Jump to content

Talk:Edward Hewitt Nichols

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeEdward Hewitt Nichols was a Agriculture, food and drink good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 27, 2021Peer reviewReviewed
July 29, 2021Good article nomineeNot listed
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on March 25, 2021.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Edward Hewitt Nichols, the first leader of Hong Kong's Country Parks administrations, oversaw the designation of 40% of the territory as parkland?
Current status: Former good article nominee

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Valereee (talk) 17:16, 24 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(
)
  • Reviewed: fewer than five DYK credits
  • Comment: Per WP:QPQ, a review of others' nomination is not needed since this will be the first credit, though one may be performed later.

Created by Aseleste (talk). Self-nominated at 10:06, 12 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: None required.

Overall: A very interesting article on a figure probably unknown most outside Hong Kong but who had a major effect on the appearance, leisure options, air quality, etc., of HK, as well as the development of co-ops and credit unions, all with lasting impact. This is a serious composition, length is very good for a fresh article (mainspace 7 March, 3.5k words); I made a little copyedit run, and a little more would be no harm, notably the further removal of "Edward" in most places - we use surnames to maintain encyclopedic distance. Clean bill of health on copyvio / paraphrasing. No picture issues. Two areas need action. Every para is cited, and in more than one location, but there is a direct quote which needs its own citation. Finally the hook... it's clear, and it's cited. But I think it could be more "hooky" - right now there are two names, neither widely known, and a mention of Hong Kong. Passing readers may not be clear why it would be interesting to read further - and yet inside is the story of how Hong Kong came to have so much green space, and more. I'd suggest putting context around at least one name, and trying (without exceeding the 200 char. limit) to convey more of *why* the governor made the comment, so "Governor MacLehose said..." I know, not easy in few words. I'll keep an eye. SeoR (talk) 14:20, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reviewing the nomination! Your copy edit is quite helpful as I am not quite yet a proficient content creator.
For the direct quote, I believe you were referring to the quote in the lead. It has just been fixed here.
As for the hook, I will try to make an improved one in the next day or so after browsing some previous hooks by others and taking your advice. ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 15:33, 20 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
You are most welcome Aseleste, and I may do a little more copyediting. And yes, the quotation issue is now fine, flag changed above. The hook composition point is sometimes tricky - the key thing to remember is that while it must be valid and cited, it does not have to be central - it's job is to get readers interested. As you will see, sometimes it's a quirky or "I'd never have guessed that" sort of point. In your case, I don't think you need quirky, just a compact way to flag what the subject achieved. SeoR (talk) 00:02, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I think mentioning the subject only is enough. I have added words to highlight his work. The result is:
Hopefully there are improvements. ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 07:59, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, and I have posted that as Alt (alternative hook) 1 (the base is considered as 0), and would also offer two modified forms for your consideration:
  • ... that Edward Hewitt Nichols was praised for being "a preserver of Hong Kong's countryside, and an organiser of recreation in it" by the territory's governor? (knowing who / what office said it may have impact)
  • ... that Edward Hewitt Nichols was the first leader of Hong Kong's Country Parks administrations, and oversaw the designation of 40% of the territory as park? (that 40% is a remarkable statistic - few places in the world have set aside so much land as park - and I think readers will be curious as to who achieved that)
  • If you'd like to adopt either of those as options, just say - and if you come up with any other options, very welcome. I suggest to finalise the options within a day, make sure they're cited, and I will approve it to proceed. If multiple options are offered, a Wikipedia Administrator will select which of them they feel will have most impact at the next stage (promotion) of the process. SeoR (talk) 09:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, I have just updated the hooks. They can be finalized now. ~ Aseleste (t, e | c, l) 12:05, 22 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Many thanks. Sorry for delay, Real Life got busy, but looking well. Good move to take citations from templates to text, I added one more so your hook points are fully covered. One last hint would be to perhaps reduce the redlinks (links to not-yet-made pages) in the article. Good luck, SeoR (talk) 19:35, 23 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Edward Hewitt Nichols/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Ado2102 (talk · contribs) 01:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


I will be reviewing this article Ado2102 (talk) 01:46, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conclusion

[edit]

This article represents a substantial amount of research and I found myself very interested to learn more about this fascinating character and the processes of HK parks and agriculture/aquaculture administration. However, as discussed further in the comments below, it fails the following elements of good article criteria (in bold):

1. Well-written: a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and b. it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[2]

3. Broad in its coverage: a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[5] and b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

General Concern: Overly detailed

[edit]

This is my primary critique of the article. I do not want to go overly beyond the scope of the GA review, or to get bogged down in stylistic nitpicking, but I think the issues discussed here are relevant to whether the article as a whole is well-written beyond my personal style preferences, as it goes to readability. As part of this, I reviewed the following relevant policies, which I think it worthwhile to share.

It appears that this article attempts to compile every written source in existence on this subject, and to pin-cite each statement it makes in the manner of a legal brief or academic publication. While I want to express my sincere appreciation for the amount of work this takes, I do not think that it makes sense in the encyclopedia format. Here are some examples of what I mean, with respect to biographical detail:

  • There are two citations for the subject's birth place. Is the birthplace contested? Is the birthplace relevant to what makes the subject notable?
  • There are three citations for his parents. Same questions.
    • Side note: both his parents are red-linked. Is there anything about either of them, other than that they are his parents, that make them independently notable?
    • In the Personal life section, his wife is also red-linked. Is she independently important or notable?
  • A single page of the Hong Kong Who's Who for 1973 (Walker 1973 p. 341) is cited 22 times. A single page of the 1966 Hong Kong album is cited 8 times, often on the same points.
    • In the Early life section, the same two sources are cited four times each.
    • In the Personal life section, these are again cited several times each.
  • There are citations to dozens of newspaper articles and dozens of other primary sources, each supporting a statement about a small detail of his life.

