Talk:Crawford family of the White Mountains/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Auntieruth55 (talk · contribs) 17:10, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

preliminary to review, I suggest some edits here okay?

will start in the next coule of days. auntieruth (talk) 16:43, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail :

No problem and thanks for taking it on. I notice you have just capitalised Notch, which is how I had it originally but someone decided it should be lower case, for reasons unknown to me. - Sitush (talk) 17:16, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, File:Section of Crawford's map of the White Mountains of New Hampshire from original surveys by Geo. T. Crawford.jpg has been nominated for deletion at Commons. I think it is just retaliatory. - Sitush (talk) 17:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

probably should use the infobox for family here auntieruth (talk) 18:20, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a fan of infoboxes. I'm sure you're familiar with the arguments that have raged over them but I've stayed out of those things and just done what seems right to me. - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Notch, as a shortened form of Crawford Notch, should be capitalized. Please link all first mentions to other articles in the main part of the article (White Mountains, Crawford Notch, etc.) Did Ethan fight in War of 1812?

Yes, I do not disagree about the capitalisation. I will check the links again - I did think I had it as you describe but perhaps some slipped through. I've no idea what war Ethan fought it - the sources are not specific either about the name or indeed the dates. - Sitush (talk) 19:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, "main part of the article". You're interpreting the linking guidance differently to me and to those who have reviewed my past GA and FA nominations, I think. I link on first use, which in some instances means the use in the lead section rather than subsequent use in the body. If I also link in the body, that is technically overlinking. Unless the guidance has changed in recent months? - Sitush (talk) 19:13, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm always told to link in the lead and in the first use of the main part of the article. it's not technically overlinking, and if you search the article for dupe links, it doesn't show up. So I figure that's the way it's suppose to be. Also, you might explain somewwhere what a geological "notch" is. Col. auntieruth (talk) 19:58, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I would resist that advice unless there's a very clear case for it. Infobox plus main text once, maybe. Tony (talk) 11:01, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Despite all the walking I've done here in the UK, I've never come across the term. From the pictures, descriptions and maps, it's a cleft between two higher rock formations, forming a pass, but I'm no geologist and we do not seem to have an article specifically for the term (DICDEF, probably). I'll see what I can find. - Sitush (talk) 20:19, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, Notch (landform) redirects to Col. Added a link to that. - Sitush (talk) 20:21, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

search the article for dupe links - is this a reference to some tool? I know of the dablinks one but that doesn't do it as far as I am aware. - Sitush (talk) 03:24, 27 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

it's called "find duplicate links, but I don't know why it has appeared in my tool kit on the left column. :( auntieruth (talk) 14:45, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha! Neither do I. It doesn't appear in Preferences > Gadgets etc. Perhaps it is a tool you have added to your common.js. - Sitush (talk) 14:51, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I will add the links in the body if you want. I doubt that they will stay there because somewhere down the line I will return and will have forgotten your interpretation of the guideline, thus removing the things again. The old dog/new tricks problem after having done it one way for so many years. - Sitush (talk) 14:54, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]