Revision as of 17:20, 21 February 2015 editRationalobserver (talk | contribs)11,997 edits →Copyright clerk comment: Victoria, you are once again wrong, so please find someone else to monitor← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:59, 21 February 2015 edit undoVictoriaearle (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers62,095 edits →Copyright clerk comment: explainNext edit → | ||
Line 65: | Line 65: | ||
:: {{u|Victoriaearle}}, you are once again mistaken. Kroeber & Kroeber, page 53 states: "One of the chiefs, upon hearing that California was the promised land, seemed to not believe that the whites did mean to move on." Which does indeed support the preceding prose: "The emigrants sensed that the chief who granted them passage was hiding something". I think you are not the best judge of this article, and I am respectfully requesting that you un-watch this page and leave me to improve it with the help of others. The close paraphrases will be ironed out in due time, but there are no pressing issues here that require such intensive supervision, especially not from you considering ]. Is that acceptable? ] (]) 17:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC) | :: {{u|Victoriaearle}}, you are once again mistaken. Kroeber & Kroeber, page 53 states: "One of the chiefs, upon hearing that California was the promised land, seemed to not believe that the whites did mean to move on." Which does indeed support the preceding prose: "The emigrants sensed that the chief who granted them passage was hiding something". I think you are not the best judge of this article, and I am respectfully requesting that you un-watch this page and leave me to improve it with the help of others. The close paraphrases will be ironed out in due time, but there are no pressing issues here that require such intensive supervision, especially not from you considering ]. Is that acceptable? ] (]) 17:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC) | ||
::: I oversimplified for the sake of brevity. Let me explain. First, Kroeber is a reprint, but the g-book version doesn't show (at least to me) a copyright page. He died in 1960 and the bulk of his work about California native tribes was written in the mid-1920s so somehow the book's publication history has to be pinned down. Beyond that, we can't know who said what or who thought what in the mid-1850s so it can't be in Misplaced Pages's voice. A better practice is to attribute - and this is why the dates are important- something along the lines of in 19xx anthropologist Kroeber wrote blah blah, and put the "blah blah" in quotations. Then you're pinning directly to the source. The same holds true of the Baley source. I could have missed it, but how do we know what Udell said? When I was reading the book, I noted a lot of quotes from him. Did he leave a journal that one of the Baley descendent used? If so, that would be interesting to add and by doing so it builds distance directly from WP's voice - in other words assert that such and such Baley says or writes that Udell said blah blah, or "blah blah". Having to attribute in this manner doesn't always make for the best or smoothest writing style but it's the best way to really understand our referencing requirements on GA and particularly FA articles. To be honest, I don't think your GA reviewer did you a favor, but that's often typical when the Wikicup is in full swing. Anyway I hope this make sense and clarifies my earlier comment. I'll cross post your page too, since you asked there for me to step away. ] (]) 18:59, 21 February 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 18:59, 21 February 2015
Rose–Baley Party has been listed as one of the History good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: February 16, 2015. (Reviewed version). |
This article is written in American English, which has its own spelling conventions (color, defense, traveled) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus. |
United States: Old West Unassessed Low‑importance | |||||||||||||
|
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Rose-Baley Party/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 23:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
Taking this review as requested - should have this to you within a day or two ☯ Jaguar ☯ 23:45, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'm sorry this one is taking so long - I have limited internet access. I'll complete this by tomorrow morning! ☯ Jaguar ☯ 21:02, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Initial comments
- I could find no issues with the lead - it summarises the article well and complies per WP:LEAD
- "and Beale named the location where they crossed the river, en route to California" - why is 'en route' italicized here?
- I thought it should be as a foreign phrase, but it's probably so common this isn't necessary, so I removed them. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- Should the image in the Formation section be at the top instead of the middle? I'm not sure as I think it would depend on the monitor resolution...
- I agree; done. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- "which, although 8,000 to 9,000 feet in elevation" - all measurements should be converted to their mertric equivalent using the conversion template ({{convert|8000|ft}})
- "carved their names into stone – a tradition dating back to 1605" - this part needs a citation, as 1605 is very specific!
- "reported that they had found water seventeen miles" - this would probably read better as reported that they had found water 17 miles (27 km) (using the conversion template)
- "Several white men were felled by arrows and clubs as the women frantically fled with their young ones" - little informal, children?
