Jump to content

Talk:St John the Baptist Church, Reid/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: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 05:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am happy to perform a review of this article. My approach is to review each section, make minor edits as I go along (links, punctuation, etc.) to save us both time and effort, and then assess the article against GA criteria. Feel free to revert edits that I made if you disagree.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction and infobox

[edit]

Both the introduction and infobox look good. I have no suggestions right now, but may come back to this section after finishing the other sections.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:14, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Construction

[edit]

Nice job!

  • I had a couple of minor edits that I made here.
  • I tried adding indents so that the bullets didn't float flush the image - no luck. Perhaps the second image could be moved to the right? I tried it and it looks good to me. Not a big deal, just a thought.–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thanks. That looks nice and is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Interior

[edit]
Yep, that makes sense!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Music

[edit]

Bells

[edit]
  • I am not sure if this is an American-English / Australian-English issue, but I understand The peal of eight church bells to mean the sound of eight church bells. Is peal meant differently in Australia regarding The peal of eight church bells were donated by Governor-General William Sidney, 1st Viscount De L'Isle and mark his term of office (1961–65).[39]?–CaroleHenson (talk) 05:53, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, cool, I have learned something! This is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Church precinct

[edit]

Churchyard

[edit]
  • I am confused by the first and last sentences of this section and the burial dates in between:
  • St John's churchyard contains Canberra's original cemetery. The first burial in the churchyard was on 3 May 1944.[1][2]
  • The churchyard was closed to new burials in 1937 unless exclusive rights to a plot were held.[4]
Excellent, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • I added the publisher for two citations, St Johns Canberra, which makes it a primary source. It's not bad to have some of the content come from a primary source, but it should be not be used much. See WP:PRIMARY.
  • I grouped multiple instances of the same source here.
  • I ran citation bot to pick up the publishers for other citations, but it just added source dates. Would you please add publisher to the citations where needed?–CaroleHenson (talk) 06:15, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent, thanks! I see that the publishers have been added. I will address the number of primary and secondary sources in the GA criteria comments section.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Schoolhouse museum

[edit]

Rectory

[edit]

Church hall

[edit]
  • Just a thought, Rendered in a simplistic style, the mural depicts subjects as diverse as a theodolite, a microscope, an Australian aborigine man, Bogong moths, Merino sheep, liturgical symbols, the Guides Australia logo and a girl in the uniform, a Boy Scout, Old Parliament House, Canberra, early ministers of the church and settlers including Robert Campbell and his nearby house, "Duntroon" (also shown), which is now part of the Royal Military College, Duntroon. is pretty long. Could it be broken into two sentences?
That looks good, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Contemporary references

[edit]
  • It is best not to sandwich text between images. I went ahead and removed the left justification for the 2nd Queen Elizabeth image. That also works out better because it's more inline with the text about her.
  • No other comments, suggestions or edits.–CaroleHenson (talk) 06:32, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Incumbents

[edit]

Looks good!–CaroleHenson (talk) 06:33, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General comments

[edit]
  • I combined a number of duplicate citations, by giving a "ref name" to the primary citation with all the citation information and using this template (the same as the first except for the slash at the end): <ref name=" " />. See the very top of this edit and how "Wilson" (author's surname) was done. There are still 2 or 3 instances of duplicate citations. Can you combine those?

GA criteria

[edit]
GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·


Comments

[edit]
  • The article is very well-written and in accordance of MOS guidelines (1a, 1b)
  • Content is cited, there are potential issues with the number of primary sources (2a, 2b).
  • We will have to see how much of the article content comes from St. John's when publisher is added to the citations and if there are alternate reliable secondary sources to replace primary sources where possible.~
  • Several additional secondary sources (from the ACT Government, Canberra and District Historical Society, local media and the Australian Dictionary of Biography) have been added to complement the primary sources. Some primary sources have been removed in favour of secondary sources.Happypup398 (talk) 11:33, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Excellent! I will look through that more closely now.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it's better now. There are still 12 primary sources out of 45, but it's a church, so I think that's okay.–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:25, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no evidence of original research, but the copy vio report should be reviewed. There appear to be instances where the language is duplicated. There's no issue where the content is quoted in the article or titles.
  • Reviewed and amended some of the language. Some passages that have been picked up by the tool are either quotes (e.g. the prophet's tombstone) or refer to titles (e.g. Royal Military College/Revd Pierce Galliard Smith) or facts (the adding of the east window in the chancel between 1872 and 1874). Happypup398 (talk) 11:33, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the examples you provide are not copyvio issues. I will look more closely at this now.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It is much better! I still find these:
  • Please paraphrase "sourced from quarries located at the base of black mountain"
  • There's only so much you can do with: "in weight from 13 to 2 hundredweight and in diameter from 3 feet 4 5 inches to 1 foot 9 inches" - how about putting this part in quotes?
  • Please paraphrase: "the bells were cast at the bell foundry of john taylor co in loughborough"
  • Please paraphrase: "ropes which cause the bell clapper to strike the inside of the bell. They are rung by two people each ringing four bells."
  • Please paraphrase: "extended and strengthened in the mid 1970s in anticipation of"
  • Please paraphrase: "extra instruments such as keyboard flute and trumpet are used on"
  • Please paraphrase: "Campbell. The regimental colours of the Werriwa Regiment and the historic colours of the Royal Military College"
In some cases, the best you may be able to do is reorder the words, but the more than you can paraphrase, the better. See WP:Close paraphrasing.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:05, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Edited all of those sentences. Quoted the dimensions of the bells. Added an additional reference for the bamboo cross, with a few words from that journal article. Happypup398 (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is focused and covers the main aspects of the article (3a, 3b)
  • It is neutral and stable (4, 5)
  • The images are relevant and are appropriately tagged (6a, 6b)–

CaroleHenson (talk) 07:01, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As a general comment, thanks for all your hard work on this! Great job!–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Happypup398, As I noted above, I think that the primary / secondary sources are better. I did find a few phases that need to be paraphrased. Once that is done, I will take a final read-through of the article. We are getting there!–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:28, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your help CaroleHenson! Done some further changes. Happypup398 (talk) 11:03, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It has been my pleasure! Thanks for the edits, I will do a read-through.–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:12, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have performed the final reading of the article and re-ran the copyvio report. The article is looking great, and passes as a GA article. Thanks for your hard work on this article. You have been a joy to work with on the review.–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It has been listed in the Religious subsection here.–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:34, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks a lot CaroleHenson. You've also been a pleasure to work with! Happypup398 (talk) 07:32, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:St_John_the_Baptist_Church,_Reid/GA1&oldid=952825065"