Talk:Little Eva: The Flower of the South/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Barkeep49 (talk · contribs) 22:13, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Review

Made a couple small copyedits. Overall this article is in great shape. Only a couple other thoughts.

Thank you. Aoba47 (talk) 02:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How did you decide on 1853 and 1861 in the lead given that the body goes with "1852 or 1853" and "between 1855 and 1861 or in the 1850s". Essentially there are five citations for these two dates which is a fair number and no doubt reflective of the fact that there's genuine disagreement. Does it make sense to put those dates into context of who is saying what rather than having it in Wikipedia's voice?

I chose to use the range because I thought it would cover all of the estimations made by the various scholars. I have replaced the part in the lead with something about how the exact publication date is unknown. Aoba47 (talk) 02:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Think that works better in the lead. I defer to you on my question of whether the current phrasing in Wikipedia's voice explaining the various dates or attribution of where those years come from is better. Please confirm you wish to keep it this way. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 02:46, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What phrasing are you referring to? Aoba47 (talk) 03:08, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47, the first two sentences of background. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:10, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see how these dates would be considered in Wikipedia's voices when the prose ascribes these estimations to scholars and has the citations to further support that these estimations are from scholars not from Wikipedia. Aoba47 (talk) 03:13, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have a whole bunch of high quality academic writing and then you have Mental Floss. I'm not sure that it's reliable enough of a source, or that Conradt is authoritative enough on children's lit or Anti-Tom lit to make the assessment we're sourcing to them.

Removed. Aoba47 (talk) 02:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Might be a day or two before I get to this but let's give it a whirl. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 22:13, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 23:03, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Aoba47, Congrats - I have passed this. This is a really well put together article. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 03:23, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I appreciate all of your comments. You have helped to make the article a lot better and caught a lot of stuff that I just read over or did not think about more. I hope you have a great rest of your week. Aoba47 (talk) 03:27, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]