- I agree; done. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Jaguar, I've addressed your above concerns with this series of edits. Please let me know if there is anything more I need to do regarding the GAN. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
References
- According to the toolserver these references are missing access dates. But other than the references pass the GA criteria
- Are access dates required for google book links? Rationalobserver (talk) 17:27, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
On hold
This is an excellent article and it is also very well written, hence the short review again! Sorry for the wait too, it never takes me this long to review articles but it's only due to me having internet issues. I'll leave this on hold for you, so once the minor issues are out of the way then this article should have no problem passing the GAN! ☯ Jaguar ☯ 17:02, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Close - promoted
Thank you for your improvements once again! Don't worry about those access dates for Google books, as they're usually inplaced when references are first formatted - but it's not a worry for this GAN. I feel that some reviewers are too pushy for that, but nevertheless this is an excellent article and meets the criteria as it is. Well done! ☯ Jaguar ☯ 22:07, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks, Jaguar! It was really nice of you to take the time to review this article and Irataba. Rationalobserver (talk) 22:11, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Close paraphrasing concerns
I'm about to tag this article for close paraphrasing/copyvio. The source is online here and in the first 10-11 pages I found the instances below. Pinging Moonriddengirl for advice about how to proceed. Victoria (tk) 17:46, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- page ix
- Source: "The Mojave Road was an extension of Beale's Wagon Road from the Colorado River to San Bernandino and Los Angeles". (p. ix)
- Article: "The Mojave Road stretches from where Beale's Wagon Road meets the Colorado River to San Bernardino and Los Angeles, California."
- The source material is not creative enough; i.e.; there aren't any other ways to say this road ran from here to there. Per WP:NONENGPLAG "phrases that are the simplest and most obvious way to present information; sentences such as "John Smith was born on 2 February 1900" lack sufficient creativity to require attribution". Rationalobserver (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- page 2
- Source: "L. J. Rose was born in Rottenburg, Germany, on May 1, 1827. When he was eight years old, he immigrated to the United States" (p.2)
- Article: Rose was born in Rottenburg, Germany in 1827; he immigrated to the United States when he was eight years old.
- Again, this is basic information that is not creative. Per WP:NONENGPLAG "phrases that are the simplest and most obvious way to present information; sentences such as "John Smith was born on 2 February 1900" lack sufficient creativity to require attribution". Rationalobserver (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- page 3
- Source: "After selling most of his property and settling his debts, Rose had a net worth of more than $30,000, a small fortune in those days." (p. 3)
- Article: "Rose sold most of his property and settled his debts, amassing what was then a small fortune of $30,000. "
- Source: "He was able to put together one of the best equipped wagon outfits ever to travel the western plains. He purchased a herd of 200 of the best cattle on the market, mostly thoroughbred Red Durhams. He knew he could sell these animals in California for a hefty profit. For driving the loose stock, and for scouting and hunting, he purchased twenty of the finest horses that he could find in Iowa and Missouri, including a Morgan stallion, Black Morrill, valued at $2,500 and two matching Morgan fillies at $350 each (p.3 )
- Article: "This enabled him to finance one of the best equipped wagon trains of the era, including an animal stock that featured two Morgan fillies, valued at $350 each, and a Morgan stallion named Black Morrill, valued at $2,500. He also purchased twenty of Iowa and Missouri's finest trotting horses and two hundred head of thoroughbred red Durham cattle, which he planned to resell in California for profit. "
- Ditto. "small fortune" is a common term, i.e.: "use of common expressions and idioms". Rationalobserver (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- page 4
- Source: "Rose purchased four large prairie schooner-type wagons, each with high sideboards and covered by a heavy painted canvas … Three yokes of oxen were required to pull these stout but ponderous vehicles … Three of these prairie schooners were used for carrying equipment and supplies, while the fourth was used by the Alpha Brown family … For transporting his own family, and his inlaws, Rose purchased an old ambulance, pulled by two mules". (p. 4)
- Article: "To complete the train, Rose acquired four large prairie schooner covered wagons and three yoke of oxen to pull the massive vehicles. Three of the schooners carried equipment and supplies, and the fourth was used by Alpha Brown and his family. Rose's family traveled in a small wagon known as an ambulance, which was pulled by two mules."
- This one is a little close, but again, it's relying very basic and non-creative information. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- page 5
- Source: "The Rose company left Van Buren County, Iowa, in early April of 1858. They set their course for Westport (present-day Kansas City, Missouri) where they crossed the Missouri River by steamboat" (p. 5)
- Article: "The Rose company left Iowa in early April; their first significant destination was Kansas City, Missouri, then named Westport, where they crossed the Missouri River on a steamboat"
- Same. There is no way to paraphrase this without losing meaning. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- page 8, 10, 11
- Source: "During the spring of 1858 four families from Missouri were also making preparation to emigrate to California. These were the two Baley and the two Hedgpeth famiies" (p. 8) "Another factor that may have encouraged these families to leave Missouri in 1858 was the unsettling times that existed on the Kansas-Missouri border as result of the passage of the Kansas-Nebraska act of 1854. This legislation admitted Nebraska into the Union as a free territory, but provided for the people of Kansas Territory to decide for themselves whether they wanted to be organized as a free or as a slave territory. (p. 10) The result was what might have been expected-open warfare between pro-slavery and anti-slavery forces … The Territory became known as "Bleeding Kansas" so great was the violence. Soon the conflict began to spill over the border into the western counties of Missouri, including Nodaway" (p. 11)
- Article: "In April 1858, four families from northwestern Missouri – two Baleys and two Hedgpeths – left for California. Several factors influenced their decision to leave the Midwest, including the Kansas–Nebraska Act, which granted Nebraska admittance into the Union as a free territory and Kansas the right to determine whether they would be free or slave-holding. The resulting tensions between pro-slavery and anti-slavery groups drove conflict near the Missouri border, with Kansas earning the unofficial nickname, "Bleeding Kansas". The ensuing violence spilled over into Missouri's western counties, including Nodaway."
