Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Richard Montgomery/1

Richard Montgomery

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 • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Sourcing issues across what both is and isn't inline cited. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:14, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Inline citations are needed in the "Memorials" (first half), "Legacy" and "In popular culture" sections. Z1720 (talk) 14:59, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I removed the unsourced paragraphs added later on that really shouldn't have been in there to begin with. Was that the only issue? I mean that only took me 5 minutes to address not sure if it was worth sending to GAR. Wizardman 00:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There's still some unreferenced passages throughout the article, which are marked with a citation needed. I took another look at the article and see that most inline citations are to the Shelton source, which is a high-quality source but might not represent the breadth of knowledge about him. Some other sources that could be used in the article are Biographi, a JSTOR article, another JSTOR article and possible sources in the Invasion of Quebec (1775) article (since Montgomery was heavily involved in that). @Wizardman: would you be willing to take a look and add citations or remove uncited passages as needed? Z1720 (talk) 01:05, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the delay in responding. Reading this a bit further I actually have a couple extra concerns on top of what you noted, namely most of the sourcing being from just one book. While not a deal-breaker in and of itself, that combined with your concerns makes me think we're probably better delisting this one until it can be fine-tuned more (even if I'm able to add/remove the citations I think the issues still stand, unfortunately). Wizardman 02:50, 18 November 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.