Talk:Delphine LaLaurie/GA1

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

Reviewer: 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 14:24, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

* Lead.
 * "until April 10, 1834, where rescuers" where --> when.
 * You might mention the house is still standing and its connection to Nicholas Cage.
 * Otherwise, Fine.

* First section: Early life
 * An en dash is used between years rather than a hyphen. "1815-1820" --> 1815–1820.
 * If it is known how Ramon died, it can be added here, "Ramon never arrived in Spain, instead meeting his death [by reason here] in Havana en route to Madrid."
 * Otherwise, Fine.

* Second section: The LaLaurie slaves
 * "The" is not used in section titles as far as I recall. "LaLaurie slaves" is fine or "Slaves in LaLaurie's house"
 * "one of LaLaurie's neighbours saw a young negro girl fall to her death" --> "neighbors"
 * "The New Orleans Bee reported that by April 12 up to 4,000 people" --> New Orleans Bee (italics)

* Third section: Late life and death
 * "Late" --> "Later" ? in section title.
 * Otherwise, Fine.

* Fourth section: LaLaurie in folklore
 * Fine.

* Fifth section: The LaLaurie house
 * Again, "The" in section title.
 * Otherwise, Fine.


 * Images
 * When you take the article to FAC, you'll find many reviewers have great expertise on images. At the moment, I would prefer to see the first image moved into the first section and to the left margin at the head of the second paragraph rather than positioned under the Infobox - or deleted completely as there is another image of the house from the same angle in the last section. As the postcard is not of the period and the color has dulled I think it can be removed without damaging the article. Not sure if the article needs two so very similar images. Perhaps it could be replaced with a general view of New Orleans circa 1800 or another appropriate image. There is a fine image of the Cathedral circa 1838 in the St. Louis Cathedral article that could be placed at the left margin at "On June 11, 1800, Delphine Macarty married Don Ramon de Lopez y Angullo". This image would be an appropriate addition. She may have even attended the cathedral on a regular basis. Another option would be a map of the period pinpointing the exact location of the house. There are several period maps at Wikicommons. Consider alternating the images left-right-left-right. This is not required so I leave it to you. The article won't fail because of image placement.


 * Awaiting your response but I will need to review the references before the pass. Good article and hope you will consider a Peer Review and then submission to FAC! 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 23:09, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Response
Thank you for the helpful review. My responses are below. Although I have challenged several of your suggestions I am open to being convinced, as the best article is invariably a collaborative one. I look forward to your further commentary. - DustFormsWords (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Lead - Proposed edit (where/when) has been made. I'm not inclined to add the house to the lead simply because it's only in the article by way of background, and isn't a fact that's key to understanding LaLaurie's life.  I remain open to being persuaded, though. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:56, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * First section: early life - I take your point about hyphens but on consideration I have decided that "1815 to 1820" is even better, as this is a prose section and not a summary. I have changed it accordingly.  Such sources as I have managed to find do not reveal how Don Ramon died (although one can speculate that given his age and the form of his travel, disease or illness seems more likely than accident). - DustFormsWords (talk) 08:00, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Second section: The LaLaurie Slaves
 * WP:HEAD doesn't suggest there's any problem with starting a section title with "the". (You may be confusing it with the prohibition of referencing the article subject - for examples, "Her slaves" would be objectionable as a heading.)  In the absence of a policy statement, the "The" formulation seems to me to be preferable, as the section discusses the notable slaves, not all the slaves her family held generally.
 * Re: spelling, as far as I'm aware the rest of the article is in Australian English (being mostly written by an Australian, ie me) and should be kept that way per WP:RETAIN. An argument could be made that as the events occurred in Louisiana there are strong national ties to America (although LaLaurie was a French-speaking Creole) so if you're prepared to assure me that this is the only localisation change that would be necessary to convert I'll make the edits.
 * I have italicised New Orleans Bee per your sugestion. - DustFormsWords (talk) 08:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Third section: late life and death - "Late" is correct, as it agrees with "early" in the first section. To use "later" here the first section would have to be called "Earlier life".  See Marie-Rosalie Cadron-Jetté for another example of this format in a Good Article. - DustFormsWords (talk) 08:13, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Fifth section: the LaLaurie house - "The" is correct, (a) per my earlier argument, and (b) per it being a proper noun. The name of the house is "The LaLaurie House", not "LaLaurie House".  See also The Hague, The Lodge (Australia).  White House provides a contrary view in the article title but then if you scroll down to the section headings you'll see many (appropriately) start with "the".- DustFormsWords (talk) 08:16, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Images - I very much appreciate your advice about images and plan to act on it. However, I would prefer not to substantially rearrange the images at this stage as there is every chance of more suitable images emerging between now and any potential FAC, which would necessitate the arrangement being reviewed in any case.  I have looked at the Cathedral image you suggested but I am not convinced it is more than passingly relevant to this article.  A view of Royal Street or the French Quarter from the relevant period would be more appropriate.  I am also hopeful of turning up either a contemporary portrait of LaLaurie, or a modern artist's rendition that can be appropriated under fair use or commons licensing.  Your idea for a period map is a great one but will require some research to ensure I am using an appropriate map so I would again prefer to make this a long term plan rather than try and rush it for GAR. - DustFormsWords (talk) 08:23, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Response

