Talk:Porcupine (Cheyenne)/GA3

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jens Lallensack (talk · contribs) 22:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reading now … --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:16, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Spinningspark:, this is a solid article. My comments are mostly related to language issues.

The article does not read fluently in many places. Closely connected information is often split into several short sentences, and reading feels sometimes like stop-and-go. This makes following the article sometimes difficult, because the reader finishes reading a sentence and then thinks/tries to understand it, but here there are often two or three short sentences that need to be considered together. I suggest to combine sentences in those instances, also too keep the tension. Examples:

In 1889, Porcupine undertook a long journey to visit Wovoka in Nevada. Wovoka was the prophet of the new Ghost Dance religion. – Suggestion: "In 1889, Porcupine undertook a long journey to Nevada to visit Wovoka, the prophet of the new Ghost Dance religion."

Done SpinningSpark 11:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two men, Pat Handerhan and William Thompson, were sent out on a handcar to investigate the failed telegraph line. Distracted by the fire, they let the handcar hit the obstruction. – I suggest to use a ; to connect these sentences: "Two men, Pat Handerhan and William Thompson, were sent out on a handcar to investigate the failed telegraph line; distracted by the fire, they let the handcar hit the obstruction."

Done SpinningSpark 11:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They were sent to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas at the beginning of 1879 to await trial. They were to be tried in Dodge City and were escorted there by lawman Bat Masterson. It was not an easy journey; – Two successive sentences starting with "they" is not ideal. This is also a good example to illustrate the problems associated with breaking up into multiple short sentences: I am not precisely sure how these sentences are connected. They were sent to Fort Laevenworth, and from there were escorted to Dodge City? If so, what about "They were sent to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas at the beginning of 1879 and from there were escorted to Dodge City by lawman Bat Masterson to await trial"?

Don't think any sentences can easily be joined without becoming unwieldly, but I've fixed the other problems. SpinningSpark 11:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

More examples are especially in the section "Political leader".

Done SpinningSpark 12:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was the normal custom for a husband to live amongst the band of his wife's family, usually in a lodge adjacent to her parents. – How is it related to Porcupine? Did he do it like this, living with the band of his wife's family? It does not become clear.

Precisely so, this was the reason for his move from the Sioux to the Cheyenne. SpinningSpark 12:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

not a good idea – this is not very encyclopedic language, because it is judgemental and subjective. It can only be valid if this was the precise wording of the Indian agents, but in this case it should be a quote.

I don't entirely agree that an exact quotation is needed, but I've removed it anyway since it is fairly obvious to the reader that the Indian agents did not agree with Hancock's actions. I've also added that they opposed Hancock burning the village, which in their view started the war. SpinningSpark 12:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Porcupine and Red Wolf drove off the men with rifle fire but they were pursued and Handerhan was killed. – Confusing at first read and disrupting reading flow because it is not clear where "they" is referring to. Does it refer to Porcupine and Red Wolf or to Handerhan and his men? Thinking about it, it can only refer to the latter, but it takes the reader some time to figure this out, and the reading flow is gone. Suggestion: "Porcupine and Red Wolf drove off the men with rifle fire but then pursued them, killing Handerhan."

I can't take up your suggestion, but have tried to make this a bit clearer. I have no information on who pursued and killed Handerhan—it might very well not have been Porcupine and Red Wolf. Very possibly this information does not exist at all. It is unlikely that anyone would ever admit to it since it was a hanging offence. The Indians generally did not talk openly and honestly about their part in the wars until at least the 1920s when they were all old men, and even then, they only opened up to a very few trusted white contacts. SpinningSpark 13:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The large image in the lead is placed on the left, which I find distracting and non-standard. According to Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images, images should only exceptionally be placed on the left, usually when multiple images are staggered left and right. This is not the case here, and I suggest to just align it to the right side. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:48, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is a minor principle of layout that images of heads should face into the page rather than out of it, which is the reason for its placement in this case. There is no prescription that images should always be on the right and the idea of facing into the page is covered at MOS:IMAGELOCATION.

The lead image is not, in fact, oversize; it is the standard thumbnail width. This is an optical illusion due to its narrow aspect ratio, but in any case, a slightly larger lead image is sometimes beneficial. This is hinted at (but not stated explicitly, although I think it was at one time) at MOS:IMGSIZE. SpinningSpark 13:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for reviewing this Jens. I'll do some work on it this weekend. SpinningSpark 16:19, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the fixes, looking all good. Passing now. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]