Talk:Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Ali Beary (talk · contribs) 13:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Czarking0 (talk · contribs) 16:29, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thanks for the submission. I am quick failing this on account of copyright violations. The article is clearly high quality in other respects. I encourage you to resubmit after fixing these errors.

Yes, it is listed as a C-Class article, but that was a while ago! I've fixed everything so that there's no page needed or citation needed in the article. I have also added more knowledge that I'm sure makes it at least above c-class. There is a good amount of sources and information about Eliza. She is notable because she is a main character in the broadway hit, Hamilton, and she helped shape our history by allowing us to find out more about Alexander Hamilton, George Washington, and by founding Graham Windham. Please let me know your thoughts on nominating this lovely woman to be one of the approximately 0.60% of good articles on Wikipedia!

Ali Beary (talk) 13:55, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I moved your comment to here as it was going to be in the wrong place on the talk page after the failed submission went through Czarking0 (talk) 16:33, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How is it copyrighted? I see nothing that I believe could be copyrighted, Czarking0. Ali Beary _{(talk2me!) (stalk me?!)} 17:00, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I agree with your comment on discord that this appears to be backcopy. Can you just renominate and I will put it underreview ? Czarking0 (talk) 17:19, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but question... what is backcopy? Sorry, sort of new to this. Also, what about Discord? I didn't tell you anything on Discord that I know of. Ali Beary _{(talk2me!) (stalk me?!)} 17:39, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Czarking0: I'm the one who commented on Discord, not Ali Beary. :) – dudhhr^talk_contribs^she_her 17:39, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dudhhr, ah okay. I got scared that someone was impersonating me for a second, haha. Ali Beary _{(talk2me!) (stalk me?!)} 17:40, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I obviously made some mistakes today but the article is back under GAR and I will follow up with some more detail Czarking0 (talk) 17:48, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Pick one name to reference her by throughout the article. It changes from Schuyler to Eliza, to Elizabeth and I think even Hamilton at some points Done In some of the correspondence between Hamilton and Schuyler, there had been some talk in at least one letter of a "secret wedding" Way too wordy Done After completing the prisoner exchange negotiations, Hamilton returned to Morristown Just start this sentence at Hamilton Not done the Pastures Just say "After a short honeymoon, at her childhood home, Alexander Hamilton..." Unless that name is notable? I see you use it later. Does this have its own page Not done sitting up with him this is not clear. Would "attending to him" to "listening" be better? Done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Schuyler would have grown up around slavery Either she did and that is verifiable or she did not. would have is not encyclopedic in this context Done was said to have been something of a tomboy when she was young This should like a POV claim. Who said this? WP:WTW James McHenry, one of George Washington's aides who worked alongside her future husband, said, "Hers was a strong character with its depth and warmth, whether of feeling or temper controlled, but glowing underneath, bursting through at times in some emphatic expression."[14] Much later, the son of Joanna Bethune, one of the women she worked alongside to found an orphanage later in her life,[17] remembered that "Both [Elizabeth and Joanna] were of determined disposition ... Mrs. Bethune the more cautious, Mrs. Hamilton the more impulsive." I don't think this is in reference to her childhood so it is questionable to have in the childhood section. Either way this is a lot of going on about qualitative descriptions of her personality which have questionable notability. Done
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Current FN 8 is I believe a children's history magazine which is a questionable source. wealthiest and most politically influential families the source says prominent. This claim is a stretch from that. I think an additional source is best here FN10 is a write up of a podcast. It does not seem to have an institutional backing. My thoughts here is that I would not take the Joe Rogan Experience as a reliable source so I should not take this either. In early April 1780, they were officially engaged with her father's blessing, which was something of an anomaly for the family with Schuyler's two sisters, Angelica and Catherine, both eloping. This is unsourced Done This is Not done all the sources you added are either blogs or use Wikipedia as a source. i do not think the blogs count as WP:RS and the New Netherlands Institute cannot be used as a source because it is using this wikipedia page as a source. That is copygensis and not allowed. I will give you some more time to find sources. I am tagging this as needs additional sources for now and I will remove the the blogs if you cannot show that they are RS. Sorry, is earlyamericanists.com not reliable? It doesn't appear to be a blog and I don't think it used Wikipedia as a source... earlyamericanists.com is a blog as evidenced by the section on their page: What is “The Junto?” The Junto is a group blog made up of junior early Americanists—graduate students and junior faculty—dedicated to providing content of general interest to other early Americanists and those interested in early American history, as well as a forum for discussion of relevant historical and academic topics. who had once sketched for her. Hamilton, while envious of André for his actions during the war, promised Schuyler he would do what he could to treat the British intelligence chief accordingly; he even begged Washington to grant André's last wish of execution by firing squad instead of by hanging, but Washington didn't listen and hung him anyways. After two more months of separation punctuated by their correspondence, on December 14, 1780, Alexander Hamilton and Elizabeth Schuyler were married at the Schuyler Mansion. Unsourced. Also there is a lack of clarity here. What does "sketched for her" mean? My (somewhat extensive) knowledge of the time period would leave me believing he was a dinner guest who had shown them about drawing? Or do you mean he drew of sketch of her. Either way why is this notable? Furthermore, Hamilton, while envious of André it is not clear to me why he was envious. Overall, why is this Andre guy important for her biography ? I find it hard to believe that a 23 year old girl having a crush on a soldier is a biographical event unless that experience had some impact on her life. Done There this not a single source in the Burr-Hamilton duel section Done I would call this Not done. My original comment wasn't meant to indicate that this section only needed one source. For one, direct quotes need an inline citation immediately following. And for two the source you listed does not include all the information in this section.Czarking0 (talk) 16:12, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	She is (about) 23 when she meets Alexander. Assuming the childhood section is not meant to cover her life beyond the age of 18 that leaves a 5 year gap in her biography. It is possible there is nothing notable to say about that but I want you to confirm that. One encyclopedic way of presenting that could be to remark where she lived during that time. How could I do that? If it doesn't fit in the marriage or early life categories, then the only way I can think of adding that is by creating a new section. However, not only do I not know what to title it, it seems odd to create a whole new section for one or two sentences. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ali Beary (talk • contribs) 13:16, 16 December 2024 (UTC)[reply] Philip was brought to Angelica and John Church's house, where he died with both of his parents next to him. It seems like there could be more to say but I am not sure Done
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	From her mother, she learned how to read and sew. Is this really notable for a 18th century aristocrat? Done which still stands; however, the original 1715 building, where Schuyler was baptized and attended services, was demolished in 1806 This seems like too much not directly related detail for WP Done After meeting Schuyler in Morristown, Hamilton was so excited that he reportedly returned to the Continental Army's Morristown headquarters and had forgotten the password to gain admission to it. I find it hard to justly the notability of this claim and my gripe about FN8 kind of makes my point here Done
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	n 1787, Elizabeth sat for a portrait, painted by Ralph Earl Is this image available? Done
	7. Overall assessment.

