Talk:Nina de Creeft Ward/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Caeciliusinhorto (talk · contribs) 21:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will review this article. Initial comments soon. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:46, 10 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, this is a relatively short article which feels like there ought to be more to say about the subject given her recency, but having looked for sources I'm not seeing anything.

The sources cited are adequately reliable, and the prose is fine. I don't see any obvious issues with neutrality and there's no problem with stability. However, I am seeing on the one hand some uncomfortably close paraphrasing, and on the other some claims which aren't quite supported by the sources.

Close paraphrasing: see, for instance Due to her mother keeping goats and other animals, Ward has enjoyed animals since she was a child (source: "Nina Ward has loved animals from an early date, since her mother kept goats and a variety of other animals"); After her parents were divorced when Ward was three years old, her mother brought Ward and her brother to Santa Barbara, California (source: "When she was three, her parents divorced and her mother brought Nina and her brother to Santa Barbara")
Unverified claims: Ward moved to Cedar Falls, Iowa, in 1975 to teach art at the University of Northern Iowa: the source doesn't say that Ward moved to Cedar Falls to teach; a "fairly sandy raku clay recipe" that she made herself: the source says that Ward mixes the clay herself, not that she developed the recipe herself.

Other, more minor points:

Consider wikilinking soft sculpture: I had not heard the term before, and I expect many readers will be unfamiliar with it
Is her trusteeship of the Happy Valley Foundation really important to mention? Does any source other than the Happy Valley Foundation itself mention it?

Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:09, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Caeciliusinhorto I thought so too about the length of the article until I did many more searches. I will get to work on the article. SL93 (talk) 20:14, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Caeciliusinhorto I think I took care of the issues. Thanks for taking the time to review and copy-edit the article. SL93 (talk) 20:30, 13 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Caeciliusinhorto Any other issues? SL93 (talk) 19:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Had another comb through the article, and it's all looking good now. The direct quotations are all properly attributed and verifiable, and all of the verification and close paraphrasing concerns I had have been fixed. Congratulations – I will pass this now Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:24, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]