Talk:Thomas Danforth/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: MathewTownsend (talk · contribs) 19:20, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- I'll review this soon! MathewTownsend (talk) 19:20, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
- review
Interesting if complicated reading for me - I'm unfamiliar with most of the article's content. I don't really know much about Puritans.
- Lede could be expanded some to be more descriptive - like what was Danforth's religious beliefs?
- "colonial Massachusetts. He served for many years as one of the colony's" - "colonial Massachusetts" to me doesn't mean a specific colony, but "the colony's" is used in the next sentence Clarified Magic♪piano 18:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- "when in real life" - when historical evidence indicates? or some other wording? Rephrased Magic♪piano 18:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- "violating bans from the colony" - they were banned from the colony and violated the ban - or are you using "bans" in the sense of breaking religious rules? Clarified Magic♪piano 18:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- "a conservative declaration that the colonial government was essentially sovereign except where its laws conflicted with English law." - I'm not familiar with English law regarding religion but didn't they have some? did the monarchy control the English church?
- "Danforth's politics and religion were relatively conservative" - could be more specific about what relatively conservative means in this case?
- "were sent to England to argue the colony's case" - which was what?
- " Colonial agents then purchased the territory" - again, this seems vague to me as weren't there other colonies? - the Colony's agents?
- "King Philip's War" - perhaps a little more explanation of what this war was, as the reader might assume that some king of England, Spain or whatever was involved somehow.
- would a little context for linked names be ok? - it would give more of a sense of what was happening - e.g. magistrate Simon Bradstreet, Puritan missionary John Eliot, etc. Readers like me need all the help we can get to understand the situation
- "refused to make changes to its administration that were demanded by King Charles" - like what changes were demanded?
- link "Dominion of New England" in the article body (some people like me don't read infoboxes) Fixed Magic♪piano 18:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- "In 1686 the Dominion of New England was established" - who established it? Clarified Magic♪piano 18:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- "excluded Danforth from their councils, given his opposition to crown authority" - clarify why - was the Dominion a crown colony? - readers shouldn't have to click on every link to get the picture.
- I've added some words here, but I thought it was clear that (1) the dominion governors were appointed by the crown, and (2) Danforth already had a track record of opposing crown control of the colony. Magic♪piano 18:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
- "Salem End Road in Framingham is now in the area where they settled" - the importance of this isn't clear until later in the article - it just seems like an unnecessary detail the way it's presented here.
- I couldn't find a better place to put it; I supposed it could go under a legacy umbrella, but it seemed more appropriate to mention it here than elsewhere. Magic♪piano 18:21, 15 September 2012 (UTC)
An interesting insight into the times. I don't see any other issues.
Best wishes, MathewTownsend (talk) 18:25, 14 September 2012 (UTC)
GA review-see WP:WIAGA for criteria (and here for what they are not)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- b. complies with MoS for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, summary style and list incorporation:
- a. prose: clear and concise, respects copyright laws, correct spelling and grammar:
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- b. provides in-line citations from reliable sources where necessary:
- c. no original research:
- a. provides references to all sources in the section(s) dedicated to footnotes/citations according to the guide to layout:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- b. it remains focused and does not go into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Does it follow the neutral point of view policy.
- fair representation without bias:
- fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- no edit wars, etc:
- no edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- b. images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
- a. images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- pass!
- Pass or Fail:
- Congratulations! MathewTownsend (talk) 20:01, 15 September 2012 (UTC)