Jump to content

Talk:Margaret Macpherson Grant/GA1

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

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Gog the Mild (talk · contribs) 21:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


Assessing as a favour to a cheeky queue jumper; I shall expect (generous) payment in shortbread. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:48, 21 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  • The paraphrasing of some of the sources is a little close in places. Very easy to do when you have your head in a source all day. Could you look at this and tweak the - non-quote - bits in red. Eg "whom she had probably never met" (which is a direct lift from the source) to something like 'of whom she had little or no knowledge'; etc
Good point - I should really have run Earwig myself before nominating. I'll get into this in a couple of hours and post here when I'm done, thanks. GirthSummit (blether) 09:45, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No problem; and no rush. I have been caught out that way myself. I use a checklist immediately pre-nom to try and cut down on that sort of thing. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:09, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Done - the only hits Earwig gets now are a couple of direct quotes, a couple of very short general phrases that I think are probably OK (and would be awkward to avoid), and a couple of items in the bibliography which are mentioned by name online. Thanks for the link to that checklist by the way - I'll bookmark that for future reference! GirthSummit (blether) 11:27, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


  • "Born to a country doctor" Given that they didn't have female doctors in those days, you may want to rephrase or expand on that. PS if her father was a surgeon, as you state later, he would have taken grave offence at being described as "a country doctor"'
Changed lede to say he was a surgeon.  Done SusunW (talk) 19:27, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "to Annie (née Grant) and Alexander Macpherson. Her father, Alexander," The second "Alexander" is probably superfluous.
Removed  Done SusunW (talk) 19:27, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The non-chronological order of the first paragraph of "Early life and family" makes it difficult to follow.
Relocated sentence about marriage and birth of older brother.  Done SusunW (talk) 19:27, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "where he died in 1852, leaving Macpherson an only child" I realise that Macpherson would technically be a child, but as she would be aged 18, the mental image it calls to mind jars a little. Possible rephrasing?
as the only surviving sibling  Done SusunW (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "received compensation for his claim for the loss of the slaves as business assets" Pedant's corner. He didn't receive compensation for his claim. Possibly he claimed compensation for the loss ...  Done SusunW (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but their files do not record his parents' names" I don't see why this is relevant.
Modified to say "Green Grant attended Eton and was described in his father's will as his adopted son"  Done SusunW (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in his own will" Delete "own". (Whose else would it be?)
See above modification.  Done SusunW (talk) 19:36, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "equivalent to £30,000,000 in 2016" Why 2016? And it is usual to insert a footnote explaining the basis of the conversion. Eg as in footnote 1 of Battle of Neville's Cross. As you are relying on a secondary source it would be helpful to footnote their basis for the conversion. (I assume that it provides one.)
  • "The ensuing court case" This comes a little out of nowhere, with no indication as to the parties, cause etc. How about something along the lines of 'Her previous female companion, now disinherited, sued and the ensuing ... '?
I'm assuming you are talking about in the lede, so modified it as you suggested.  Done SusunW (talk) 19:41, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oops. Yes Sorry. I was rereading to see if I had missed anything and stuck it on the end.
Nice work. Are you OK with 'uprighting' the images? I know that it is your speciality area.
LOL, Gog the Mild I avoided the photos like the plague. I also have zero clue about conversion of currency, so I didn't answer that. Girth Summit can have the honors :) SusunW (talk) 20:28, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Important: I hope that the pair of you are planning on promptly taking this to FAC? Because I warn you now, if you're not I intend to steal it, file off the serial numbers, and nominate it myself.

No idea, you know, never done it. SusunW (talk) 20:28, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speaking of which, how come Inter-Allied Women's Conference hasn't turned up at FAC yet? It is in better shape than half of the stuff that goes through and you have already done 70-80% of the work in the (rather horrid) ACR.

