Talk:Jacquetta Hawkes/GA1
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Caeciliusinhorto (talk · contribs) 19:47, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
I will review this article; initial comments shortly. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:47, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
First pass through:
Done The article is inconsistent on how to render initials: "J B Priestley" vs. "J. B. Priestley". MOS:INITIAL says that it should be the latter.- Done I noticed a couple of instances where the article deviates from the usual chronological ordering in a way which was jarring to me. In particular:
- We hear about her graduation from Cambridge before the Colchester excavations from during her time at university
- The mention of the birth of Nicholas in 1937 before jumping back in time to discuss her work from 1934 and 1935
- Done "From the Roman section, the visitors met a recreation of the Sutton Hoo ship burial.": I initially read this as saying that the Sutton Hoo recreation was in the Roman section! Perhaps "After the Roman section" would be less ambiguous?
- Done "In 1953, after her divorce from Christopher Hawkes": the article hasn't mentioned that she has divorced Hawkes yet! Perhaps something like "Jacquetta and Christopher Hawkes divorced in 1953; she married Priestley the same year"?
- Done "moving to Alveston": I'm British and hadn't the foggiest idea where Alveston is; perhaps specify "Alveston, Gloucestershire" in text?
- Done "Priestley's letters in the work were set in a brash new America in Texas": "brash new America in Texas" comes directly from the source, and needs to be in quotes to comply with WP:PLAGIARISM.
- Done A bunch of the sections don't know whether they want to be chronological or thematic, and it's confusing me. What has the paragraph beginning "After the couple's move to Alveston in the early 1960s" to do with Hawkes' involvement with the HLRS, for instance? I've added an extra heading to separate the activities in this instance.
More soon Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:14, 2 November 2021 (UTC)
- Regarding the main GA criteria, I don't have any major concerns. Looking at the sources, I'm not seeing anything worrying. Plenty of inline citations. Spotchecks don't turn up any concerns re. verifiability or copyvio. Images are all fine – I was worried about the Festival of Britain poster, but it's conveniently ex-Crown Copyright. Aside from my previous comments (which, I think, shouldn't take major work to fix) this article looks good. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 18:57, 5 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hello from another participant in the WiG editathon! I was interested to read this entry (fascinating!) and went ahead and made a couple small punctuation edits per the above while I did. Will tick them so it’s clear which but @Lajmmoore of course if you disagree please change accordingly! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hello both - thanks so much for the review Caeciliusinhorto - very much appreciated and I'll work on the changes this week, do I just ping you when they are done? Thanks too to Innisfree987 really kind of you to help out. Lajmmoore (talk) 09:12, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Caeciliusinhorto I've made the changes you suggested, and added an additional heading "Research in the 1950s". Thanks very much for your help and support. Lajmmoore (talk) 10:54, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Lajmmoore (and Innisfree987): my apologies for the delay in getting back onto this. I've had a little fiddle about with the section layout – consolidating the various sections on activism in the late 50s/early 60s into a single one, and retitling the section "A Land" because it discusses Hawkes' other archaeological work of the period. How does that look to you? Fundamentally I think this is a good article either way, though, so I'm going to go ahead and promote it and you can feel free to revert my changes if you think it was better the way it was before. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 11:02, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Caeciliusinhorto Thanks so much! My first Good article - thanks so much for your support. Lajmmoore (talk) 13:27, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Congratulations @Lajmmoore! Very well done! Innisfree987 (talk) 16:38, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Caeciliusinhorto Thanks so much! My first Good article - thanks so much for your support. Lajmmoore (talk) 13:27, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Lajmmoore (and Innisfree987): my apologies for the delay in getting back onto this. I've had a little fiddle about with the section layout – consolidating the various sections on activism in the late 50s/early 60s into a single one, and retitling the section "A Land" because it discusses Hawkes' other archaeological work of the period. How does that look to you? Fundamentally I think this is a good article either way, though, so I'm going to go ahead and promote it and you can feel free to revert my changes if you think it was better the way it was before. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 11:02, 16 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hello Caeciliusinhorto I've made the changes you suggested, and added an additional heading "Research in the 1950s". Thanks very much for your help and support. Lajmmoore (talk) 10:54, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hello both - thanks so much for the review Caeciliusinhorto - very much appreciated and I'll work on the changes this week, do I just ping you when they are done? Thanks too to Innisfree987 really kind of you to help out. Lajmmoore (talk) 09:12, 9 November 2021 (UTC)
- Hello from another participant in the WiG editathon! I was interested to read this entry (fascinating!) and went ahead and made a couple small punctuation edits per the above while I did. Will tick them so it’s clear which but @Lajmmoore of course if you disagree please change accordingly! Innisfree987 (talk) 19:43, 8 November 2021 (UTC)