Talk:Hippolyte de Bouchard/Comments

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Status

[edit] Good Article Nomination Review

  1. Recommendation Bring coverage of subject matter at least up to B class, with "usually a majority of the material needed for a completed article." Use William Brown as a model.
  • Apply to the Biography Project team to have an editor with an independent outlook reassess the article.
  • When all of the work to bring the article up to a B class has been completed. Request a peer review. Tell your colleagues that you are seeking GA, perhaps eventually FA status, and that a previous GA reviewer felt that there were completeness issues.
  1. Recommendation Consider developing the voyage of La Argentina as a separate article. Much of the material in this article readily supports that scope, in terms of emphasis on dates, places and events. The Bouchard biography gets a summary version, with emphasis shifted to Bouchard, rather than a chronology of events.
  2. Recommendation Align the lead section so that it accurately recaps the article. Eliminate the hyperbole of the present version.
  3. Recommendation Recruit native English speaking editors with not quite your point of view to help with Point of view self-policing. These recruits can help with spelling, grammar, and idiomatic usage
  4. Recommendation Adopt an inline reference scheme; consider using citation templates. In introducing new material, you will require additional references. My experience with 40 - 60 KB articles runs to thirty separate reference works, with perhaps fifty to eighty citations in them. When it comes to quotes or statements that could be challenged, you need to be able to direct readers to specific page numbers so they see where you've gotten your information.
  5. Recommendation Please do not submit to Good Article Review an article with as many spelling and grammatical errors as this article had. It established an immediate poor impression in my mind. Before nominating any article to a GA or FA queue:
  • Find an independent editor to copyedit the prose. The editor should not have worked on the article much so as to be able to look at the material with a fresh eye.
  • Dry run the article by following the What is a good article? checklist with a thoroughness I have tried to strive for here. Recall the instructions on how to nominate a page at WP:GAC: "If you believe an article to be good according to the 'Good Article' criteria:" That means you should really believe a good article is a good article before submitting. Do not trivialize your self evaluation. My evaluation of this article ran over the course of several days. You should be at least an afternoon at your own review.
  • Look at the talk pages of regular GA reviewers, such as Epbr123; many have additional checklists of items they deem important.

If you feel that I have dealt with this article harshly or unfairly, please request a review with the Good Article Review team. Thank you for introducing me to Hippolyte de Bouchard. — Gosgood 21:01, 14 July 2007 (UTC)