Talk:Addie Viola Smith/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Voorts (talk · contribs) 23:37, 28 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: KJP1 (talk · contribs) 13:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Pleased to pick this up. Will work on it over the next few days, in fits and starts. Feel free to respond as I go, or when I'm done, at which point I'll ping you. Ping me if anything's unclear. I review chronologically and then summarise in a table. KJP1 (talk) 13:19, 30 April 2024 (UTC)

Comments

Infobox

• We don't have one. Not obligatory for GA, of course, but many readers do find an IB summary helpful.

  I generally think IBs aren't needed in short articles like this one. I'm hoping to get a free use picture of her soon as well.

That's fine. I'll come back to Images below. KJP1 (talk) 07:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Lead

This all looks fine as a summary. Just a few comments:

• "also known as "Shi Fanglan" (施芳蘭),[1] - the only instance I can find of this is in Cite 1. None of the other sources mention it, nor does Google as far as I can see. I don't speak Chinese so don't know its meaning, but is it actually worth including?

  I think it's worth including since she spent so much of her career in China. It might also encourage Chinese readers to look for her under that name in Chinese sources.

Fine. KJP1 (talk) 07:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

• Worth bluelinking trade commissioner?

  Done.

• "Smith was appointed trade commissioner of Shanghai in 1928. As trade commissioner, she promoted the importation of American automobiles into China and the introduction of American radio. Smith served as trade commissioner until 1939..." - you've got "trade commissioner" three times in two sentences. Perhaps - "In 1928 Smith was appointed trade commissioner of Shanghai. During her tenure she promoted the importation of American automobiles into China and the introduction of American radio. She held the post until 1939 when she was appointed as Counsel and..."

  Done.

• Redlinks - you have five here, and many others elsewhere. Not a GAC issue, but for me they are rather off-putting. Is it likely that any of them will turn blue in the not too?

  Removed the ones least likely to turn blue in the lead and throughout.

Early life (1893 – 1920)

• "a large California-based merchandising firm that sold dry goods" - worth linking dry goods? I don't think it's that common a term outside the Anglo-sphere.

  Done.

• "Smith also served as a confidential clerk to an assistant secretary, assistant chief of the Women's Division of the United States Employment Service, and chief of the Information Division of the United States Training and Dilution Service" - this threw me a little. On first reading, I thought she was, first, confidential clerk to an assistant secretary, second, assistant chief (herself), and third, chief of the Information division (herself). But I think it actually means she served as confidential clerk to all three post-holders, i.e. she didn't hold the second and third roles herself. Perhaps - "Smith also served as confidential clerk, firstly to an assistant secretary, then to the assistant chief of the Women's Division of the United States Employment Service, and lastly to the chief of the Information Division of the United States Training and Dilution Service"?

  I think she actually served in those roles. This is what Stanoff 2023 says: During her time at the United States Department of Labor, she held several positions such as confidential clerk to assistant secretary, assistant chief of the women’s division of the United States employment service, chief of the information division of the United States training and dilution service, clerk to the employers group of the President’s first industrial conference in 1919, and assistant editorial clerk to the first international labor office conference at Washington in 1919.

Hmm. The source itself isn't 100 per cent clear, but I think your rendering of it is therefore fine. KJP1 (talk) 07:46, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

• "In 1919, she also worked on" - I think you could lose the "also", especially as you have one in the preceding sentence, and another in the next-but-one.

  Done.

Foreign service in China (1920 – 1939)

(a) Gaps - For me, there are a couple of gaps here, in relation to criterion 3a, the first rather crucial, the second less so:

• Colonial mindset - First, I think we need a little on her colonial mindset and approach. Three of the five sources, Epstein, Paddle and Stanoff, mention it, Epstein specifically, and Paddle generally, at length. An effective trade commissioner, certainly, and an equally effective battler against her bosses' sexism: but Stanoff has "a product or facilitator of American imperialism" (albeit qualified); Epstein has "perpetuated the imperialist project. As Trade Commissioner, she implemented trade policy in lucrative China that helped to economically enrich the USA. Likewise, as an international feminist, Smith injected Western superiority to the international feminist sphere"; and Paddle has "the colonising attitudes of Western feminists". Where I think this could be covered is in a paragraph on the 1928 Pan Pacific Women’s Conference in Honolulu. [There's also a, fairly helpful, bluelink.] Both Paddle and Epstein cover this extensively, and Smith and Hinder's unilateral invitation for China to act as host for the next congress does shine a light on their Orientalist thinking - "If China is going to extend this invitation I want Chinese women to take the full responsibility and invite other people to come in and help us but not force it upon us" [Chinese delegate, Dr Mei Iung Ting].(Paddle|p=338) I think something on the imperialist context to Smith's activities would be useful.
• Jantzen - Second, I wonder if a sentence or two on Smith's efforts on behalf of Jantzen's knitted swimwear might be interesting. Epstein covers it extensively, and it is an interesting example of the lengths Smith went to in furtherance of American trade. I agree it's not as important as the work around roads/radio that you do highlight, but I think it might be worth a mention.

