Talk:Patricia Banks Edmiston/GA1

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

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 15:19, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

I'll get this reviewed some time today. Hopefully we can get all of the Women in Green nominations reviewed before the event ends. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 15:19, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

, the review is posted below. Thebiguglyalien ( talk ) 18:24, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Spot checks:
 * Well-written
 * Uppercase Black, lowercase black, and African American are all fine, but the article should be consistent in which one is used.
 * Is her surname Edmiston or Banks Edmiston? This should also be consistent.
 * It's Banks Edmiston, but some sources use just Edmiston after introducing her full name. I changed all occurrences to Banks Edmiston.
 * She actively combated – "actively" doesn't add anything here.
 * paving the way – Avoid idioms
 * after seeking advice from Adam Clayton Powell Jr. – The reader should have a general idea of who this is and why he was involved without clicking the link.
 * The second paragraph under "legal complaint" doesn't really flow, and it reads more like a list of facts.
 * as "they have 570 employed hostesses and not one is a Negro," in fact none of the airline's 1,350 persons employed in a flight capacity were – Is there a conjunction missing here? It might be best to rewrite this sentence.
 * On May 6th, 1960 – Avoid ordinals in dates.
 * The last paragraph under "legal complaint" doesn't use her name at all. It just says "she" throughout.
 * Beginning in 1970, Banks Edmiston served as a counselor at New York City's Addicts Rehabilitation Center until 1972 – "Beginning in" and "until" are mismatched.
 * Emidston also dedicated her expertise as a member of the board of directors for the Black Flight Attendants of America. – I'm not sure what this is trying to say. Does her expertise mean her experience with the legal challenge?
 * Yes.
 * Edmiston practiced Shotokan and is a black belt holder – Is this supposed to be past tense and then present tense?
 * Yes, but I reworded for clarity.
 * Verifiable with no original research
 * The last paragraph under "legal complaint" doesn't use her name at all. It just says "she" throughout.
 * Beginning in 1970, Banks Edmiston served as a counselor at New York City's Addicts Rehabilitation Center until 1972 – "Beginning in" and "until" are mismatched.
 * Emidston also dedicated her expertise as a member of the board of directors for the Black Flight Attendants of America. – I'm not sure what this is trying to say. Does her expertise mean her experience with the legal challenge?
 * Yes.
 * Edmiston practiced Shotokan and is a black belt holder – Is this supposed to be past tense and then present tense?
 * Yes, but I reworded for clarity.
 * Verifiable with no original research
 * Yes, but I reworded for clarity.
 * Verifiable with no original research
 * Westbrook (2023):
 * Brooks (2023):
 * Close paraphrasing: The article says similar to other Black women at the time, encountered consistent rejections. The source says.
 * Should be permissible per WP:LIMITED.
 * Close paraphrasing: The article says Edmiston remembered facing violent threats following the verdict and had to seek law enforcement assistance to safeguard her well-being. The source says
 * I don't believe that constitutes close paraphrasing, but even so, should be covered by WP:LIMITED.
 * Close paraphrasing: The article says he pressure of needing to maintain a flawless record in order to preserve future prospects for other Black flight attendants, combined with the racial discrimination she encountered while flying in the Southern United States, exacted a significant emotional toll on Edmiston. The source says
 * WP:LIMITED
 * Barry (2007):
 * Ithaca Journal (1960):
 * New York Age (1959):

No issues.
 * Broad in its coverage
 * No information about her early life? Cole (2018) mentions a few things like where she was born.
 * Westbrook (2023) talks a little about her education, which is mostly omitted in the article.
 * Are there any sources mentioning anything she did 1961–1970?
 * None that I could find.
 * Neutral
 * None that I could find.
 * Neutral

No recent disputes.
 * Stable

Both images are public domain and suitably captioned.
 * Illustrated
 * Thank you very much for the review! I've responded to all your comments above. –– Formal Dude  (talk)  01:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * , looks pretty good overall, though I don't believe that WP:LIMITED applies here. My understanding is that it's for the simplest things like names and dates. Right now the text gives the impression that it was copied into the article and then the words were swapped for synonyms. The presentation in the article should be entirely independent from that of the source. If we disagree about whether this is close paraphrasing, we can always get a third opinion. One other note, the new "early life" section is very small. Could this be rearranged? It's common to combine "early life and education" if that's the approach you want to take. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 02:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm willing to work with you on the close paraphrasing, how do these alternatives look?
 * → However, she encountered consistent rejections, which was not uncommon for Black women in similar positions at the time.
 * → Edmiston had to seek law enforcement assistance to safeguard her well-being after facing violent threats following the verdict of her case.
 * → The stress of experiencing racial discrimination while flying in the Southern United States took a toll on Edmiston. This, along with the pressure she felt to maintain a flawless record in order to preserve future prospects for other Black flight attendants, caused Edmiston to resign from Capital Airlines in 1961.
 * As for the early life sections, those are frequently short, but I'm not opposed to rearranging, just not sure of the best way to do so. It could be combined with the next section, but then we'd have either an early life and education section that's only two sentences longer than the current early life section, or we'd have a section titled Early life, education, and career. I'm not sure if either of those are preferable to what we have now, let me know what you think. Maybe you have a better idea for restructuring. –– Formal Dude  (talk)  03:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, those all look good to me. For reorganizing, there are a few ways that it could be done; it's not a major issue, so I'm not too worried about it. A short "early life and education" section would still be an improvement. Alternatively, "legal complaint" and "after 1961" could be bumped up to level-2 headings, and then everything above "legal complaint" could be one section. Thebiguglyalien  ( talk ) 03:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Done! Thanks again for the review. Let me know if you have anything else. –– Formal Dude  (talk)  04:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)