- I agree that the last sentence is too close, but you've locked down the page now, so these simple fixes will have to wait. Rationalobserver (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
- These threads are relevant: , , and . Rationalobserver (talk) 20:20, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Copyright clerk comment
Rationalobserver, you can work on a re-write of the affected section on a temporary page by clicking on this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Talk:Rose-Baley_Party/Temp&action=edit&preload=Template:Copyvio/preload
Having said that, while there is possibly some over-close paraphrasing in that section which could be improved, it does not remotely rise to the level of a copyright violation. And in several cases listed above, I would dispute that the paraphrasing is overly close. Blanking it with the copyright violation template was excessive in my view. At most {{Close paraphrasing}} should have been added to the section so that the material could be re-worked where necessary. Clerks who aren't admins, e.g. me, can only remove the blanking template after it has been in place for five days. If an admin doesn't deal with this first, I'll revisit the article and the temp page in five days and deal with it myself. Voceditenore (talk) 18:34, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- I didn't realize we had a close paraphrasing template; that would have been helpful to know about. Do we advertise these things? At any rate, I had no idea that template was quite so draconian or that it would "blank" as you say, but once I hit save I couldn't go back. I don't object to having an uninvolved admin remove. Re the close paraphrasing, I've re-formatted the above, and keep in mind that's only a single section of the article using a single source. Today I went through about half of the next section with the same results - all from the same source - so I don't fully agree with your assessment. I'll post the rest when things calm down a bit. Victoria (tk) 03:56, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- Adding: to put into perspective, the article is in excess of 4000 words and it appears to use seven sources. But Zappia is only used in a note, Kroeger's FN52 (a) fails verification, Bonsai is used in a very long quote, Woodward used for a single short sentence, and Ricky used for a single sentence. All the rest comes from a single source and so far all the material checked from the single source bears a close relationship to the text. The sourcing in its entirety needs to be taken into consideration. Victoria (tk) 04:57, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- Victoriaearle, you are once again mistaken. Kroeber & Kroeber, page 53 states: "One of the chiefs, upon hearing that California was the promised land, seemed to not believe that the whites did mean to move on." Which does indeed support the preceding prose: "The emigrants sensed that the chief who granted them passage was hiding something". I think you are not the best judge of this article, and I am respectfully requesting that you un-watch this page and leave me to improve it with the help of others. The close paraphrases will be ironed out in due time, but there are no pressing issues here that require such intensive supervision, especially not from you considering our recent history. Is that acceptable? Rationalobserver (talk) 17:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- I oversimplified for the sake of brevity. Let me explain. First, Kroeber is a reprint, but the g-book version doesn't show (at least to me) a copyright page. He died in 1960 and the bulk of his work about California native tribes was written in the mid-1920s so somehow the book's publication history has to be pinned down. Beyond that, we can't know who said what or who thought what in the mid-1850s so it can't be in Misplaced Pages's voice. A better practice is to attribute - and this is why the dates are important- something along the lines of in 19xx anthropologist Kroeber wrote blah blah, and put the "blah blah" in quotations. Then you're pinning directly to the source. The same holds true of the Baley source. I could have missed it, but how do we know what Udell said? When I was reading the book, I noted a lot of quotes from him. Did he leave a journal that one of the Baley descendent used? If so, that would be interesting to add and by doing so it builds distance directly from WP's voice - in other words assert that such and such Baley says or writes that Udell said blah blah, or "blah blah". Having to attribute in this manner doesn't always make for the best or smoothest writing style but it's the best way to really understand our referencing requirements on GA and particularly FA articles. To be honest, I don't think your GA reviewer did you a favor, but that's often typical when the Wikicup is in full swing. Anyway I hope this make sense and clarifies my earlier comment. I'll cross post your page too, since you asked there for me to step away. Victoria (tk) 18:59, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- Victoriaearle, you are once again mistaken. Kroeber & Kroeber, page 53 states: "One of the chiefs, upon hearing that California was the promised land, seemed to not believe that the whites did mean to move on." Which does indeed support the preceding prose: "The emigrants sensed that the chief who granted them passage was hiding something". I think you are not the best judge of this article, and I am respectfully requesting that you un-watch this page and leave me to improve it with the help of others. The close paraphrases will be ironed out in due time, but there are no pressing issues here that require such intensive supervision, especially not from you considering our recent history. Is that acceptable? Rationalobserver (talk) 17:19, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- Misplaced Pages good articles
- History good articles
- Misplaced Pages articles that use American English
- Unassessed United States articles
- Low-importance United States articles
- Unassessed United States articles of Low-importance
- Unassessed American Old West articles
- Unknown-importance American Old West articles
- WikiProject American Old West articles
- WikiProject United States articles