Talk:Edmund Andros/GA1

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

Reviewer: Dana boomer (talk · contribs) 19:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi! I'll be reviewing this article for GA status and should have the full review up later today. Dana boomer (talk) 19:44, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


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

Overall a nice article. However, there are several areas where terminology needs to be explained better, or where more context/explanation is needed. Also a few areas that need sourcing... When the above issues are resolved, the article should be about ready for GA status. I've already answered your post on my talk page, but just to double-check here - yes, it's fine if the review is on hold through next week - holds of a week or even a little more are fairly common. Please let me know if you have any further questions, Dana boomer (talk) 01:38, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Per WP:Lead, an article of this length should have a lead of three to four paragraphs that summarize the article as a whole.
 * Done.  DCI  talk
 * Standardize, either Andros' or Andros's.
 * Done.  DCI  talk
 * A couple of short, choppy paragraphs in Early life section. The section would read more smoothly if these were expanded or combined.
 * Done.  DCI  talk
 * Early life, what is a "gentleman in ordinary"?
 * Changed to "courtier".  DCI  talk
 * King Phillip's War, what is a "colonial for Indian affairs,"?
 * Added "colonial department for Indian affairs". Clarified the sentence dealing with the appointment of Robert Livingston the Elder as the agency's first secretary.   DCI  talk
 * This does not appear to have been done? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * King Phillip's War, "Andros annoyed Massachusetts fishermen by restricting their use of the duke's land for drying fish." First, this is a big jump from the previous few sentences, where you are talking about the Indians and building forts. Second, did this have any bearing on him as governor? Every governor annoys some group of people with just about every decision s/he makes...
 * Perhaps this is better deleted.  DCI  talk
 * Is it important to his term as governor? What weight do sources give to this incident? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Here's my rationale for including it: by the time Andros became governor of the Dominion of New England, he had already acquired a negative reputation in Massachusetts and Connecticut. This sort of thing is one example; the disagreement over how to handle King Philip's War was another.  Magic ♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I see, that makes sense. Are there any sources that actually offer that sort of analysis? In other words, are there any sources that spell out that incidents such as this gave him a bad reputation which didn't help during his time as governor of the Dominion? If so, it would make it more clear to really spell it out, rather than just leaving it up to the reader to infer from the multiple examples scattered through the text. Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Uncertain. Lustig (who has written on New York colonial history in addition to biographing Andros) may make this assessment, but her works on the subject are not particularly convenient for me to access.  Historians who cover that period of American colonial history might also do so.  Magic ♪piano 22:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Southern border disputes, what are "Lenape sachems"?
 * Sachem is a fairly widely-used term for Eastern Indian chiefs. I'm not sure this needs to be changed.   DCI  talk
 * It may be widely known in some areas of the world, but it is completely unknown in others. I have added a link to sachem and clarified that it essentially means chief. Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Southern border disputes, "Andros offered them protection from their English enemies". Wasn't Andros English? So how come he wasn't the enemy?
 * Does the new wording seem any better?  DCI  talk
 * I'm still confused as to why they had enemies among the English if they had (apparently, from the rest of the section) been fairly friendly with the various governors... Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * There was significant inter-colonial rivalry going on at the time. The colonies were vying with each other for (1) land and (2) control (or claims of control) over native populations.  Andros was rare among colonial administrators in actually treating the natives with some respect, something that annoyed expansionist settlers.  Magic ♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * That makes things way more clear. Do we have any sources that explain this? Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This material (which is somewhat messy to explain because of the number of actors and issues involved) should be covered by any good colonial history that covers Maryland/Pennsylvania/New Jersey relations in this time. I'm not sure how explicitly Andros' distinctiveness in managing colonial-Indian relations would be addressed outside works on either Andros or those relations (e.g. books about the Convenant Chain).  Magic ♪piano 22:23, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Southern border disputes, last two sentences. I'm not sure why these need to be in parentheses.
 * Fixed.  DCI  talk
 * Control of the Jerseys, what are "commissions under his authority."?
 * Control of the Jerseys - there is a hidden comment in this section that says "TODO other domestic politics". I would be interested to know what information was/is going to be put here.
 * I am not the main contributor to this article, and have no idea why that tag is present. The current information seems adequate; I don't feel that this is the most important chapter of Andros' life.   DCI  talk
 * The TODO represents a placeholder I placed for adding detail on New York colonial politics. Events that led Dutch patroons and/or English interests to work against him, for example.  Magic ♪piano 22:08, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