Well, the update is that I have decided to do it, now that my real life has settled down a bit. I am toying with whether the attendees should be in a table, but reading FAC criteria I have no clue if that is good or not. Maybe you can advise me on my talk page. SusunW (talk) 20:28, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I will continue the review of this tomorrow. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:01, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow - lots of great work already, thanks both! So, the currency conversion thing is a template. I had a discussion about this with The Rambling Man while working on the GA nom for St Margaret's Church (the church that she had built for the orphanage). There's no uncontroversial way to convert values - there are various different websites you can use and they all use different algorithms, weighting things differently and arriving at very contrasting figures - there isn't a right answer. TRM suggested just using our own in-house template as the least controversial method - unfortunately, it automatically converts to 2016 values (although presumably at some point someone will update it and the figures will automatically update, which will cut down on maintenence). I'd be happy to consider alternative options if you would like to suggest them. GirthSummit (blether) 21:37, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Following up with more comments:
  • here is a link to the discussion I had with TRM about the use of the {{inflation}} template.
  • With regard to the image sizes - I would be happy with a crop of the picture of the house - is there an easy way to do that within the article, or do I need to crop it in MSPaint and re-upload the new image?
  • I'm afraid I don't know how px versus upright works. Can you point me at the guideline - I'd be happy for you to make the change, but it's probably worth me finding out how to do it myself for future reference. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 09:54, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image size: See MOS:IMGSIZE, third bullet point. If you remove px=xxx and replace it with upright= then the image will automatically size to fit each readers preset preferences. (If you look at, for example, Crécy campaign in edit mode you will see a variety of upright sizes, and can probably work out why they are what they are for most of them.)
  • Crop: SusunW set me, a little while ago, the job of hunting down the crop tool - Commons crop tool. I found it straight forward, but shout if you don't.
Done (I think!) - useful tool, thanks. I had a quick play with the upright= thing, but the image became massive, so I was doing something wrong - I'll have another play with that ASAP, and look at explaining the inflation thing somehow. GirthSummit (blether) 11:20, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I put upright=1.3 in and, to me, it looked good. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:49, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gog the Mild, I must have messed up the syntax when I tried it - I tried upright=1 and the image more than filled my screen! Yes, the size looks good to me now, I'm happy with that. GirthSummit (blether) 15:26, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Inflation: I am aware that there is a wide range of views and no set policy. I have my own opinions, but that is not really relevant. 2016 is acceptable, it is not as if there has been galloping inflation since then. BUT, it would be helpful to explain the basis on which the figure is arrived at. (The inflation calculator I used in Neville's Cross comes with a link to a page explaining this and a cite, which is why I use it. (It also automatically both updates and adjusts each year.) But there are no doubt a host of other entirely acceptable alternatives.) Gog the Mild (talk) 10:41, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks SusunW - I was just figuring out what I'd done wrong there - I think I had it cracked, but you beat me to it! Is there a way to condense all these into a single note though - they're all using the same conversion template, one note referring to all three ought to be sufficient? GirthSummit (blether) 15:25, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Girth Summit I literally hate the "coding aspect" of WP, it is not my area of expertise. I just ask, and when I get a solution that works, I copy it over and over again. No idea how to make it one note, sorry. SusunW (talk) 15:30, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gog the Mild, maybe you know a magic way of doing this? GirthSummit (blether) 15:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly not. In Neville's Cross, my first FA, there were five sums which I expressed in today's money; I attached an explanation to the first and simply left the rest. No one objected, nor has since, to this aspect of presenting inflation adjusted sums. It seems to be treated a little like a Wikilink. (I assume that you are aware of Template:Inflation/fn?)
I have inserted an upright into the image of the house, slightly increasing its size. This is mostly for demonstration purposes, so feel free to change it back if you are happy with the current image size.
As you have used Clark, Gregory (2017) to calculate inflation you could, if you wished, link on the link you provide and get a figure for 2019, rather than 2016. Ah, you are ahead of me. Good stuff.

