Talk:Elizabeth Ann Linley

	; Archives (Index) ;
	1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 5; 4; 3; 2; 1;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Elizabeth Ann Linley has been listed as one of the Music 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.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 31, 2018	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on June 28, 2023.

Biography: Musicians

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (assessed as Low-importance).

Women's History Low‑importance

	History portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women's History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women's history and related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women's HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject Women's HistoryTemplate:WikiProject Women's HistoryWomen's History articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

England Low‑importance

	England portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject England, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnglandWikipedia:WikiProject EnglandTemplate:WikiProject EnglandEngland-related articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Elizabeth Ann Linley/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tim riley (talk · contribs) 09:39, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Starting first read-through. More shortly, Tim riley talk 09:39, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

After first read-through for spelling etc: only two queries – "cajouled" and "Appollo". Substantive comments to follow. Tim riley talk 10:26, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Both fixed. Eric Corbett 13:20, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Detailed comments[edit]

Not much to detain us here. This is a fine article, and clearly of GA standard. Just a few minor points before I cut the ribbon:

Single quotes
- If I correctly understand the Manual of Style, we use double quotes as default in e.g. "Captain" Thomas Matthews, and "The Romance of Sheridan and Miss Linley".

Agreed. Done. Eric Corbett 14:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
- "Whig" – the OED capitalises the word when used in the political sense. Our Wikipedia article does too. And the word is capitalised at one point in this article.

Fixed the capitalisation. Eric Corbett 14:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Early life
- "early childhood[4])" – the Manual of Style bids us put the citations outside closing brackets.
  - Agreed. Done. Eric Corbett 14:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "expressed that he overworked them" – odd phrasing: "commented" or "observed" (or "expressed the view that") would be more usual.
  - Changed to "expressed the view that". Eric Corbett 14:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "Though Handel's works formed the dominant nucleus" – do nuclei dominate?
  - Probably not, so I've changed "dominant nucleus" to "core". Eric Corbett 15:22, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "performing in Drury Lane" – "at Drury Lane" might avoid the fleeting picture of al fresco performance.
  - Changed. Eric Corbett 15:22, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "broken off shortly before the wedding took place" – "… was due to take place"?
  - Rewritten. Eric Corbett 14:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Flight to France
- "Although unsuccessful in gaining extra funds, an oil merchant" – "Although they were unsuccessful in gaining extra funds"? It was they rather than the oil merchant, presumably.
  - Rewritten. Eric Corbett 14:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Marriage
- "still born" – the OED gives this as either hyphenated or all one word.
  - Gone with "stillborn". Eric Corbett 14:18, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "at Her Majesty's Theatre after her husband became involved" – not "Her Majesty's" in Georgian times. I think it was called the King's Theatre during the reign of all the Hanoverian kings.
  - It was indeed, changed. Eric Corbett 15:11, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Portraiture
- "Masque of Beauty, a 1972 National Portrait Gallery exhibition" – the MoS calls for named exhibitions to have their titles italicised. Likewise for Brilliant women: 18th century bluestockings.
  - Done. Eric Corbett 15:01, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Legacy
- "music historian Charles Burney" – clunky false title that can be cured with a "the" before it. Likewise for Dr Sadie shortly below.
  - I don't altogether agree with this recent WP obsession with so-called false titles, but I've changed it nevertheless. Eric Corbett 14:26, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- "11, Royal Crescent, Bath" – earlier you have omitted the comma after the street number in addresses. Either is fine, but it's as well to be consistent.
  - Fixed. Eric Corbett 14:26, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I can find to quibble about. This is an excellent and enjoyable article, and I look forward to promoting it to GA. – Tim riley talk 12:15, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Eric, thank you very much for stepping into the breach in the present disagreeable and sad circumstances. Sagagaciousphil has been kind enough to explain to me what has been going on and why that fine editor has retired hurt – temporarily, let us hope. Focusing on this review, I am now satisfied that the article meets the GA criteria, and I have much pleasure in promoting it to GA. I'm most grateful to you for helping to get it there. I shall keep my fingers crossed that it doesn't turn out to a swan song by our excellent colleague. – Tim riley talk 16:01, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tim. I would have done it anyway, but Sagaciousphil asked me to address the issues you raised, so I didn't try to usurp her efforts, which I have the greatest of respect for. All I can add is that it won't be her swan song if I've got anything to do with it. Eric Corbett 16:21, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overall summary[edit]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:
Well referenced.

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
Well referenced.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
Well illustrated.

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
Well illustrated.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Tim riley talk 16:01, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

can I ask for your contact 105.112.112.168 (talk) 20:18, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]