Jump to content

Talk:Hetty Reckless

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Help adding new information

[edit]

I was trying to find new information on Hetty and came across this old article from the Courier Post. There's some interesting, and conflicting, information in there that I'd like to use, but don't know the appropriate way to do so (as it's a cached link on a defunct page). Any suggestions are appreciated. Ckoerner (talk) 18:53, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • @Ckoerner: Excellent. We can certainly use this information as offline sources are generally quite acceptable and I suppose major libraries such as the Library of Congress will have a copy of the newspaper, should it need to be double-checked. That source provides some good leads about the subject's background in Salem and that leads me to another page which has even more. I shall revisit the topic now that we have more material. Many thanks. Andrew D. (talk) 07:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 13:37, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Happy to offer a review; seems like a great topic for a GA. Josh Milburn (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Just a little thing, but I'm unsure about the infobox picture. I do think the picture belongs in the article, but unless we have some reason to believe that the woman pictured was in some way based on Reckless, I don't think it really belongs in the infobox.
  • "the wealthy Johnson family who lived in Johnson Hall" According to our article on the Hall, it wasn't built until thirty years after Reckless's birth.
  • "Fleeing to Philadelphia in 1826[notes 1] with her daughter" Do we know anything more about Reckless's family? This is the first mention. Also, what work was Reckless doing? Do we know?
  • "to the Goodwins" Do we have an article on the Goodwins (either independently or together) that we could link to?
  • Female Vigilant Association currently redirects to Vigilant Association of Philadelphia, which doesn't mention it by name. I note this first because the redirect is perhaps slightly counterproductive given the current state of the target article, and because it means that you have two links to the same article in quick succession.
  • "Of the fifteen committee members appointed to replace the previous board, Reckless served with the male appointees." This isn't as clear as it could be.
  • "but improve them with educational offerings" Are you perhaps missing a word here? I'm not sure.
  • Are the Anti-Slavery Convention of American Women or Convention of the Colored People notable? Don't be scared of redlinks!
  • "The first two years alone, they housed over 200 women for periods of up to six months, providing shelter and education" In the firs two years?
  • "The organization served the dual purpose of providing employment for the women who ran the shelter" I don't think you can say "dual purpose" but then list only one purpose, even if the other is obvious.
  • "These activities continued through the American Civil War, when in a letter from 1862 from Abigail Goodwin to William Still, Goodwin reported that "Amy Reckless" collected $17 (more than any other contributor) and was collecting clothing for fugitives." Can I recommend that this sentence be split? Also, what was the money collection for?
  • Would a category relating to her anti-prostitution activities be appropriate?

I could quibble about source formatting, but that's not necessary for GAC purposes; the sources themselves all look appropriate. I would also be tempted to place the main section titles as subsections under the title of "Life" or something akin, but, again, not a necessary change. However, this seems like a strong article that I'm fairly sure can be promoted to GA status soon. I've made a few small edits; please double-check. Josh Milburn (talk) 14:16, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'm going to close this review. I believe one week is standard and this has now been open for more than four; I do encourage you to work your way through my comments and then renominate. The article's certainly not far off GA status, but I'd rather not promote in the current situation. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:39, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok. Thanks for taking the trouble to look through the article. I skimmed your comments but have been too busy with other matters to attend to them in detail, alas. I shall perhaps return to the topic at some future time. Andrew D. (talk) 21:21, 1 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Hetty Reckless. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:52, 29 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]