Break 1

[edit]
  • "becoming acquainted with Temple's friends in the area" I assume this means London, although it could mean Wiltshire. I would prefer a specific area replaced "area".
The source wasn't specific - I assumed London, but I'm not certain, so I've changed it to 'her social circle'.
  • "Macpherson Grant placed a ring upon Temple's finger" I believe that it was the ring finger of her left hand. If so, it may be worth mentioning.
 Done
  • "again, had she ever had any" Optional: 'again, if she had had any at the time of her death'?
 Done
  • "She provided the organ at for Inverness Cathedral"
 Done
  • "to her Edinburgh solicitor" "her" being Temple or Macpherson Grant?
 Done
  • "In response, Keir drew up a deed of revocation" I have missed something. How is the revocation a "response" to a notification of a change of address?
It isn't a response to a change of address, but rather someone who might give his accounting a more proper scrutiny, to my reading. It doesn't actually *say* he was hoodwinking Grant, but it does say she was not a businesswoman, which was "troublesome". He had been sending the account statements to Grant. You get the idea that since Temple was not going to be there to help Grant, she wanted her to be protected by Mr. Falconer. SusunW (talk) 18:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think Girth Summit satisfactorily changed this section. SusunW (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Back to the lead "She had just revoked the will" Given that ir was six months earlier, I am not sure about the "just".
 Done
  • "interred in the Aberlour church yard in a burial aisle" Aisles in churches are usually indoors, rather than in the church yard.
Far be it for me to know diddly about churches, but the source says: "A burial aisle, in the Perpendicular style of architecture, erected over the bodies of her father and mother by the late Miss Macpherson-Grant of Aberlour, adds considerably to the beauty of the churchyard. Here is also laid herself…"p 183 SusunW (talk) 22:59, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed - from my reading, it sounds like it's some sort of Gothic memorial structure in the churchyard; possibly not actually a burial aisle in the strictest sense, but without a source calling it something else I think we have to go with that. GirthSummit (blether) 06:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "argued that Macpherson Grant had been coerced into signing the deed of revocation" Any more information on this? Eg, by whom and/or for what reason?
See explanation above about Keir. SusunW (talk) 18:19, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I inserted "by Falconer" ... "because he was aware of her declining health". Again, the actual reason is implied, not stated. SusunW (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SusunW - did you mean 'Keir' at this point? My impression was that it was Keir who visited her and did the coercing, because he didn't want Falconer coming between him and Macpherson Grant. GirthSummit (blether) 06:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh lordy, you are absolutely correct, Girth Summit Fixed it, so sorry. SusunW (talk) 14:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "William Grant of Wester Elchies" Who was he and why might he care about Macpherson Grant's buildings?
So, going purely on the name, he seems to be a rare example of a member of the Grant family who wasn't called Alexander. The Grants were locally powerful and numerous - Wester Elchies was a nearby estate and house, and my guess is that William is a some sort of cousin of Macpherson Grant. I'll do a bit more research to see whether I can establish a clearer link. GirthSummit (blether) 06:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I can't find anything more about thie William Grant unfortunately. I think it's highly likely that he is the son of James William Grant (astronomer), but I can't find any sources to confirm that, or to confirm a direct family link between him and Margaret Macpherson Grant. We could perhaps describe him in the article as "another member of the Grant family and owner of a nearby estate"? GirthSummit (blether) 12:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I went back to Shaw and about Wester Elchies he says it was in the Grant family for over 150 years, passing from Alexander Grant to his son Robert, who died in 1803 and another son Charles, who died in 1828. As there were no other heirs in that line it passed to James William Grant (of Bengal), who died in 1865. It passed to his son William Grant of Carron, who died in 1865 (which is a wrong date) and thereafter passed to Henry Alexander Grant in 1877. Henry Alexander was still in residence in 1882 at the time of Shaw's writing.p 111 So looking at then James William and Margaret (née Wilson) Grant's family, I found William, born 16 June 1809 in Calcutta, Bengal India[1] who died 18 August 1877[2] and is buried at St Margaret’s.[3]. He did not apparently die in 1882, but he did die after MacPhereson Grant, and in the same year that Henry Alexander inherited. In light of the statement that Grant of Elchies owned the old ruined church at Aberlour, which burned in 1861 and which he bought from the other legatees (Shaw 182), I am positive this is the correct William. SusunW (talk) 16:16, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Proctors were too impoverished to care for the estate" Given that they had just come into wealth beyond their dreams, that could do with some explaining.
Would that I could, but the source doesn't say anything other than "Her successors were too poor to occupy the mansion house…Fortunately the late Mr. Findlay, proprietor of The Scotsman, purchased the estate".p 73 (Asset rich, cash poor?) SusunW (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not entirely happy with the word 'impoverished' actually - it is a bit jarring when we are saying they have just inherited vast wealth. My guess here is that, with Macpherson Grant's wealth split between a number of cousins, no individual one of them could afford the upkeep of the house and estate in Aberlour. (Death duty may have played a part in this as well - not really something I know much about, but I think they could swallow up a lot of ready cash from an estate, or even force the heir to choose between mortgaging or selling property if they weren't independently wealthy themselves; this is speculation though without a better source.) I wonder whether we could rephrase this simply to say "The Proctors could not afford to care for the estate..." and leave it at that? GirthSummit (blether) 06:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've gone ahead and changed this sentence a bit - are we happy this is better? GirthSummit (blether) 12:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Girth Summit "unable to afford the expense of maintaining the estate" looks good to me. Yes, it's tough because don't really know why. We can logically see why they might not be able to, but without a source, we can't really say more. SusunW (talk) 14:51, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is it worth mentioning subsequent uses of Aberlour House?
I'll be happy to add a bit about this into the 'legacy' section - watch this space. GirthSummit (blether) 06:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GirthSummit (blether) 12:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • What, if any, is the relationship between the orphanage's chapel and St Margaret's Church?
They're the same thing - St Margaret's Church was the chapel for the orphanage. I'll check through the text and make sure this is clear. GirthSummit (blether) 06:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GirthSummit (blether) 12:57, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 16:56, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few changes - just typed out a blow-by-blow account of them, but got an edit conflict with SusunW - my fault for taking so long to type it. I've got to dash now, but will come back to this tomorrow - please let me know if you think the stuff I've added about Keir is valid based on the sources, or if I'm treading too close to OR. GirthSummit (blether) 18:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I stopped for the same reason. We are too eager ;) SusunW (talk) 19:03, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Since we were stepping on each other's toes (or is that fingers?), I went away until I was sure y'all would be sleeping. Sorry for the earlier confusion Girth Summit. I think between what you cleared before you stopped and what I cleared, we only have a few points outstanding. SusunW (talk) 23:32, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No worries SusunW! I've put a few comments above - there are a couple of points I'll try to address later today, would you mind checking the bit where you added 'Falconer' (I think you meant Keir at that point, unless I've misunderstood). Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 06:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

