Talk:Harlan Page Davidson/GA1

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

Reviewer: Etriusus (talk · contribs) 03:05, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll take the lead on this review. Etriusus (talk) 03:05, 10 July 2021 (UTC)


 * This seems to be a remarkably interesting topic, the page appears to be stable and predominantly written by Doug Coldwell. I'll begin with a few cursory notes then move on to specification. My preliminary assessment is that the format seems a bit strange but otherwise it looks good.

1. It is reasonably well written the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct
 * It complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead, layout, and word choice.
 * The writing is excellently done, there are a number of clarifications I went ahead and made but these were minor and didn't warrant pinging you on. I would prefer a bit of a layout change in some sections (see G.3 for more details). Etriusus (talk) 04:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable It contains a reference section, presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; All inline citations are from reliable sources;
 * It contained no original research;
 * It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism.
 * There appears to be no noticeable instances of original research in this section, I will take a second pass through the article prior to fully checking off that portion. There were a small number of reference issues that do need to be addressed. The strange format of the Ref and Footnote section isn't failing criteria per se but should be cleaned up before this article will qualify for Featured status. Etriusus (talk) 04:36, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage
 * It addresses the main aspects of the topic;
 * It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.
 * The lack of content in the personal life section holds this section back from full marks. This issue is both an aesthetic and a coverage problem. My recommendation is to merge this information with the Midlife section, maybe also including the achievements section as well. I'm impartial on the achievement section so I'll let you go with either option (1. merging it, 2. leave it as a stand-alone piece) Etriusus (talk) 04:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

4. It has a neutral point of view
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to different points of view.
 * This one almost goes without saying, there are no biases noted Etriusus (talk) 04:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

5. It is stable,
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of any ongoing edit war or content dispute.
 * Page is stable, no ongoing edit wars. It's impressive how much you've expanded this article. Etriusus (talk) 03:35, 10 July 2021 (UTC)

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * Images are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content;
 * Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
 * Pics seem good to me. I'm actually impressed on what you managed to dig up in terms of photos.Etriusus (talk) 03:47, 10 July 2021 (UTC)


 * My initial assessment: excellently written, stable, and nearly ready for GA status.

Recommendations
1) The designation between Midlife, Degrees and Honors, and Personal Life sections is a bit cluttered, either these should be condensed into fewer sections or reorganized into chronological order. 'Degrees and Honors' can be justified as its own section but 'Personal Life' should either be expanded or merged into the surrounding text.

2) Can you repair the link for this source? "Northwestern Military and Naval Academy". Chicago Tribune. Chicago, Illinois. November 20, 1935. p. 20.

3)The section 'Societies and Clubs' is unsourced, you list 'Dodge, Grenville M. (1898). Norwich University; Her History, Graduates, Roll of Honor. Rumford Press.' prior to the list of clubs provided but I cannot find the actual text referencing what clubs he was involved with.

4) Due to this individual serving as the founder and president of Northwestern Military and Naval Academy, this page may additionally fall under WikiProject Schools and WikiProject Military history. This is outside the scope of a GA review but I considered it important enough to mention.
 * I took care of this, the article class won't matter since this article will pass after edits are finished. Etriusus (talk) 04:47, 10 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks for review. I get started on the issues as soon as possible. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:12, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * All Issues have been addressed. Can You take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * FYI It so happens that I have created an article on his son Royal Page Davidson that I submitted GAN 11 May 2021. It is related history on the Northwestern Military and Naval Academy. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:37, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks good, well done on this article. Since I'm here I might as well go ahead and hit that other GAN page posted. Etriusus (talk) 00:32, 11 July 2021 (UTC)