In general: the information in this article is too detailed without sufficient attention to relevance for what makes the subject notable. It should be substantially condensed. Here is a suggested rewrite of Early life:

Edward Nichols was born in Newcastle upon Tyne to Edward E. Nichols and Mary Hewitt. He studied agriculture and was admitted a Bachelor of Science from Durham University in 1945, and went on to advanced studies at Queens' College and the University of the West Indies. He married Annie Audrey Muse in 1951 and the couple had one daughter. (then drop one footnote to Lee 1966 and Walker 1973, and maybe nothing else)

Comments on Lead

[edit]

Consistent with [Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography], my primary concern is the "notability" criterion. As earlier reviewer noted, there is an important story here about the creation of green space in Hong Kong, but it is very difficult to discern at first read. Really trimming up the lead may help substantially.

It is not immediately clear why this person is important enough to merit a Wikipedia page. Certainly, everyone is important, but why was he particularly notable and worth writing up? One possible edit to the first sentence to address this: ... was a British colonial official who served as the director of Hong Kong's Agriculture and Fisheries Department from 1965 to 1980 and was (one of the primary proponents of?) Hong Kong's unusually extensive country parks system. He was also..." Some other comments:

  • Second and third paragraphs would better fit in early life section. Too much detail for lead. I'd recommend moving them, perhaps entirely, to below the lead.
  • Fourth paragraph, second sentence: this suddenly shifts subject to Murray MacLehose for most of the sentence. Should eliminate discussion of what another person did, and focus everything on Nichols' actions.
  • Fourth paragraph: there are a number of links to pages that don't exist. These should be cleaned up unless you intend to create those pages?
I have re-reviewed Wikipedia:Red link and want to revise this comment. What I'd suggest is that these red links be revised to specify jurisdiction. So, for example, it's not the "Country Parks Ordinance" but the "Country Parks Ordinance (Hong Kong)" or something similar (it could be styled with the same text, i.e., Country Parks Ordinance). Anyway, I'd consider that for the offices also. This is separate from whether these might not be better handled in, say Conservation in Hong Kong.

Colonial career section

[edit]

Similar to above comments, this is exhaustive but unfocused. I think it could be combined with "early life" into an "early life and career" section and be reduced to one short paragraph: "From 1947 to 1959, Nichols worked in the Sierra Leone colonial government's agricultural division, rising to head director of agriculture in 1957. Among other work, he managed a rice research centre, promoted agricultural mechanisation, and served as assistant superintendent of police of Njala, Moyamba. In 1959 he moved to Hong Kong to become the assistant director of the Hong Kong Agriculture and Fisheries Department, where he managed agricultural affairs."

Director Section: Other work

[edit]

This is the last subsection but I'll discuss it first.

  • First paragraph. What is the relevance of his service on these committees to his importance? Did he contribute? How? Was it unusual for somebody in his position to serve on this many committees or anything notable like that? What is the context? Why does it matter? My sense is that it doesn't, and this could all be omitted.
  • Second paragraph. What is the relevance of his attending these meetings? Were they important? Did he contribute? How? Was it unusual or notable for a person in his position to attend such meetings? My sense is that this is a typical part of the job. This could be summarized as "He performed other typical duties of his office," which is probably not remarkable, and so could be omitted entirely.
  • Third paragraph. It's interesting and unusual that he actively promoted life saving. I'd keep this part as a small independent subsection.
  • Fourth paragraph. The details of the administrative reorganization of the division don't seem all that important. Government divisions are reorganized all the time.

In general, I would combine this material into brief introductory paragraph to the whole subsection that describes the typical duties of a Director of the Agriculture and Fisheries Department, and consider separating that material into a separate page if you want to go into so much detail about the history and development of the position. All you need to say is that in his role as director he performed a variety of other typical duties, including attending international meetings and representing Hong Kong's interests, and then move onto his major projects section by section.

Director Section: Establishment of Country Parks

[edit]
  • This seems like his most important and significant work and it might make sense to highlight it first, unless there are strong reasons (like preservation of chronology?) to put it later.
  • Regarding the quote, it appears that he did not speak Chinese? Or did he learn it when he came to Hong Kong? I ask because the English seems a little off and I wonder if the quote was made in English, but then reported in Chinese, and then translated back to English?
  • First paragraph. After the first sentence, it is not clear what Nichols' role in any of this was.
  • Second, third, and fourth paragraphs. These seem like the most important content in the entire article. But it has taken some time to get here.

Ag/Aquaculture, Cooperatives and Credit Unions

[edit]

My comments on this material are consistent with the prior comments.

Personal life section

[edit]

It is not clear why information is included here rather than in the main biography (e.g., early life). I recommend combining.

Honours section

[edit]

The Honours sections is redundant and has other problems:

    • Already says he was made a JP in his early life section and he's marked as a JP in his infobox.
      • Note: the infobox JP is linked to JP:Canada?
    • Already says he was OBE and CBE in Later life section, and CBE is noted in his infobox.
    • It's not clear what the Silver Jubilee honor was. Is it supposed to be a reference to the Queen Elizabeth II Silver Jubilee Medal?

I recommend adding Silver Jubilee medal to main narrative and deleting the rest of this section.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Edward_Hewitt_Nichols&oldid=1246337446"