Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/William L. Breckinridge/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

William L. Breckinridge

[edit]
Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review in preparation for a potential FAC nomination. Reviews with emphasis on prose standard, sources/referencing, and comprehensiveness would be particularly appreciated. It passed GA in August 2023 but hasn't had a lot of eyes on it since then. Any comments would be extremely helpful! Thanks, PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:08, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I will take this one up and post my comments by end of day today. On first glance, I'd suggest removing all the redlinks, those are a big no for any FAC. Matarisvan (talk) 04:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Matarisvan Thanks for your willingness to take a look. I tried to reduce the redlinks to only the ones I am confident are appropriate, the two college presidents. Other than that, redlinks have been removed. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, apologies for my delayed response. I would recommend removing those as well, because FA criteria doesn't allow for redlinks, citations needed, better source needed tags, stuff like that. The only time redlinks are tolerated: if they're part of a III template, where the link is to a Wikidata page. You should check if there are Wikidata pages for the 2 presidents, if not, I'd removed the redlinks from both the infobox and the body. Matarisvan (talk) 17:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is the first I've heard of any FA criterion wholly against redlinks - actually, all four of my previous FAs have passed with redlinks present and I tend to follow WP:REDLINKBIO for those. I tend to leave redlinks for potential articles about college presidents as they would be presumed notable per WP:NACADEMIC. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, I was not exactly sure about the guidelines. I've seen reviews, all of them by different reviewers, red flag all redlinks. You have had experience defending them during FARs, so I will defer to you on this regard. However, have you considered adding a Wikidata link using a III template, at least until you create the pages for the 2 presidents? Matarisvan (talk) 20:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I like the idea of a Wikidata link but I don't think either of them have entries there (at least, not that I could find). PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:24, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Matarisvan

[edit]
  • The first thing I noticed was the 'A Christian College' source. I would recommend taking this link and putting it in a 'Works' or 'External Links' section. Instead, as a source, put in a link to a review.
    Does this source work for you: https://books.google.co.in/books?id=5cERAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA473. It is from the Danville Review so I believe it would count as a non primary source, though it is just a reproduction of the original work. Matarisvan (talk) 07:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Good solution - I ended up putting in a publications section since there weren't as many as I thought and I wanted to keep the link to the original publication of the speech, and I added your source in the text. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Does the article subject have no other publications?
  • What was the denomination WB was part of? I'm guessing Protestant, but I would also want the exact denom, say Baptist or Methodist or something else. Also, he was a pastor, so what were his views om theological/cultural/social issues?
    • He was Presbyterian - this is mentioned several times but only in the form of "First Presbyterian Church" or "Presbyterian Church General Assembly", etc.; I can add "Presbyterian" to the first sentence of the lead if you think it would be good to have it expliticly. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • Oops. My bad, once again. No, I think you should not add the Presbyterian identifier. The infobox does seem to be a suitable place however to list his denomination, as most readers tend to go through the infobox even before the lead. Matarisvan (talk) 20:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • As WB was a Southerner, you could add his experiences of and views on the Civil War & Reconstruction.
  • What were the exact arguments WB gave to support his emancipationist views? Were they moral, theological or both?
  • At least the images of Centre & Oakland Colleges would be great here. For the captions, you could say 'X College, where WB was a president for Y years'.
  • The article is well written and has good sources. But it's too short for FAC. There is a very thin line on FA length, you don't want to go too short or long. Currently, the size is ~15,000 bytes, with some additions like the ones suggested above, you could reach ~ 25-30,000.
  • In your bibliography, 4 sources are publications from Centre College. FA reviewers will accept those for trivial details like term served, salary drawn etc. But for any non trivial changes WB may have made, they will not allow your choice of sourcing, as primary or associated sources are not favored.
    • I can try to find some other sources but I haven't had any problems with getting those sources in particular (Craig, Hill, Weston, or CentreCyclopedia) through FAC for my other three FAs on Centre presidents. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    That's great. I will have to learn to defend sources and other things during an FAR from you, maybe some other time. I've always had primary sources get flagged, or at least have been asked to add a non primary source as a support. Matarisvan (talk) 20:04, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is all for now from me. I will get back soon with more. Cheers. Matarisvan (talk) 18:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • While looking through some sources, I came across WB having established the Mount Horeb Presbyterian Church. Could we include some details on this experience?
  • Can we specify what colonization in the context of WB meant? Instead of the bureaucratic proceedings, can we add details on what WB's role here was, especially as a founding member of the Kentucky Colonization Society?
  • Could we have some brief details on his debates and rivalry with Stuart Robinson? Especially when we have mentioned Bullitt?
    Do you think this detail should be added? Robinson doesn't seem to have an article on here. Matarisvan (talk) 06:57, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found a few sources on Google Books which had the details of WB's moral & theological reasoning for emancipationism. I cannot find them now but you should be able to.
  • Image review: For the first image, everything appears to be alright. For the second image, I would recommend adding alt text.
  • Would you be open to including William & Robert's act of freeing 5 slaves from their Cabell's Dale home in the article? Seems significant to me, especially as the act was done against the will of their mother.
  • I found various instances of WB's correspondence being cited in multiple books. But I did not have access to them so I could not tell what exactly was cited and for what purpose. What I can guess is that the citations talk about WB's opinion on his sister Sophonisba choosing to go to college. This also seems very significant to me. If you can get access to the sources, then you should consider adding this detail. Some of these books I can recall: Deliver Us From Evil, Southern Women in the Progressive Era.

Hey PCN02WPS, casual ping. Hope this isn't disruptive. Matarisvan (talk) 15:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Matarisvan: Many thanks for the comments. I will work on addressing them in the coming days. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 17:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @PCN02WPS, have you had time to work on these? Matarisvan (talk) 09:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Matarisvan Hi there, sorry this has taken so long. I am slowly (but surely) trying to look through some sources in order to follow your suggestions. I have also been finishing up some other articles that have taken time away from this one. I will try to keep you updated as I make progress on this review. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Query from Z1720

[edit]

@PCN02WPS: It has been almost two months since the last comment. Are we ready to close this and nominate it for FAC? Z1720 (talk) 17:20, 2 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720 I have been super bad about sticking with this - there are lots of good points that I have begun to address only to get distracted and then forget about the PR entirely. I am going to make every effort to wrap this up soon - if I haven't made any progress on this by the end of the week I am good with it being closed, though in any event I will implement the changes suggested and I still have the same goal for the article that I did at the beginning of the PR. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:52, 6 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PCN02WPS: It has been another month. Is this ready to be closed? Z1720 (talk) 17:38, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Z1720 yeah, that's fine. I'll try to come back to this at some point but all the comments are there so not much use in keeping this open indefinitely. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:36, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/William_L._Breckinridge/archive1&oldid=1230865537"