Talk:Mary Arthur McElroy

This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Mary Arthur McElroy has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
January 13, 2023	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on February 14, 2023.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Mary Arthur McElroy (pictured) was never given official recognition as First Lady of the United States out of respect for Nell Arthur, the deceased wife of then-president Chester A. Arthur?

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on January 8, 2024.

United States: Presidents Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject United States Presidents.

Biography: Politics and Government

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by the politics and government work group (assessed as Low-importance).

Women's History Mid‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics: American Low‑importance

	Politics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by American politics task force (assessed as Low-importance).

New York (state) Low‑importance

	New York (state) portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Wikipedia:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Green: Wildcard Edition

This article was created or improved during the Wildcard Edition GA edit-a-thon hosted by the Women in Green project in October 2022. The editor(s) involved may be new; please assume good faith regarding their contributions before making changes.Women in GreenWikipedia:WikiProject Women in GreenTemplate:WikiProject Women in GreenWomen in Green articles

Birth?

Was she born in Vermont or New York? From reading the page it says both, in different parts of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by OldScottishPerson (talk • contribs) 16:32, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out. It looks like I accidentally copied her mother's location of birth at one point when writing the article. I've fixed it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:01, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Burial?

Is she buried in Albany, New York, her place of death? --Coingeek (talk) 19:36, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marriage.

The article says that she "... later married insurance salesman John McElroy (in 1851)" Really? At the age of 10?? Bayowolf (talk) 01:07, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mary Arthur McElroy/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Shearonink (talk · contribs) 20:52, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Comment - No "immediate failure" issues. Doesn't have any maintenance templates, no copyvios. Shearonink (talk) 20:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
Prose/spelling/grammar are all fine. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
So far MOS for the lead section, layout, words to watch seem fine, but I want to read through everything a little more to make sure I haven't missed something. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No issues with lead section or layout. No "words to watch" found. Fiction & lists NA. Shearonink (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it verifiable with no original research?
A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
All the refs check out. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
Nicely-done. Every ref I checked is fine. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

C. It contains no original research:
All statements about Mary Arthur McElroy are backed up with careful sourcing. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Ran Earwig's CopyVio Tool - no violations found. Shearonink (talk) 20:57, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
Covers the subject as well as can be expected. especially considering she isn't one of the more well-known First Ladies. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
No problems. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
Stays focused on the subject. Shearonink (talk) 01:54, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
No edit wars, article is stable. Shearonink (talk) 20:53, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
Status is fine. Shearonink (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Her images are relevant. Maybe just a nicety, but could the captions have the dates of publication? I tried to find the artist for the last portrait but the book doesn't credit the artist who drew all the drawings of the various First Ladies, not even "portrait after painting by" or "portrait after photograph by". The First Ladies' portraits are anonymous (and, an aside, not as well-done as the Presidents' portraits...) Shearonink (talk) 21:35, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 05:20, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Yeah, that second portrait is obviously later and I assume was done off of some (unknown to us) photograph. Personally, I am always interested in where whatever materials (information and images) actually come from... Shearonink (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
This article is looking good. I am going to go over it a few more times, to make sure I didn't miss anything that is non-GA quality. Will update the status within a day or two. Shearonink (talk) 16:11, 11 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nicely-done. Congrats, it's a GA. Shearonink (talk) 05:21, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Bruxton (talk) 20:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that Mary Arthur McElroy was never given official recognition as First Lady of the United States out of respect for then US President Chester A. Arthur's late wife? Source: https://millercenter.org/president/arthur/essays/mcelroy-1881-firstlady
- Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Annas Maamun
- Comment: There's two more hooks I want to do but they're so weirdly worded in the article that I can't decipher what they mean. For example "She also established the tradition of serving tea after a reception" is a great hook idea but I can't tell if it's about the tradition for the entire world or just the white house.

Improved to Good Article status by Thebiguglyalien (talk). Nominated by Onegreatjoke (talk) at 20:00, 18 January 2023 (UTC).[reply]

I am in the process of reviewing this article! Comments to follow. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:24, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

General eligibility:

New enough:
Long enough:
Other problems:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall:

The article meets all criteria. I'm approving the hook you provided - I think it's interesting enough and provides some insight into Arthur's character. As far as the other potential hook, I think it was contextually obvious that that's just talking about the White House but I made a minor phrasing edit there to clarify that. Either way, I don't think that fact is as interesting as the existing hook. ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 00:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]