Talk:Stonewall Jackson's arm/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:13, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) 19:41, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):

b. (citations to reliable sources):

c. (OR):

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a. (major aspects):

b. (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed) I can review this shortly. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:41, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm experimenting with making copyedits as I read rather than flagging every minor thing, if that works for you I'll probably just paste a diff here and ask you to check them over. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:28, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that'll definitely work for me. My copy-editing (and English grammar) are generally atrocious, courtesy of having been raised on a farm. Hog Farm _Talk 00:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Digging through newspaper clippings,

this is probably not great for the history but could be used to cite the 90's work on the site. Here's another source, albeit from before the work was done [1] [2]

I've added a mention of the work. Hog Farm _Talk 01:42, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I read somewhere (of course can't track down the source now) that the tools used to amputate the leg were on display in the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond-- can that be verified?

I'm having trouble finding this, although what is believed to have been the tools was loaned to the NPS for a display in 2019, which I've added

Try this link, maybe?

Thanks for finding that! I've added a short bit based on that. Hog Farm _Talk 23:15, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise I think this includes all (or at least reasonably most) relevant coverage. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 21:38, 26 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could we break up the 'post-amputation history' section? It's a lot of content for a relatively short article, might better fit as several sections. Also, some of those paragraphs could maybe be split into two, though that's not as big of a deal. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 00:16, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've shuffled the headings around a bit

"While the story about Butler's visit is repeated on a historical marker near the site" Which visit, the first or the second?

Clarified

"Ellwood came under the control of the National Park Service (NPS)," Maybe add a date, if possible?

Done

You say that "the NPS had failed to find documentation supporting the story from before 1940"-- how do we know the story started circulating in the late 1930s, then?

This is unclear to me. The same source gives both dates. I think attributing the pre-1940 limit to the NPS is the best way around this, as the NPS may have only been considering certain types of evidence (print vs. oral?). Hog Farm _Talk 02:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Can you attribute some of the "claims" and similar stuff in the article to specific people? (ie "although it has been claimed that it was added during the 1921 mock battle" or "Other markers placed by Smith at battlefields are "quite approximate in nature""

I've attributed these two as best as possible - the 1921 addition claim is attributed only to "legend" in the source, and the "quite approximate in nature" is attributed in the source vaguely to the NPS. No great attribution for most of the other ones, as much of the Butler story is vague urban legend that's been floating around to the extent that multiple sources feel the need to refute it

Consider whether the sentence "The marker has become a tourist attraction." could be better integrated-- it feels like a bit of a break from the surrounding sentences. I'm not sure though

I've put this into a new short paragraph with the 1998 renovations and the 2019 display of McGuire's surgical kit

Made some copyedits, feel free to rv any/all. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 20:13, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Eddie891: - Thanks for the review! I've attempted to address all of these, but may have missed something as I was trying to keep one of the cats off the keyboard the whole time I was addressing these. Hog Farm _Talk 02:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie891 - Just letting you know that I think this is ready for a round of re-review. Hog Farm _Talk 15:29, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, sorry, was out of town on a (very) long weekend. I'll try to take a look today or this weekend. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 13:34, 6 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've checked some of the sources, everything lines up nicely, no indication of close paraphrasing or copyvio. Passing, sorry for the delay. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:12, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.