(b) Other

• "After she was passed over, Clara Burdette of the California Federation of Women's Clubs appealed to her friend Herbert Hoover, who was then the Secretary of Commerce; at that point, however, she had already been appointed trade commissioner, effective January 1, 1928" - This is a little unclear, in terms of who the "she" is referring to. Perhaps - "After an initial rejection, Smith sought help from Clara Burdette, president of the California Federation of Women's Clubs, who appealed to Herbert Hoover, the Secretary of Commerce and a personal friend; at that point, however, Smith's appointment had already been confirmed by Julean Arnold, her immediate superior, and she took up the role on 1 January, 1928."(Epstein|p=709-710)
  • Done.

Post-trade commissioner career (1939 – 1975)

• Retirement - assuming she was not working until her death, do any of the sources indicate the year/date of her retirement? I can't see it. Was it when they moved to Sydney in 1957? (Epstein|p=715) I'm guessing her representative role at the International Federation of Women Lawyers wasn't a full-time job?
  • The sources are unclear and I'm not sure.

Personal life

• "although they did not identify themselves as lesbians" - given the times, that isn't surprising, but the sources seem pretty clear that they were. Epstein writes of "an intense emotional, if not sexual, partnership", and Stanoff describes her as "a dedicated friend and lover". There is also the intriguing reference to "censored love letters" written to her by Hinder. I wonder if they self-censored, or whether it was done by someone else subsequently? You don't have a Footnotes section, but I might have a footnote on the censored letters? Also, is there a suitable Category? [Category:American lesbian politicians] doesn't work, as she was a lawyer and diplomat. [Category:American LGBT lawyers]?
  • They were self-censored, but the only thing about the self-censoring is in the library Tik Tok.

References

• These all look fine.

Sources

• These also all look fine, and nicely standardised. There doesn't seem to have been that much written about her, but the available sources are well-covered (but see Gaps above).

Images

• Pleased to hear you may be getting an image. The absence is not a grounds to fail, under Criterion 6, but their presence generally enhances an article. I was wondering if any held by the California State Library, and reproduced by Epstein, might be accessible. Does Wikipedia have an access arrangement with them? The one of her in the Jantzen knitted swimsuit is particularly good. On that point, and also in relation to Sources, I don't do TikTok but the State Library obviously does, [1]. If all else fails, there are a couple of nice ones here, [Category:EG Waterhouse National Camellia Gardens] but unfortunately not of the memorial benches, which makes them less directly relevant.
  • An image was added; thanks to Bruxton for finding it.

Conclusion

voorts - An interesting article, and a pleasure to read and to review. Let me know if you want me to put it formally On Hold. Probably not necessary, as you've promptly responded to Batch 1. As before, ping me with any issues, although I have the page on my Watchlist. Best regards. KJP1 (talk) 09:58, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

This will take a bit of time and it's a busy week, so you can put this on hold. Regarding pictures, the California State Library just sent me some of her scrapbooks that they scanned. I'll need to find one that's in the PD, so likely something from a newspaper clipping. Most of them haven't been published before. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:46, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

On Hold it is. Nice image. KJP1 (talk) 06:04, 2 May 2024 (UTC)

@KJP1: Everything done except for the gaps you've identified. I'll probably get to those Thursday evening, but will try to do some work on it tomorrow. voorts (talk/contributions) 00:34, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

That’s fine, no hurry. KJP1 (talk) 04:13, 8 May 2024 (UTC)

@KJP1: Added a bunch and reorganized a bit. voorts (talk/contributions) 01:06, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

It’s looking good. Indeed it’s looking GA. Congratulations. KJP1 (talk) 06:41, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the thorough review, @KJP1! Do you have any further comments before I nominate for FAC? voorts (talk/contributions) 21:12, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Review Summary

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   Prose standard is high and the minor quibbles promptly addressed.

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   All MoS-compliant for me.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   Well-referenced...

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   and well-sourced.

   c. (OR):

   Not seeing any OR.

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

   Earwig gives 43.8 per cent, but it's all, sometimes long, titles, and I'm satisfied regarding CV.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   I've suggested two areas, one more important in my view, one less so, where there might be a slight expansion. And now covered. KJP1 (talk) 06:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

   b. (focused):

   It doesn't stray from the point.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   It's fine for NPOV.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   It's stable.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   Currently there aren't any, but there are grounds to justify this - the absence of suitable images. The nominator is hoping to access one, but the current absence is not grounds to fail. The best available is now there. KJP1 (talk) 06:40, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Not currently applicable.

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)