Talk:Carrom Company/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Mike Christie (talk · contribs) 02:14, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:14, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I used to play Carroms at an Indian friend's house in London in about 1970, so was delighted to discover what this was about when I picked it to review. I'd forgotten the name of the game.

I'll add comments as I go through; it might take me a day or two to complete the review. Please revert my copyedits if I make a mess of anything.

The lead is too short; it should make a brief mention of at least some more of the history.

Expanded lead. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:42, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

There's no need for a {{main}} link to Henry L. Haskell; he's linked in the very next sentence.

Removed hatnote. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:42, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think it would be OK to relegate the mention of the 1953 Ludington Daily News article to the footnote for the 1895 advertisement; that's just the source here.

Referenced only by 1953 article.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:42, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have three capitalizations for the game: "Carroms", "carroms", and "CARROMS"; we should pick one and stick with it, unless it's in a quote.

Consistency of "carroms" throughout article.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:25, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I like the gallery of patent images, but they appear to be unsourced; can we add citations to the patents?

Citations added for the patent images.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:58, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conversely, in the next section you say "See patent"; that should be a citation, not part of the text.

Removed text - made a citation. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:08, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The advertisement notes that it was patented on October 26, 1897, and that other associated patents were "pending.": suggest cutting this; it's evident from the display of patents.

Removed text of "The advertisement notes........associated patents were "pending."--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:16, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Why is there a gallery of vintage Carrom boards here? It would make sense in the Carroms article, but I don't think we need more than one here. Similarly, the external links would belong in the Carroms article better than here, and the "Copies and reproductions" section should probably be in that article too; this is about the company, not the game itself.

Removed sections suggested and placed in Carrom article.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:50, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Readers could obtain a catalog of the CARROMS products by requesting one from Ludington Novelty in Michigan: We already know Ludington is in Michigan, and it's not exactly a surprise that Ludington Novelty is where the catalogs could be requested from. I'd make this just "Catalogs of CARROMS products were available on request", or something similar.

Replaced text with "Catalogs of carroms products were available upon request."--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:59, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No need for a "main" link for the Haskell Manufacturing Company; it's linked in the first paragraph. Main links are really for cases where the topic of the section is also the exact topic of the linked article, but there's no natural in-article link; neither of those conditions apply here.

Removed hat-note to Haskell Manufacturing Company.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I think you could merge all three history sections into a single "History" section. It wouldn't be all that long -- less than a screen on my monitor -- and it would look less bitty.

Merged History sections together. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 22:12, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused about the history after Haskell Manufacturing is formed. Is the Carrom Company still a separate company? What was its name? If it's separate, why are we discussing the activities of the Haskelite Manufacturing Corporation in this article? And if it's not separate, shouldn't it's subsequent history be recounted in Haskelite Manufacturing Corporation rather than here?

Copy-edited accordingly and took out the history of Haskell Manufacturing.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:54, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

-- More later, probably tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:15, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

All the fixes above look fine. Reading through the whole article, I think there are some confusing points in the chronology. Here's a timeline I pulled out of the article; I've left this in the order the article gives it.

1942 Stearns' grandson sells Carrom Company to William Ross
1950 Ross sells Carrom Company to Lee Smith
1960 Lee Smith retires
1961 Mueckler et al form Merdel
1951 Carrom Company bought out by Shampaine
1952 Total sales up to this point is $4 million
1958 5 million boards made up to this point
1980s 80,000 to 100,000 boards sold annually
1961 Shampaine sues Merdel for copyright infringement
1967 Copyright suit dismissed
1967 Affiliated Hospital (AH) buys Shampaine
1968 Production briefly moves to Red Lion
1969 AH sues Montgomery Ward
1972 AH carrom production moves to Sardis and then shuts down; branch sold to Merdel
1981 Lightning Guider Sled (LGS) acquires Merdel
1992 Merdel buys Drueke
1994 Merdel changes back to making carroms with two "r"s
1996 AH carrom branch buys Recreational Products and moves some production to Ludington; the Carrom Sports division of AH operates under Merdel

Here are some questions and issues based on the history section and on looking at the list above.

If carrom production is sold to Merdel in 1972, how come there's still carrom production at AH in 1996?

Copy edited accordingly for the items to be in chronological order.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm still not clear when the Carrom Company ceases to exist. It looks like it's 1951, so the rest of the article is really about carrom production after that date. Is that right? If so, shouldn't that information be in the article on the game? But in the 1980s "the Carrom Company" is selling boards, so it does still exist?

Copy edited accordingly for the items to be in chronological order.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have "$5000,000" in the article; this is either missing a comma or has an extra zero.

Corrected to almost a half million dollars.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

At one time in the 20th century it was the only domestic manufacturer of chess sets; in the 21st century it was in financial difficulty and nearly went out of business: I can't tell if this refers to Drueke or Merdel.

Corrected to make it clear that it refers to Drueke.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Generally when you've introduced a company you don't have to use the full name on every subsequent reference. You could make "Merdel Company" or "Merdel Manufacturing" just "Merdel", for example; the same goes for Shampaine Industries and The Drueke Company. Affiliated Hospital Products is a little harder to abbreviate, but you don't need "company" after the name, at least.

Corrected. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The timeline above is mostly in chronological order but a couple of things are out of sequence; I'd suggest moving them into chronological order if possible.

Copy edited accordingly for the items to be in chronological order.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Drueke Company, along with its employees and equipment, was merged into the game division of Merdel Manufacturing Company in Ludington after Affiliated Hospital Products Company acquired it: I don't understand this. Merdel bought Drueke in 1992. AHP sold their carroms games branch to Merdel in 1972. So what does the reference to AHP in this sentence mean? They were no longer involved in carroms, were they?

Copy edited accordingly for the items to be in chronological order and corrected that part referring to AHP.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:05, 20 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Done for now and waiting for any further issues.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Everything now looks good; in particular it's now clear that there is still a "Carrom Company" today, even after all the mergers and acquisitions. Passing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]