Talk:Alexander Hamilton/GA1
Latest comment: 9 years ago by SNUGGUMS in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 17:38, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
I will review, comments should be up within seven days. Ping me or leave a message on my talk page if I don't leave the review by then.
Sorry for the delay, I am drafting the review and hope to have it up within a day or two from now. Snuggums (talk / edits) 21:55, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- Infobox
- I don't see any mention within the article of Hamilton ever being Episcopalian, and it doesn't even have a citation
- Son William should link to William S. Hamilton
Fixed. LeftAire (talk) 17:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Lead
- Mother's heritage isn't really lead-worthy
- "Recognized for his abilities and talent" is POV
- Add a comma after "1795" in "In 1795 he returned to the practice" per MOS:DATE
- "In 1798–99" → "In 1798 and 1799"
- "Hamilton's opposition to Adams' re-election helped cause his defeat in the 1800 election"..... awkward phrasing
- In its current state, the quote "When Vice President Burr ran for governor of New York state in 1802, Hamilton crusaded against him as unworthy. Taking offense at some of Hamilton's comments, Burr challenged him to a duel and mortally wounded Hamilton, who died the next day." seems to suggest the duel was in 1802. Probably best to clarify that the duel took place later on.
- Fixed. LeftAire (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Childhood in the Caribbean
- The picture of Hamilton's birth place doesn't add much to the article and therefore is not needed
- No need to include grandparents, it's not like they have their own articles or were influential parts of Hamilton's life
- "Historians have explained the different birth years by the following: If 1755 is correct, Hamilton may have been trying to appear younger than his college classmates or perhaps wished to avoid standing out as older; on the other hand, if 1757 is correct, the probate document indicating a birth year of 1755 may have been in error, or Hamilton may have been attempting to pass as 13, in order to be more employable after his mother's death"..... I'm skeptical about the tone of "by the following" and "on the other hand"
- It's worth mentioning Hamilton's half-brother Peter by name
- "including Greek and Roman classics" needs to be sourced
- "Hamilton's mother had been married previously to Johann Michael Lavien of St. Croix, a much older merchant planter, who is described in some accounts as Danish-Jewish"..... Lavien's ancestry, religious affiliation, and age aren't relevant to this article, so I'd simply say "Hamilton's mother had been married previously to merchant planter Johann Michael Lavien of St. Croix"
- What is "effectively" in "leaving Hamilton effectively orphaned" supposed to mean?
- Taken care of. LeftAire (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Education
- Don't need an image of Kings College
- Add a comma after "1772" in "In the autumn of 1772 Hamilton arrived at Elizabethtown Academy" per MOS:DATE
- "by way of Boston, Massachusetts"..... confusing and awkward phrasing
- Church of England was already linked in "Childhood", so unlink it here per WP:OVERLINK
- During the Revolutionary War
- Washington's Staff
- This shouldn't just simply say "Washington" without first establishing in the article body who it refers to. While I personally was able to figure out this was George Washington, some other readers wouldn't automatically understand in its current form.
- I'd include how Hamilton meet his wife Elizabeth? How long were they together before marrying??
- If mentioning Elizabeth's father Philip Schuyler, might as well also include her mother Catherine Van Rensselaer
- Done. LeftAire (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Congress and the army
- "The Continental Congress was never able to secure full ratification for back pay, pensions, or its own independent sources of funding" is missing a citation
- Why does "Robert Morris" link to Robert? One thing I should note, though, is that Robert Morris is a DAB page
- Hamilton enters Congress
- Something about this section title doesn't seem up to par, probably best to retitle as something like simply "Congress"
- The WP:LAYOUT guidelines (MOS:PARAGRAPHS to be more specific) discourage really short paragraphs with just one or two sentences, so I'd merge the first two paragraphs
- Constitution and The Federalist Papers
- Unlink Philip Schuyler here per WP:OVERLINK as he has previously been linked in the article
- “ and ” should be " per MOS:QUOTEMARKS
- "Robert R. Livingston" and "Richard Morris" link to a DAB pages, please correct these links
- Secretary of the Treasury
- The five reports listed here need to be sourced, and I'm not sure if they should be in a bulleted list per WP:LAYOUT
- Report on Public Credit
- Why does "David Hume" link to the Hume DAB page when it can simply link to David Hume?
- Revenue Cutter Service
- MOS:PARAGRAPHS discourages having a singular sentence as its own paragraph
- Jay Treaty and Britain
- The image is too big, let's downsize this so it doesn't leak into the next section
- Post-Secretary Years
-
- 1800 presidential election
- See previous note on MOS:PARAGRAPHS
- Burr–Hamilton duel
- Unlink Morgan Lewis here per WP:OVERLINK
- Since the depiction isn't accurate, I personally wouldn't include the illustration of this duel
- Legacy
- My above note on MOS:PARAGRAPHS throughout this section. It particularly applies for the "Hamilton on U.S. postage" and "Popular culture" sections. Postage section can be merged into memorials, Popular culture can be scrapped.
