actual name was since his wrong name has been repeated so often in various histories and in official pronouncements. Will take another whack at the nested-referencing within the next few days or so. Shearonink (talk) 08:29, 4 June 2016 (UTC)
The issues resolved, I am happy to promote this beautiful article. Great job! Sainsf (talk · contribs) 17:15, 5 June 2016 (UTC)