Talk:P. G. T. Beauregard/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Peacemaker67 (talk · contribs) 11:14, 1 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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.	some of the prose is clunky, for example, "Trained as a civil engineer at the United States Military Academy, Beauregard served with distinction as an engineer in the Mexican-American War. Following a brief appointment at West Point in 1861, after the South seceded he resigned from the U.S. Army and became the first brigadier general in the Confederate States Army." This would be better rendered as "Trained as a civil engineer at the United States Military Academy, Beauregard served with distinction as an engineer in the Mexican-American War, and had a brief appointment to West Point in 1861. After the South seceded, he resigned from the U.S. Army and became the first brigadier general in the Confederate States Army." Despite the time gap, his appointment at West Point had more to do with his pre-secession positions than his post-secession ones, so I broke the sentences differently. I suggest you have another look at the article and do likewise. There is at least one more example of this in the lead alone.Y
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	lots of duplicate links, suggest you install the User:Ucucha/duplinks script so you can identify and fix them easilyY link of rank in infobox title seems unnecessary (and is an overlink)
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).	The page ranges are quite wide in general, and the grouping of citations at the end of large paragraphs makes it quite difficult to assess this criteria. If you are planning to take this article to Milhist ACR or FAC, I would break down the citations quite a bit more within paragraphs. Only just acceptable for GA, IMO. I don't know about the lack of citations on the "In memoriam" section. These are a bit WP:BLUE, but some sort of citation seems appropriate. I won't insist on it at GAN, but if taking further, I suggest you source it all.
	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.	several of the image files are non-compliant, eg File:Bombardment of Fort Sumter, 1861.png and File:Pierre Beauregard.pageantofamerica.jpg have no PD-US tag, File:PGTBeauregard01.jpg used PD-US, but does not have a creator name, per "The creator and year of publication are essential information and must be provided.". File:Laure Villere Beauregard.jpg doesn't seem right either, as it is based on the death of the author, but no author is identified.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The captions for the ones that are there are fine, but see my comment above about licensing.
	7. Overall assessment.	On hold for seven days, one remaining image license needs fixing, or image needs to be removed. Some of the images sandwich text, regardless of which of my screens I look at. This should be fixed.

Thanks for the review. I'll work on the issues noted over the course of the week (ideally sooner if I can find a couple free hours) Wizardman 02:13, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MoS and image issues now fixed, sans the Laure image. I'm not finding anywhere else the image resides sans findagrave, which I can't use for reliability. The subject died in 1850 so to me it's reasonable to presume it's PD, but I'd much rather find better info than that myself. I'll take another look at the prose shortly. Wizardman 01:41, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, the Pageant of America was published after 1923, not before, which means the Commons licensing still isn't right. There may well be a workable solution, so I've pinged @Nikkimaria: Nikki, could you please provide some feedback on the image licensing? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 05:37, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with the licensing on the remainder, I added PD-Art-100 to a couple after adding a life span to the license for the artist. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 06:14, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Crap, didn't notice until re-looking at the archives that it was published in 1926. I would think it was published elsewhere between his death and 1923, but the question would be where, and so far I haven't been able to find anything :/ Wizardman 22:07, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pierre_Beauregard.pageantofamerica.jpg? Did the 1926 publication have a copyright notice and/or was the copyright renewed?{{PD-Pre1978}} or {{PD-Pre1964}} might apply. Of course if there was an earlier publication the answer might be different. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:03, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's the one, Nikki. The first volume of the series had a publication notice, so I think we can reasonably assume the later volumes did. The copy of Volume 1 on Questia does not have an updated/renewed copyright, so again, we could assume Volume 7 wasn't renewed, but we don't know that. As I understand it, if that was the case, it would allow its use with PD-Pre1964. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 10:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Placing review on hold for seven days for image issue to be resolved. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:44, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

(outdent) I'll keep looking, but for the time being I removed the image. Wizardman 16:48, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, passing on that basis. Great article. If taking to ACR, I suggest you review my comments above on citations and image sandwiching. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:34, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]