Talk:Baa, Baa, Black Sheep/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Sarastro1 (talk · contribs) 19:01, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

To be honest, I was reluctant to take this one as I did not think that the article could be comprehensive looking at its length. But having looked in several places, it looks like I am wrong and this article seems to sum up the thinking pretty well. Looking good.
 * "It was first recorded in 1731.": Recorded is ambiguous here; the reader may assume recorded in the musical sense. And maybe combine with the the first sentence: ""Baa, Baa, Black Sheep" is an English nursery rhyme, the earliest surviving version of which dates from 1731.
 * ✅--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * "Uncorroborated theories that have been advanced to explain the meaning of the rhyme include that it is a complaint against Medieval English taxes on wool and that it is about the slave trade.": The main body does not say that the all the theories are uncorroborated; also, this is a bit of a mouthful. Maybe "Explanations of the meaning of the rhyme have suggested it may be a complaint against Medieval English taxes on wool, or concerning the slave trade."
 * ✅--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Why quotation marks around "political correctness" (maybe worth a link?) A little too much like scare quotes.
 * WP:MOSNUM: "twentieth century"→"20th century".
 * WP:ORDINAL says that century can be in words or figures.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * "It has been used in literature and popular culture.": A bit vague; used how? And a short, choppy sentence
 * ✅--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * The page is wrong on ref 2, according to google books; should be p. 174.
 * ✅--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * "have been collected across Great Britain and North America": Not supported by ref.
 * It is if you use the buttons to look at all the other versions.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Given that the first two surviving versions are given, are there any theories (either about this specific nursery rhyme, or generic ones) how long it existed before this? (I appreciate this crosses over into the stuff about the theories of what it means)
 * Generally reliable commentators do not assume it is much older than the earliest reference. Probably cannot expand this without straying into original research.--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Page number wrong for ref 4 (according to google preview)? Also, seems to cross across 2 pages, and the linking of words and music is on the next page.
 * ✅--  SabreBD  (talk) 22:14, 27 August 2012 (UTC)


 * "Katherine Elwes Thomas in The Real Personages of Mother Goose (1930) suggested that the rhyme referred to resentment at the heavy taxation on wool,[5] this has particularly been taken to refer to the medieval English 'Great' or 'Old Custom' wool tax of 1275, which survived until the fifteenth century." Suggest splitting this sentence after first wool.
 * ✅--  SabreBD  (talk) 19:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * "However, this tax did not involve the collection of one-third to the king, and one-third to the church, but a less punitive sum of 6s 8d to the Crown per sack, about 5 per cent of the value.": Does this ref directly refer to "Baa baa"? Otherwise, this may be WP:OR, or at best, WP:SYNTHESIS.
 * I cannot get access to this passage so I am playing safe by deleting this.--  SabreBD  (talk) 19:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Several instances of single quotation marks, when WP:MOS requires double.
 * ✅--  SabreBD  (talk) 19:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Not completely convinced by the "linguistics" section, and not too clear what it means by "varieties of English".
 * I have no idea and I do not have access to the source to check. This is confusing in its current form, so I have removed it. If someone puts back a clearer version that is well and good.--  SabreBD  (talk) 19:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Images seem fine, although not sure of the value of Blacksheep2.
 * Having two Denslow images is probably overkill. I will try to find something from a contrasting period sometime in the future (I take it that is not really a GA issue).--  SabreBD  (talk) 19:01, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

Placing this on hold for now, but no big obstacles to passing. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:49, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Spotchecks OK, apart from the minor issues above.
 * As far as broad coverage is concerned, a check of the sources and elsewhere is giving me the same picture as this article, so it looks OK. I'm not sure if this would be enough for FA without checking further, but happy for GA. May be worth a check of places like JSTOR for more academic sources for the future.

Comment: This review has now been open for a week, and I think we need to see some progress very soon. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:47, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
 * I think that is everything. Let me know if I missed something.--  SabreBD  (talk) 19:24, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

OK, all looks good. Passing now. Sarastro1 (talk) 19:49, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Many thanks.--  SabreBD  (talk) 20:06, 5 September 2012 (UTC)