Talk:Henry M. Crane/GA1

GA Review

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.

---

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

Reviewer: M4V3R1CK32 (talk · contribs) 16:07, 17 August 2023 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Good on these counts. I conducted a fairly extensive copy edit. Though not one of the criteria for a GA, the prevalence of quotations should be evaluated against MOS:QUOTE if this article goes on to be an FAC.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   b. There are a few places where coverage that directly credits Henry Crane is lacking. Of note, the sources used in the final paragraph in the Early life section do not verify Henry Crane with designed the engine in Vingt et Un II. It could be extrapolated from the Hemmings source that this was the case, however, Hemmings doesn't specify which boat that engine was in. This should be fixed or removed before this article can reach GA status. Removed as per your suggestion. Rublamb (talk) 04:25, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

   • I've taken the liberty of removing several claims throughout the Crane & Whitman section that are similarly not verifiable. Since these were often smaller portions of a sentence rather than a full paragraph, I felt comfortable making those changes myself rather than holding up the GA review.
   • I've removed information cited to Conceptcarz as it does not meet the requirements of WP:RS

   c. The sentence, "The challenge of designing and building automobiles in the early days is indicated in an advertisement Crane ran in July 1911, seeking an expert tool maker for steady work and good wages." in the Crane Motor Car Company section is OR and should either be removed or cited appropriately. Done. Reworked text to fit the source. Rublamb (talk) 03:45, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

    Done Works for me! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 23:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

   The sentence "He did not marry." is only verifiable through 1920, when the source was published. Though a reasonable assumption, if the claim is not verifiable through the end of Crane's life it should be removed. Good catch. My jump to never married probably falls under original research. Rublamb (talk) 02:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   a. The final four paragraphs of the Crane-Simplex section were copied directly from the Crane-Simplex article, are not related to Henry Crane, and should be removed to keep the article's focus on Crane. Pretty sure I wrote it for this article and added it to the other, but you are right that it is not needed in both places. I cut most but reworked a few sentences that are about Crane. I also trimmed some of the technology details and quotes in the upper portion of this section. That also makes more sense for the car article and not the bio. I think the section is better now. Rublamb (talk) 03:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

   The sentence "On March 23, 1940, Crane held a large dance at his home in Mountain Lake." strikes me as a case of WP:NOTEVERYTHING. I agree and have removed it. Rublamb (talk) 02:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

    Done I agree and think what you did is perfect! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 23:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Some minor weasel words here and there, I have removed them. Good to go.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   No red flags here.

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   b You've got an incredible number of images here, I do think it may be a good idea to reassess both their placement and number. Some images seem better suited to the Crane-Simplex article. At some point they do become a distraction. Of the 12 images, I would suggest picking the 5 or 6 that best illustrate Crane's achievements. Doing so will allow the article to become less crowded. Done. I decided to mostly keep images that don't have another article to go to. Rublamb (talk) 02:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

I think that is perfect! M4V3R1CK32 (talk) 23:52, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

1. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   A couple fairly minor fixes and I think this is good to go!

   This article is good to go!

The discussion above 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.