Talk:David Hudson (pioneer)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Coemgenus (talk · contribs) 13:33, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get started on this review over the next few days. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:33, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

The last sentence is kind of just hanging out there. It would be better to make the lede into one big paragraph or two smaller ones.
- I split more off the first paragraph and put it on the second, if it looks all right. If you think it might be better to have it all as one paragraph, I'm fine with that - just thought it's best to have two. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Two is fine. --Coemgenus (talk) 02:11, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Hudson's claim that his property was "spent" at the hands of the British is also doubted." might be better in active voice. Perhaps "Historians [or whoever] also doubt Hudson's claim that his property was "spent" at the hands of the British."
- Done Re-worded if you want to take a look. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"His father practiced Calvinistic Presbyterian Christianity" is kind of repetitive. I think "His father was a Presbyterian" or "His father practiced Presbyterianism" might be better.
- Done Good point, done. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 05:10, 11 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is the William McKinley mentioned the father of the president of the same name?
- Good question - I'm not sure, but will try to look into it further. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Now that I look at it, William McKinley, Sr. was born too late, and in the wrong state. Just a coincidence, I think. --Coemgenus (talk) 21:33, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Again, the paragraphs are kind of out of balance. Maybe break up the first one and combine with the second?
- Will work on. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Done - Tried to split based on preparations, travelling, and arrival. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The last three short paragraphs should probably be expanded, or else combined in a single paragraph.
- Will work on. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Done - Also re-ordered some information for better flow. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:54, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What's with the "1952?". Does the book not have a clear publication date?
- Yep - the book was originally published without a year specified, so the provided date is an estimate provided by the library. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:09, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

All seems in order. The infobox image could be better, but it's not enough to hold up the whole review. Nice work! --Coemgenus (talk) 19:09, 13 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]