Wikipedia:Peer review/William S. Sadler/archive2

William S. Sadler

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article is currently a GA, and I would like to nominate it at FAC soonish. I think it is in pretty good shape, but I'd like to get another set of eyes on it before nominating it there. Attention to prose and neutrality would be particularly appreciated.

Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 04:34, 21 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (some quick notes, with the caveat that I know nothing about the subject!!)

Could you use an infobox at the top of the article? No real reason to do so, but most FAC bios I've seen have them.
"Post-Graduate Medical School of Chicago" is this notable enough to be redlinked? If not, is it worth inclusion in the lead?
"Isabelle Wilson[1] and was of English and Irish descent.[2] " move [1] to before [2], it's not a big deal, and would look a lot neater.
"Adventist in 1888[4] and became devoutly religious.[3]" ditto. For a more approachable article, I'd just place refs at the end of sentences.
"In this role, he persuaded ..." you've mentioned two other people since Sadler... maybe reassert the subject.
"Picture of Sadler standing, c. 1914...." is the "standing" for any good reason?! You could say "sort of pointing" or "uncertain"...!
"Sadler also wrote about race:[33] he had an interest" perhaps capitalise "he"?
"Sunday[44]" again, why would you feel the necessity to cite "Sunday" so directly? Relax and add it to the end of the sentence. It makes for a much better reading experience.

The Rambling Man (talk) 18:58, 23 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- Thanks for the comments, I will do most of them--I tend to avoid infoboxes if they're not there already, and I think the capital after colon is a British English convention, not 100% sure though. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:09, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looking it over

I think the heavy lifting has been done... I'm just looking it over. I'm still fascinated by the close orbits of Sadler and Beilhart. Anyway..(hope you don't mind, but I don't like directly editing the article. I'm too afraid of messing it up entirely!)

In 1889, Sadler moved to Battle Creek, Michigan, to work as a bellhop and help in the kitchen of the Battle Creek Sanitarium, in addition to attending Battle Creek College.

Maybe that's how it was, but it reads as though being a bellhop was his goal. Just seemed odd. I would think his main goal was to work at the sanitarium no matter what the position.

The couple moved to San Francisco in 1901 to attend medical school at Cooper Medical College. The couple had been interested in medicine for several years, but the loss of their child inspired them to pursue a medical careers.

Two "The couple"'s in a row. Perhaps: "The couple had been interested in medicine for several years, but the loss of their child inspired them to pursue a medical careers. In 1901 they moved to San Francisco to attend medical school at Cooper Medical College"

Sadler was a relatively early adopter of Freudian...

- strike 'relatively', I think. You are an early adopter relative to other adopters by definition.

Although Sadler was a committed Adventist for much of his early life, he became less involved after John Harvey Kellogg left the church in 1907 owing to conflict with Ellen G. White, the church's founder.

The lede says that Sadler left the church after Kellogg was excommunicated. Here, it just says Kellogg 'left the church'. Did leaving the church (or the conflict with White) lead to the excommunication? Did Kellogg leave because he was excommunicated? Doesn't matter, really, but the lede caused me to want to know more. :)

Journalist Brad Gooch writes in his 2002 profile of the Urantia movement that...

I don't know for sure, but I thought that you didn't specifically name an author or work unless you were going to directly quote something from it. (thus, we'd have "Gardner writes... ", "York wrote... " etc all through the article). I'm unsure on this one. In any event, I might have said, "In his 2002 profile of the Urantia movement, Brad Gooch wrote/writes/said.... "

That takes me up to "Urantia Revelation"... More later.. Wikipelli ^Talk 10:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

- Thanks, those are good comments! Will work on them soon. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:29, 24 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, I did them all. In some places, I'm going to leave "X says that" if it's referring to a disputed part of his life. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:06, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Looks great.. as always, my suggestions are 'take or leave, what do I know?' :) Great article! Wikipelli ^Talk 02:04, 25 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]