Talk:Alexandra Kropotkin/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Kavyansh.Singh (talk · contribs) 19:39, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Nominator: Czar (talk · contribs) at 00:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA criteria

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Comments

Prose

(1887–1966) — upto you, though I'll suggest to write full dates
The New York Times — can be linked in the lead, and the prose as well: The New York Times
I'd expect the full name, Alexandra Petrovna Kropotkin, in the lead as well
where Alexandra stayed until 1921, after the death of her father. She settled in New York. — Odd flow
championed her father's legacy — championed is WP:POV
and maintained connection with his circles — can we use another word than 'circles'?
By the 1964 United States presidential election — should be "In the 1964 United States presidential election"
the conservative Barry Goldwater — indeed he was the most conservative candidate, but I would also suggest to include that he was a Republican
While living in London, she had a — replace 'she' with her last name
relationship and brief affair — either 'relationship ' or a 'brief affair', but not both together
with author Somerset Maugham — our articles calls him "W. Somerset Maugham"

Images

Images can take ALT text

Sources

Is 113fn31 a page number?

That is it. Nice one! Short but addresses almost everything I expect it to address. Putting on hold. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, @Kavyansh.Singh! I prefer years-only in the lede's first sentence for brevity, given that the full dates area available in both the full text and the infobox and given how much cruft the first sentences of articles collect (despite being the most important sentence of the article). I think "championed" is supported by the text—it's more than just support. For Goldwater, I used "by" because it is inferred that her politics shifted from left to right over time. I also used "conservative" rather than Republican because the latter term has shifted in meaning in American history whereas the former has not. She had a social relationship with Maugham that included a brief romantic affair, but "brief affair" alone would not accurately describe their relationship, hence listing both. Yes, 113fn31 is page 113, footnote 31, which is the most common notation I've seen for that (and more precise than just saying 113. Believe I've addressed the rest! czar 22:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still, we are writing championed in Wikipedia's voice, which is WP:POV. If the source supports it, something like "According to author Paul Avrich, she championed her father's legacy" would better. As for Goldwater, I think "backed the" in informal. It should be "endorsed the". Also, "conservative Barry Goldwater" is WP:SOB. Rest good! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kavyansh.Singh, thanks. I've rephrased those sections (but two links in a row is not a "sea of blue" issue) czar 15:34, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lets agree to disagree on that. Will take another look before promoting. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 19:44, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]