Talk:Marcus Ward Lyon Jr.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Marcus Ward Lyon, Jr./GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jebus989 (talk · contribs) 15:01, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I'd like to take this review. At first glance, this will not be a quick fail so I will perform a full review. Additionally, I have institutional access to the Just (1942) obit, allowing proper inspection of the attributed claims Jebus989^✰ 15:01, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

✗ Fail At this point I'm going to fail this GA review per item #6 of the GA quick fail criteria: The article contains significant close paraphrasing or copyright violations. I encourage you to resubmit this article for review when this issue has been addressed, examples are provided below. If you feel this is an inaccurate assessment, you are free to seek the opinions of a second reviewer or to discuss with myself. Overall, I found it to be an interesting and thorough article on a lesser-known subject which could make a great GA when these issues have been addressed. Jebus989^✰ 18:33, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Major issues

• Some of the article is too closely paraphrased from the Seventy-five years of mammalogy source, note that this reference is not public domain, or published using a WP compatible licence (it's CC-BY-NC). Here are some examples:

Article	Reference
Little is known of his early years, except that his family moved between various army posts across the United States	Little appears to be known of his early life, which was spent at Army posts in various parts of the country
His father was later posted at Rock Island Arsenal again, and in 1893, Lyon graduated from Rock Island High School	Later, his father apparently was again posted to Rock Island, because Lyon graduated from high school there in 1893
In 1919, following 18 years of medical teaching and practice, he and his wife, Martha, were both invited to join the staff at the South Bend Clinic in South Bend, Indiana	During that 18-year stretch of medical teaching and practice, his wife also obtained an M.D. from Howard University, and in 1919 they jointly accepted an invitation to join the staff of the South Bend Clinic in Indiana.

• The following are examples which, in my opinion, are too closely paraphrased from the Just (1942) obit:

Article	Reference
He joined the U.S. Army during World War I and attained the rank of Major in the Medical Reserve Corps in September 1919 after serving as a pathologist at the Walter Reed Army Hospital for two years.	During World War I he joined the U.S. Army and served as pathologist in Walter Reed General Hospital from 1917-1919, attaining the rank of Major in the Medical Reserve Corps, September 1919.
He was survived by his daughter Charlotte Lyon and his two brothers Henry S. Lyon and Col. James W. Lyon.	He is survived by a daughter, Charlotte Lyon ... and two brothers, Henry S. Lyon ... and Col. James W. Lyon ...
... 7th president of the American Society of Mammalogists from 1931 to 1932, and a month before he died, received honorary membership	... president of the American Society Mammalogists (1931-1933) and election to honorary membership month before his death.

• These are from the third reference, McIntosh (1990):

Article	Reference
filled the entire first issue of the 1936 volume—a total of 365 pages—with his work "Mammals of Indiana"	The entire first issue of Volume 17, 1936 (385 p.) was taken up by Marcus W. Lyon's "Mammals of Indiana"
Lyon published 80 articles in the field of zoology, 55 in pathology, and four in botany, in addition to many book reviews, technical reports, and newspaper articles	he had published some 80 articles in zoology, 55 in medicine and four in botany, along with numerous book reviews, technical reports and newspaper articles.

Thanks for catching these. I'll work on fixing these when I get home tonight and have more time to potentially restructure sentences, paragraphs, and sections. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

I have attempted to fix all of these, except for the one discussing the American Society of Mammalogists. I worded the first part of that sentence independently, using a completely different source (using noting he was the "7th president" *and* a giving correct date range, not an incorrect date from the obituary). The second half of that sentence is sufficiently reworded from its cited source, IMO. The phrase "president of the American Society of Mammalogists" cannot be easily changed if I can only state that he was the president. – Maky ^« talk » 02:25, 14 January 2013 (UTC)

Minor prose issues

You may find some of these over nitpicky, and of course they are open to discussion and to being ignored.

Lead

• The third sentence has 4 or 5 clauses which make uncomfortable reading, I suggest two sentences, e.g. the first could be:

  After attaining his undergraduate degree at Brown University, he went on to receive graduate degrees at George Washington University while working part-time at the U.S. National Museum (USNM)—now the National Museum of Natural History of the Smithsonian Institution.

Thanks. Done. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• I'm not sure the following sentence (In 1919, he and his wife moved to South Bend, Indiana to join a new clinic) meets WP:LEAD as summarising one of the article subjects most important aspects. More interesting aspects of his history could be his military rank, herbarium creation or some of his honours.

