Talk:Oliver Bosbyshell/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Crisco 1492 (talk · contribs) 23:50, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I take. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:50, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

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.
	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.
	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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	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.	Fine
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Within definition
	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.	Pending

Comments

1

He was also known for his claim to have been the first Union soldier wounded by enemy action in the Civil War - Perhaps "He also claimed to have been the first Union soldier wounded by enemy action in the Civil War"? He was known for a claim reads a little awkward

Second paragraph has too many semi-colons

"After brief employment on the railroad, and after beginning the study of law, Bosbyshell enlisted in the Union cause on the outbreak of war." - perhaps "After briefly working on the railroad and studying law, Bosbyshell enlisted in the Union cause on the outbreak of war."?

350 Pennsylvania troops - Pennsylvania or Pennsylvanian?

It sounds OK to me as is. I could change it to "Pennsylvanians", but I think this is better.

"Bosbyshell led his command at Globe Tavern and at Peebles's Farm. He sought leave of absence to return to Pennsylvania on personal business." - Transition is rather abrupt

"Disastrous" results... sayeth the source indeed, but why no scare quotes?

Worth a link to Republican Party (United States)?

In 1869, Bosbyshell was appointed - You used in 1869 above as well. Perhaps "that year Bosbyshell also..." or something?

He received this post as Controller Robert Dechert was a friend of his, and Bosbyshell was hired despite the fact that he was a Republican and the municipal administration was run by Democrats. - Perhaps something like "Bosbyshell was hired despite the fact that he was a Republican in a Democratic-run municipal administration as Controller Robert Dechert was a friend of his" or something. With a link to Democratic Party (United States), if Republican is linked above

Where'd the National Guard come in? Huh?

Got those, thanks. Appreciate your thoroughness.

"he held that position until December of that year when he resigned in favor of the post of treasurer, which he still held as of 1908." - Quite a few clauses, perhaps simplify?

"and involved himself for much of his life in Sunday School work, often as superintendent" - Do we need "much of his life" here? We already have many years before

His wife's death is mentioned in the infobox but not in-text. Any word how this affected him?

The first two still haven't been addressed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:53, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, will do.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:03, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(clarifying) the first two under the note "Got those, thanks. Appreciate your thoroughness." — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:08, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Got those now.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:16, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

3

"Who's Who" in the footnotes doesn't link anywhere, per Ucucha's tool

Did this myself. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:05, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

6

File:OC Bosbyshell Sig.svg needs categories and, preferably, no bare urls
File:Second Mint.jpeg needs a crop and proper information template. Uploading the full resolution version might be better too, but that's not part of the criteria at either GA or FA.
Why the alt for the signature but not the other images?

The result of a copy and paste from another article. I do not object to alt text but choose not to do it myself because people are always picking at it. I have removed the field from the infobox for signature alt, and also swapped the Mint image for another I found on the LoC site which is much better. I think I'm up to date.

Suggestions for FA

More context would be good, especially information about his activities in certain areas (his book, for example)
Information on his personal life would be nice, if available.
What did he do in the 20th century?

Source spotchecks for this version

3a: - Fine
3b: - Close paraphrasing, looks exactly the same as the source.
3c: - Checks out
3d: - Close paraphrasing, format is essentially the same as the source
3e: - Fine

18 - Fine

I"ll look at these. When I don't have a lot of context to go with, I sometimes try to stick fairly close to the source. Did you mean Footnote 4? I see Footnote 3 as only used once. I have not been able to find anything out about 20th century stuff on him. I will add a bit of family life. I don't see a lot on the book. I glanced through it, as I use it as a source, but cautiously. I have to call the ANA library tomorrow to get a 1993 article on him, they are closed today.

Can you double-check on the footnote number?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:56, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

4, yes. Sorry. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further discussion

On hold for fixes. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:21, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the two paraphrasing; in both cases it was because there isn't a lot of supporting info. On the others, I'll give the ANA library a call, they are usually helpful.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:59, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, looks good. Passing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:34, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]