OK Gog the Mild, SusunW, I think we've finished the last set of comments, and I've removed the notes from the second and third inflation-adjusted figures. GirthSummit (blether) 16:19, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Girth Summit, didn't want to step on your fingers again. See above section on William Grant. We need to fix his death date and possibly link him to his dad.SusunW (talk) 16:28, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SusunW It looks like you are correct there - I was probably barking up the wrong tree with regard to the astronomer chap. With regard to the date, looking again at the source, the date of 1882 is just a headline on the charity's website - it doesn't directly state that that is the date he died. It could potentially be the date that they received the funds (which might presumably have been delayed somewhat with a large estate) - this might well be the right person. Do you want to make any changes to the content based on what you've found? GirthSummit (blether) 16:41, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
On it. But you weren't wrong, you were absolutely correct. The astronomer was the guy who lived in Bengal. Give me two shakes. SusunW (talk) 16:46, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think I'm done with it, if you agree with the text modifications. SusunW (talk) 16:53, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SusunW Yep, I'm happy with the changes - great work finding all that. GirthSummit (blether) 17:01, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Gog the Mild Hi - I think SusunW and I believe we've addressed all the outstanding points that we can now. The 'burial aisle' issue is the only thing we haven't really done anything about. Pondering on it a bit more, it occurs to me that Aberlour Church had been destroyed by fire, and was probably a picturesque ruin - this addition might be an external memorial tacked onto the ruins of the church, where a normal burial aisle would have been had the church still been intact.
I wanted to touch on your suggestion about FAC earlier - I can't speak for SusunW, but I for one would be very excited to go ahead with that, having never been involved in FAC and eager to push this as far as I can. Having had a quick look at WP:FAC, I see that it recommends first timers seek the involvement of a mentor before making their first nomination. Your name isn't on the list of mentors, but if you'd be interested I'd be delighted; if not, I had a very positive experience with Josh Milburn when he reviewed my first GA nom, so I might reach out to them when we're done with this GA review. GirthSummit (blether) 18:19, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Break 2
[edit]

Comments in random order, sorry.