- Monuments and memorials
- Not sure if the memorial picture is necessary
- Can't exactly say his son is "Alexander Jr." since A) it is not included in the given citation (FN218), B) there is the grandfather that Hamilton was named for (making Hamilton's son is Alexander III if anything) unless grandfather had a different middle name (or lack thereof) than Hamilton/son, so probably best just to say "son Alexander" for now
- Family
- The information from thissubsection is better placed in the "Washington's staff" section where Hamilton's marriage is mentioned
- Emily's grave photo isn't necessary
- Hamilton on U.S. postage
- This many images is overkill, just one will do
- . Aww...George Washington has a lot, too!. *Sighs*. LeftAire (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Popular culture
- Being on money isn't exactly "popular culture"
- Not only is the Broadway musical trivial, but its quote doesn't comply with MOS:QUOTEMARKS.
- . Took it off, and then it was added again. I will remove it, but it's not quite like the first one, so perhaps you could change your mind on it. It wouldn't matter to me much if it were on the page or not, frankly. LeftAire (talk) 17:02, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Broadway musicals are not "trivial": they are at the heart of American popular culture. As Martin Shefter argued in Capital of the American Century, (1993) p 10: “Broadway musicals...became enormously influential forms of American popular culture." The quote does comply with MOS:QUOTEMARKS. Rjensen (talk) 17:35, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- References
- FN216: Missing David W. Dunlap as author
- FN's 218, 219, and 221: remove the ".gov" bit
- FN238: Contains a HARVref error. To see them, install this script if you haven't done so already.
- Fixed. LeftAire (talk) 17:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Bibliography
-
- Specialized studies
- HARVrefs error for Ron Chernow's Washington: A Life and Michael Lind's Hamilton's Legacy needs to be fixed'
- Fixed. LeftAire (talk) 17:03, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
- Overall
- Well-written?
- Prose quality:
Decent, but could be better - Manual of Style compliance: Needs some adjustments
- Prose quality:
- Verifiable?
- Reference layout: Could use touching up
- Reliable sources:
All sources are reliable - No original research: A few bits are missing citations, and HARVref errors also make things harder to verify.
- Reference layout:
- Broad in coverage?
- Major aspects: Very close
- Focused: Some bits aren't necessary
- Major aspects:
- Neutral?: Not quite
- Stable?: All recent work has only been to improve the article
- Illustrated, if possible, by images?
- Appropriate licensing: Looks good
- Relevance and captioning: Some images aren't needed
- Appropriate licensing:
- Pass or Fail?: Placing this on hold for seven days. Nothing of major concern that I can find. Again, sorry this took longer than planned, but this is a big article and I was caught up with other things during the process. Snuggums (talk / edits) 09:45, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
- I've made some corrections; hopefully I will have this completed within a week. It shouldn't even take that long. The puzzling citation to fix is likely that Wilentz one. I trust its source, but I'm unable to access it. Journal of American History. I'll end up deleting citation if it comes down to it. Thanks for the advice. If this passes for GA, I'll definitely consider another peer review to clean of the neutrality and prose. I wondered if it was shoddy in some places... LeftAire (talk) 00:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
- I can send a copy of the Wilenz review to anyone who writes me at rjensen@uic.edu (sending personal copies is allowed by the JSTOR rules) Rjensen (talk) 05:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry to counter suggest, but I'm not so sure about two of them:
- I can send a copy of the Wilenz review to anyone who writes me at rjensen@uic.edu (sending personal copies is allowed by the JSTOR rules) Rjensen (talk) 05:22, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
1)Mentioning of her mother. I'm not so sure if mentioning her mother is so necessary. Consider her father Philip played a significant role in Alexander's life later on, it would make sense to mention him. I thought about deleting the mentioning of her father all together, but it would seem odd to leave such a big disconnect of people wondering if Elizabeth and Philip were kin, let alone daughter and father.
- I originally thought about removing Philip as well. However, it seems incomplete to just mention one parent and not the other when both identities are known. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
2)Family. Would it be a disconnect to mention some of the information if it moved up closer to the beginning? I'll move it soon, but I wonder that I may need to edit it some later...
- It feels disconnected to mention marriage in one section, and then children in a much later section. Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:48, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'll mention the children in the front, but I'll word it to make mention only of them having eight children and their names, and give more information in the notes section (with a link of course). Mentioning the reason for the two Philips in the midst of the his time as George Washington's aide feels very out of place; I probably should have clarified it in the beginning. I'm going to reference back the sources used for the children and may rearrange and add some more. Once again, sorry for not clarifying. LeftAire (talk) 22:03, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Phew. Got through that. Thanks for reading.LeftAire (talk) 23:21, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
- You're welcome, now passing! Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:59, 2 March 2015 (UTC)