 * Is it possible to expand the lead ever so slightly with material from the "House" section? In this way, the entire article would be summarized.
 * Done. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * If the LaLaurie house is correctly known as "The LaLaurie House" then this construction should be used rather than "The LaLaurie house".
 * Malleus Fatuorum has sidestepped this issue by renaming the section "The LaLaurie Mansion", which deals with your concern and agrees with the sources. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Most constructions I've seen use 'Later life and death' or a variant. See GAs Henry Wadsworth Longfellow (Later life and death}, Olaf the Peacock and Gebhard Truchsess von Waldburg (Later years), The Sleeping Girl of Turville (Later years and legacy). Some GAs use constructions such as 'Last years and death', 'Death', and variants. There seems to be little consistency and I cannot imagine there's a guideline on this. If you come across one, please let me know. In the meantime, use your preference.
 * Done (in that I've left it the way it was). - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:41, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I have little experience with the 'legality' of images used at Wikipedia. I'll request an image review.
 * ✅ "They all seem fine, either the copyright has expired, or they are freedom of panorama, I would prefer they were tagged as where appropriate so that they can be moved to commons which requires images to be free in the US and their country of origin, and thus allows them to be enjoyed by other projects Fasach Nua (talk) 12:28, 29 January 2011 (UTC)"


 * Only image captions that are complete sentences should end with a period. None of the captions here are complete sentences so none should end with a period.
 * Fixed. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

56tyvfg88yju (talk) 12:11, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * MOS: Article titles, headings, and sections states "Do not use a, an, or the as the first word ... unless by convention it is an inseparable part of a name" and then states "All of the guidance in Article titles immediately above applies to section headings as well". "The LaLaurie slaves" then is incorrect per MOS. "LaLaurie slaves" would accord with the MOS.
 * This policy seems to be valid; however, applying it here would have the consequence of creating an incorrect section header - the section does not deal with "LaLaurie slaves" but rather some' LaLaurie slaves. Do you have a suggestion as to how to resolve this dilemma - possibly by using a completely different section header? - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:40, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Never mind; the section really deals with the 1834 fire, so I've retitled it accordingly and thereby dodged the issue. - DustFormsWords (talk) 01:47, 31 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Very good. If you're satisfied, I'll pass the article. Let me know that you feel the work is done. 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 06:35, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm happy that the article now meets the GA criteria, so if you are too I'd suggest a pass is in order. However, your continued comments and suggestions for improving the article don't necessarily have to end at GA - feel free to continue pointing out areas for improvement.  I intend to come back and work on the images once I've got the article I'm currently working on ready to nominate for GA. - DustFormsWords (talk) 07:06, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you! the article is well written and, most importantly, appears to leave no question unanswered. Very thorough and very good work!

'''What is a good article? A good article is—'''

Well-written: (a) the prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

Meets the criteria. Well and correctly written.

Factually accurate and verifiable: (a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout; (b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;[2] and (c) it contains no original research.

Extensively and well cited.

Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

Excellent. Thorough. No question unanswered.

Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Well illustrated with both historical and contemporary material.

The article meets the criteria and is passed to GA. 56tyvfg88yju (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Note: The above GA review was done by a banned user in violation of ban and will need to be reviewed again. The new review may go below. –MuZemike 03:02, 20 June 2011 (UTC)