  • I have switched the image of the church from px to upright. If you don't like the size, feel free to change - it is the same size as the image of the house. Please do not put it back to px.
Thanks - sorry, I forgot to check that image, I should have changed that after you showed me how to do it with the other one. Yes, I'm happy with the new size. GirthSummit (blether) 09:47, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • SusunW: I have made a note of Inter-Allied Women's Conference and will be rereading and coming back to you with any thoughts regarding preparing it for FAC. I will post my thoughts on tables there.
  • "burial aisle": you can only go with what your sources say, so fine. Possibly the source also knew diddly about churches, although I like your OR supposition.
  • Keir: the situation is much clearer now. Thanks.
  • "William Grant of Wester Elchies" Good work. The splitting into thematic paragraphs also improves the flow. (And preempts a comment from me.)
  • A last query from me "a partner of her agents at Milne & Co." reads as if "her agents" refers to Temple's. If so, a sentence earlier stating that Temple had been directing Macpherson Grant's business affairs, or had her power of attorney or whatever. If the agents were Macpherson Grant's then a brief explanation of how or why Temple was able to instruct them would be helpful.
  • I added Macpherson Grant's before agents, but I don't think we know why Temple was empowered to do anything. SusunW (talk) 04:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    SusunW, your change is good. If I remember correctly (I'd have to trawl through the sources again to find where I got this impression from), Temple managed quite a lot of Macpherson Grant's affairs while they lived together - I'm guessing that this was because Macpherson Grant had little interest in account-keeping, and the drinking wouldn't have helped. Again, I think this feeds into the stuff about Keir and Falconer - she knew that Macpherson Grant would be vulnerable after she had left. GirthSummit (blether) 09:51, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Girth Summit: I am not listed as I have only had 13 FAs so far (plus one at FAC) the first of these only 9 months ago, so it seemed premature. Not to mention all of them being between 1333 and 1355; and eleven between 1345 and 1347; you could say that they are a bit specialist. That said, I have listed myself as a possible mentor in a couple of other areas and do a fair bit informally. However, I have no article creation experience of biographies, and you should seriously consider being mentored by an editor who has this area down pat. If, on reflection, you would both like me to mentor you, I would be happy to; if you would rather go with Josh, I shall take no offense.
  • I am always happy to have mentors. Honestly, I would have quit WP my first year had it not been for Montanabw and Dr. Blofeld finding me and helping me. The technical stuff, the entrenchment, the aggressiveness are all things that I find overwhelming, especially over the last year, when I have had so many more real life issues going on. I am still terrified of FA, *especially anything more having to do with photos), but I am willing to give it a go. SusunW (talk) 04:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    Gog the Mild, given the amount of effort you've put in on this article already, I'd be delighted for you to act as mentor here. I hear what you're saying about this being outside of your speclialisation, but after 13FAs I'm sure you're familiar enough with the process, and you've already put a lot of work in on this review. If we get stuck I'm sure we can reach out to Josh or someone else for a steer. GirthSummit (blether) 09:55, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 23:34, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]


This is a high quality article, easily meeting the GA standards and I am promoting it. You are no doubt aware that you now have seven days to nominate it for DYK. The assessment process has been as much fun as I have ever had with a GAN, so thanks to both of you. I will take a break for a few days, then come back with some "formal" suggestions for FAC. Meanwhile, I shall put some thoughts down on the talk page - don't take them too seriously, they are by way of scratchpad jottings, but do feel free to throw your own thoughts or responses in. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:50, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much Gog the Mild. Always a pleasure to work with you to improve an article. It was fun to work with you as well Girth Summit. May I list the article on WP:WIG's 2019 targets? SusunW (talk) 12:59, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I am not sure that permission is required, but SFAICS it meets the criteria. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:24, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Trust me, permission is required. There have been some really unpleasant dustups at both WiR and WiG for listing things without permission. If Girth Summit concurs I'll be happy to add it to our lists there, but would not presume to do so without agreement. SusunW (talk) 13:28, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SusunW, of course I'd be delighted for you to add it there - I'm pleased to be able to support these projects. Gog the Mild thanks for all your efforts with the review. I'm looking forward to your thoughts on moving forward with improvement to FA, and to working with you both on that. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 14:43, 26 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Good Article review progress box
Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()
3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Margaret_Macpherson_Grant/GA1&oldid=918001940"