 * MP, do you feel that this is something that needs to be in the article for it to be considered "broad", or is it more of a "comprehensive" thing? Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It probably ought to have a sentence or two.  Magic ♪piano 03:31, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Recall - This section is very abrupt, and the next section begins with him being appointed governor of another area. What happened in his interview with the duke? What did he do in the five years between ending his term as governor of New York and picking up as governor of New England? If he was in England this whole time, did his wife stay in New York the whole time?
 * Dominion of New England, "The Lords of Trade had insisted that he govern without an assembly, something he expressed concern over while his commission was being drafted." More on this subject would be interesting. Who were the Lords of Trade? Why did they want him to govern without an assembly? Why did he want to govern with an assembly?
 * The Lords of Trade were the precursor to the Board of Trade. They were a special committee of the Privy Council that helped to administer the colonies by managing and promoting the "plantations" in America.   DCI  talk
 * OK, I see you've linked them earlier. However, that still doesn't answer the rest of my questions about governing with/without an assembly. Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Town meeting laws, last sentence. I'm not sure why this needs to be in parentheses.
 * I had other issues with this statement, and revised accordingly.  DCI  talk
 * Land title reform, what are "writs of intrusion"?
 * Indian diplomacy, "shipping the captives to Boston." Why did they ship them to Boston? What did they think Boston was going to do with them?
 * Revolt, "tried to escape to the Rose." Why did he try to escape to this particular ship? Was it a British ship? What was it doing in Boston? How did he get word for them to sent a boat for him?
 * This was a concern on the FAC for 1689 Boston revolt, as well. Does this way of saying it explain it any better?   DCI  talk
 * Not really, as it doesn't really answer any of my questions... All that the addition tells me is what kind of ship it was and that it was anchored (as opposed to being tied up to the dock?). Perhaps something along the lines of "escaped to the British frigate Rose, anchored offshore as part of an attempt to suppress a potential revolt" or whatever it was doing out there. Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Revolt - What happened after he was released by the court? What happened to the Dominion of New England and why wasn't he sent back there?
 * The new final paragraph should clarify this.  DCI  talk
 * Governor of Virginia, "(The exact reasons are unclear: one contemporary wrote that Nicholson "especially [resented] Sir Edmund Andros, against whom he has a particular pique on account of some earlier dealings".)" I'm not sure why this needs to be in parentheses.
 * Fixed.  DCI  talk
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * Spotchecks of a few references show no concerns with copyvio, sourcing not covering content, etc.
 * A couple of areas that need references:
 * First paragraph of Southern border disputes
 * Last sentence of Recall section
 * Last sentence of Church of England section
 * Please don't strike - leave that up to the reviewer (me) for when I feel the issue is corrected. In this case, it isn't - the quote ("horrid Popish plot") is a significant part of why this sentence needs a reference. Dana boomer (talk) 20:59, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Last paragraph of Revenue laws
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * Licensing is good, but the images are clumped together at the bottom of the article, leading to a large wall of text at the top of the article and minor sandwiching at the bottom. Could they be spread out more?
 * I'm not sure there's anything I can do about the images. The content they depict is all located in that section of the article.   DCI  talk 01:18, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Then are there any images that we can put in the top part of the article? It's really wall-of-texty right now, with nothing to break up the visual.
 * Indeed. Here are a few suggestions: images of Elizabeth of Bohemia, Metacom, George Carteret, James Blair. Images related to King Philip's War.  Images exist (I don't know if they're on Wikipedia or Commons) depicting the famous Connecticut "Charter Oak" incident.  The Nicholson image can be moved to the Virginia section.  Magic ♪piano 03:14, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Indeed. Here are a few suggestions: images of Elizabeth of Bohemia, Metacom, George Carteret, James Blair. Images related to King Philip's War.  Images exist (I don't know if they're on Wikipedia or Commons) depicting the famous Connecticut "Charter Oak" incident.  The Nicholson image can be moved to the Virginia section.  Magic ♪piano 03:14, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * I've struck the issues above that I feel are resolved and left several replies on other issues. Do we have a timeline on when the remainder of the issues will be addressed? Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 02:20, 28 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Is work still ongoing on this article? At this point, the review has been on hold for almost three weeks, and little has been done in the last week or so. There are still enough things at issue here that I will have to fail the article if they are not addressed... Dana boomer (talk) 18:40, 31 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, due to the lack of work and response from the nominator in the past couple of weeks, I am going to have to fail the article at this time. I feel that the article is close to GA status, but needs some additional work on references and prose in order to get it the last little bit. When and if you renominate it at GAN, please feel free to ping me and I'll be happy to take the review up again, if you wish me to. Magicpiano, thank you for your replies above over the past few days - I realize that you did the majority of the original work on this article and have been a help on this review, and that is much appreciated. Dana boomer (talk) 03:31, 4 January 2012 (UTC)