Talk:Hellé Nice/GA1

GA Review

Passed. BritneyErotica (talk) 19:00, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: BritneyErotica (talk · contribs) 17:15, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	"In 1949, driver Louis Chiron accused Nice of being a Gestapo agent during World War II, without providing any evidence. This claim disrupted her planned career revival, and her partner subsequently left her." Avoid puffery, consider "In 1949, driver Louis Chiron accused Nice of being a Gestapo agent during World War II, without providing any evidence. This claim disrupted her planned career revival, and her partner subsequently left her." sorry what's the difference? Mujinga (talk) 21:35, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply] I've reworded but want to keep the notion that Chiron is a big name since his denunciation without evidence ruined her career Mujinga (talk) 14:07, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply] "She travelled to England with Courcelles and Mongin in 1921, the two men planning to race Grégoire cars at the Brooklands circuit; the cars were not delivered and Delangle argued with her friends because the race was for men only." Unsure what this sentence is trying to convey. Consider rewording it. yes that could be clearer, rewritten Mujinga (talk) 21:35, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply] Rework this sentence (Should there be a full stop before "She"?): "Her first appearance was in Woodbridge, She was immediately christened the "Speedbowl Queen", gaining a sponsorship deal with Esso." rejigged Mujinga (talk) 21:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply] Reword and reference (avoid plummeted) "She was too shocked to reply and afterwards her reputation plummeted" rewritten Mujinga (talk) 21:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply] "Despite the accusations not being proven" consider "Despite the accusations failing to be proven" rewritten Mujinga (talk) 21:40, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Links appropriately archived.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Feedback above. Also I recommend avoiding 4 inline citations for a single sentence "enquiries at the German Federal Archives in Berlin yielded no record of Nice having been a collaborator.". Perhaps these references could be distributed better. Likewise the first paragraph in Final years and death could do with having an inline citation in the middle of it as there are 3 sentences without one which generally is too many. I'm not quite sure what you mean here since every paragraph should be cited but not every sentence. To take In 1949, the esteemed racing driver Louis Chiron accused her of being a Gestapo agent in the war, at a party in Monaco to celebrate the first postwar Monte Carlo Rally. She was too shocked to reply at the time and she was later ostracised. Her biographer Miranda Seymour considers what the evidence could have been: a connection to Fritz Huschke von Hanstein did not prove problematic for fellow driver Anne Itier, who was known to have had an affair with him; in Nice's archives, Seymour found a picture of German General of the Cavalry Manfred von Richthofen, who had written to Nice in 1936 after her accident in Brazil, but no further link could be found; enquiries at the German Federal Archives in Berlin yielded no record of Nice having been a collaborator.[25][24][26][27] the four references are being used for this whole paragrpah not just for "enquiries at the German Federal Archives in Berlin yielded no record of Nice having been a collaborator" Mujinga (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Copyvios looks good.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Overall

Thanks for taking on the review, I'll hope to make a start on the replies later today Mujinga (talk) 10:37, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@BritneyErotica I've made some replies, back to you Mujinga (talk) 21:43, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I quoted my proposed rewrite by accident in the first piece of feedback. I believe I was referring to this section "In 1949, the esteemed racing driver Louis Chiron accused her of being a Gestapo agent in the war, at a party in Monaco to celebrate the first postwar Monte Carlo Rally. She was too shocked to reply at the time and she was later ostracised" where it could be clearer with what's being conveyed and also avoids "esteemed" which should generally avoided.

Thanks I see no and made the adjustment Mujinga (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct that inline citations do not have to reference every sentence when in a paragraph. This is supported through WP:CITEDENSE. However my feedback refers to WP:CITEKILL, where "...more than three should generally be avoided; if four or more are needed, consider bundling (merging) the citations." BritneyErotica (talk) 14:02, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK great that makes more sense, although I do think it's hard for me to udertsand that when at first you said "Also I recommend avoiding 4 inline citations for a single sentence". WP:CITEDENSE and WP:CITEKILL are not guidelines, whereas WP:CITEBUNDLE is and it says "sometimes".. I think I'd rather keep the four refs as they are to be honest and I don't think it's a GA requirement to change them. My rationale is that this is a quite complex issue and I'd like to show i'm using a range of sources to summarise the view that Chiron's allegations do not appear to have been based in fact Mujinga (talk) 14:12, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely favourable but not a guideline as you say. While the mentioned sentence isn't a run-on sentence, it is still quite lengthy. Nonetheless I won't necessarily hold you for this minor change as it's quite cosmetic and the sentence still reads well as the multiple clauses are properly connected. I also do prefer "well-known" instead of "esteemed" as it appears more neutral and still places emphasis on the point being made.

I can see you have extensive experience with writing on Wikipedia and it definitely shows so I'm happy to pass this. BritneyErotica (talk) 18:58, 4 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.