I could add the others (after we discuss this), but the event was significant to his life and had a profound impact on his career. I don't see a problem removing the city name or maybe summarizing it a bit differently. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• Per WP:LEADCITE, a citation may still be required on either the specific claims of the paper count or the president duration. I relise that this are adequately referenced later, and also that the DYK reviewer did not feel it needed citing in the lead so this is totally optional—my point is just that the lead doesn't need to be devoid of citations.

I prefer to leave the lead without citation unless absolutely necessarily. The reason is this: If you include one citation because one fact may or may not be contested, then what's to stop people from coming in and contesting every other fact in the lead? I've seen it before—people will say that since some things are cited and others aren't, then the uncited facts are unreliable and that everything needs to be cited. If I can manage to remember an example article, I'll post a diff... but I have seen people post {{citation needed}} templates all over the lead on articles with just one or two lead citations. I don't want to start down that slippery slope. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• You introduce his wife in the first paragraph but give her name on the second mention in the second paragraph.

Fixed. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• I personally think "ardent conservationist" is only valid if you use the quotation (as you did earlier), else per NPOV he just became a conservationist. I'd recommend either removing "ardent" or adding quote marks and the citation.

Good point. Fixed. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Early life...

• The following passage duplicates "Watertown Arsenal near Boston", maybe the em-dashed clause could be removed.

  Watertown Arsenal near Boston, Massachusetts—and that he enjoyed collecting insects and other animals around the army posts during his childhood,[1] particularly around Watertown Arsenal near Boston

Oops... fixed. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• I also note sentences making specific claims without direct citations, though I assume this occurs when one reference supports multiple preceding sentences (I'll look at referencing after).

You are correct. Having gone through WP:FAC many times, I was once asked to remove duplicate citations. I have stuck with that pattern. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

Career

• At the start of each section I like to reintroduce the subject with either his last name or full name rather than "he" or similar (I note you've done this in all the other sections).

Done. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• It's not clear to me how this claim:In 1919, following 18 years of medical teaching and practice, adds up; though I note it is stated in the reference. In 1901, it seems Lyon was still completing his MD (while also possible in Venezuela?).

His teaching career started in 1897 at North Carolina Medical College, and there may have been years where he did not teach. But I can only go by my sources. It seems about right, though there may be a year or two unaccounted for. If it's a serious problem, the statement can be removed. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

• Why is the USNM renaming, i.e. USNM, now the National Museum of Natural History, not mentioned in the first reference to USNM in the Career section?

Fixed. – Maky ^« talk » 23:06, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Marcus Ward Lyon, Jr./GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Khazar2 (talk · contribs) 22:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

I'll be glad to take this review. In the next few days I'll do a close readthrough, noting here any issues I can't immediately fix myself; once those are addressed, we can go through the criteria checklist. Thanks in advance for your work on this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:42, 22 January 2013 (UTC)

Initial readthrough

• "his home state" -- is this his original home state, or Indiana? Perhaps "new home state" would make this clear?

Good catch. Fixed. – Maky ^« talk » 14:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

• Not an issue for GA either way, so feel free to ignore, but as an American, the dates on this should probably be written in month/day/year per WP:STRONGNAT.

Good point... though I wish my country would convert. Putting the day first makes it so much easier to read and write. – Maky ^« talk » 14:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Since both of these concerns border on the trivial, I'm going to go ahead and start the checklist.

Thanks for the review! – Maky ^« talk » 14:42, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:43, 23 January 2013 (UTC)

Checklist

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prose is clear and excellent. Spotchecks show no copyright issues, and issues raised in a previous review have been fixed.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pass.

Results?

@Khazar2: I'm kind of confused. Is this a Good Article? It isn't marked as such on the article page. — Brianhe (talk) 00:17, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

TFAR 5 Feb

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/Marcus Ward Lyon, Jr. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:27, 18 December 2014 (UTC)

Medical Reserve Corps

Saw this on the main page, caught an issue. The Medical Reserve Corps differs in lineage from that of the World War I version. The United States Army Reserve traces itself back to the Medical Reserve Corps, see United States Army Reserve#History. Also see this official history. The current organization, and the subject of the article linked in the lead section is to the post-11 September attacks organization.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 01:59, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. I pointed the links to United States Army Reserve#History. – Maky ^« talk » 09:45, 5 February 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Marcus Ward Lyon Jr.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/resshow/perry/bios/LyonMarcus.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://archives.nd.edu/findaids/ead/html/LYF.htm
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.sigmaxi.org/chapters/web/index.php?chapter_id=22&page_id=38
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150418081700/http://public.mapper.army.mil/ANC/ANCWeb/PublicWMV/ancWeb.html to http://public.mapper.army.mil/ANC/ANCWeb/PublicWMV/ancWeb.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:40, 20 May 2017 (UTC)