Czarking0, thank you, I'll fix the article when I get home. As for 6b, the image is currently the cover photo. As you can see in the infobox, the caption is "A 1787 portrait of Elizabeth Schuyler Hamilton by Ralph Earl". Also, if you didn't put any info in a section, does that mean it's good or you're still working on it? Ali Beary _{(talk2me!) (stalk me?!)} 12:47, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, about 1a, it's because for part of the article she is unmarried, and for the rest she is married to Alexander. However, I'll change this to Schuyler the whole time so as to not get confused with her husband. I will 100% be changing the ones who refer to her by her first name, though. Ali Beary _{(talk2me!) (stalk me?!)} 12:54, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"'After completing the prisoner exchange negotiations, Hamilton returned to Morristown...' Just start this sentence at Hamilton"... but it mentions the prisoner exchange negotiatons prior. In the sentence before, it states, "While on the prisoner exchange, Hamilton wrote to Schuyler, continuing their relationship through letters." Ali Beary _{(talk2me!) (stalk me?!)} 13:31, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, my comments are just suggestions. If you don't think they work you can leave it. I'll make the determination holistically at the end. I expect to be wrong on some points. Czarking0 (talk) 18:04, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ah got it on the image. If I put nothing that means I have not finished commenting on it yet. Some of them are good Czarking0 (talk) 18:02, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you do me a favor and mark my points above with

Done after you have addressed them or

Not done if you think I am wrong. I work on multiple reviews/articles in tandem so this helps keep track Czarking0 (talk) 18:06, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will then ~~strike~~ the comments as I confirm your work. Of course none of this is required process. Just a method I have Czarking0 (talk) 18:07, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Very notable improvements thus far thanks for the good work Czarking0 (talk) 18:11, 13 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]