Talk:Meghan, Duchess of Sussex/GA1
GA Review
[edit]The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Hi. I'm going to do this review. COI disclaimer: I'm a fan of suits, but I think that's okay --DannyS712 (talk) 00:10, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Reviewer: DannyS712 (talk · contribs) 00:10, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Review
[edit]Good Article review progress box
|
Notes
[edit]Partly done The "Titles, styles, and arms" has a lot of whitespace when the coat of arms is collapsed. Can we reduce that?
- Can we combine eliminate the collapse of the arms, and combine the two sections. It looks really bare, with just 1.5 lines of text, and then the centered caption
- Yes, I too have noticed that there is still a lot of white space, but I do not know why. Your suggestion seems very reasonable. Surtsicna (talk) 23:08, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: I noticed you removed the section break, but not the collapsing. Why? --DannyS712 (talk) 23:59, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- There was an extensive discussion about the coats of arms and they way they are explained, resulting in the consensus to keep them collapsed. I am afraid I cannot point you to this discussion without spending some time looking it up, but if you check related articles, you will notice it is the standard. We could remove the collapsing, but I am sure doing so would mean stepping on a lot of toes. Surtsicna (talk) 00:10, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
Done The second image ("Markle at a panel discussion of Suits, Paley Center for Media, 2013") - the right side of the image isn't the best quality, with an odd cutoff or something. I'm not a photography person, but can this be improved at all?
Done Lede -
Sussex on her marriage to
- on? shouldn't this be "upon"
|
|
|
I'm going to stop here. This article needs a general copy edit before I proceed. --DannyS712 (talk) 01:34, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
|
|
Ssuggest shortening a bit, the 4th paragraph is fine, but the first 3 are really specific. Maybe just touch on the highlights? Eg "In 2016, after a trip to India focused on raising awareness for women's issues, Markle wrote an op-ed for Time magazine concerning stigmatization of women in regard to menstrual health." We don't need to know about every trip she made...
|
|
Request withdrawn Filmography section - given that a lot of this is covered in the prose, could we have this be a separate article and just a short summary here? The tables stand out, in part because they are narrow, and in part because its just a list (like other filmography sections, but see Sean Connery#Filmography for precedent (you would want to add a summary though)
- Do you think there is enough for a new article? Her filmography is not nearly as extensive as Connery's and is unlikely to expand. Surtsicna (talk) 23:45, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: If its not, then idk... maybe put the tables side by side, move the prose about her acting work to that section, and collapse the tables by default? --DannyS712 (talk) 23:55, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- Moving the prose so far down would not work because the chronology would become messed up. Her acting career should not come after her royal marriage. I do not think putting the tables side by side is possible, but I am no expert. Surtsicna (talk) 00:04, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: It should be. See Help:Table#Positioning. --DannyS712 (talk) 02:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- DannyS712, it won't work for me. I thought it might be due to the width of the first table, but fiddling with that did not help either. Surtsicna (talk) 22:41, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
@Surtsicna: please see the rest of the review. --DannyS712 (talk) 22:57, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
Discussion
[edit]- Please note here when you have fixed the issues noted above, and once I confirm that I will strike them. Please do not just remove them yourself. --DannyS712 (talk) 00:11, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments, DannyS712. I have addressed all the issues. The article was copy-edited by Twofingered Typist on 3 August 2018. Surtsicna (talk) 01:58, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: Can you continue the copy edit beyond where I stopped. Its not very efficient for my notes to focus on grammatical or spelling errors, etc, but they do need to get fixed --DannyS712 (talk) 02:00, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- I do not agree with all of your grammar and spelling concerns. For example, "on marriage" is fine, though I have replaced it with "upon marriage". There should be no commas before and after the name of Harry's grandmother because she is not his only grandmother. I do believe Twofingered Typist did a good job copy-editing the article. Surtsicna (talk) 02:10, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: That copy edit was months ago. a lot has changed. My point is just that it should be copy edited beyond the last note I gave. We may disagree on "on marriage" or commas, so I'm just requesting that you copy edit the rest of the article so I don't have to point out every time I think something is wrong, because I'll know that it was an intentional choice. --DannyS712 (talk) 02:16, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- Twofingered Typist informed me today that she or he copy-edited the article again. Surtsicna (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: Please see the updated notes DannyS712 (talk) 21:27, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: Any update? --DannyS712 (talk) 01:51, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- I sent a message to you on 7 January. It seems you did not see it. Surtsicna (talk) 02:25, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: I saw that edit on my watchlist, but there is still other stuff left I thought you were still working on it. In the future please ping me when you have responded to all of the remaining notes, so that I know to check back. Thanks, --DannyS712 (talk) 02:33, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: Please see update review --DannyS712 (talk) 02:45, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: I think its just the one charity work section left. Fix that, then I'll reread it all, and hopefully pass it! --DannyS712 (talk) 22:55, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- I sent a message to you on 7 January. It seems you did not see it. Surtsicna (talk) 02:25, 14 January 2019 (UTC)
- Twofingered Typist informed me today that she or he copy-edited the article again. Surtsicna (talk) 20:56, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: That copy edit was months ago. a lot has changed. My point is just that it should be copy edited beyond the last note I gave. We may disagree on "on marriage" or commas, so I'm just requesting that you copy edit the rest of the article so I don't have to point out every time I think something is wrong, because I'll know that it was an intentional choice. --DannyS712 (talk) 02:16, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- I do not agree with all of your grammar and spelling concerns. For example, "on marriage" is fine, though I have replaced it with "upon marriage". There should be no commas before and after the name of Harry's grandmother because she is not his only grandmother. I do believe Twofingered Typist did a good job copy-editing the article. Surtsicna (talk) 02:10, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: Can you continue the copy edit beyond where I stopped. Its not very efficient for my notes to focus on grammatical or spelling errors, etc, but they do need to get fixed --DannyS712 (talk) 02:00, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Surtsicna: I'm going to reread it soon --DannyS712 (talk) 23:58, 14 January 2019 (UTC)