Talk:William Jarvis (merchant)

Downgraded to C-class
The primary point of failure is the referencing (Criteria 1). There are several large sections/paragraphs where there is 0 or only one footnote supporting the claims. Typically, B class articles are very specifically footnoted: with many, if not every, sentence having a footnote to a WP:RS, and if those works are multi-page works, typically to a specific page or group of pages. Additionally, the lead is not sufficient summary of all of the content in the article (per Criteria 3). At times, there is also very odd colloquial language throughout article (i.e. "snapped up", "snagged") that wouldn't be appropriate for international or non-native English readers, the references are very inconsistently formatted (I recommend WP:CS1), and the legacy section feels inappropriately short for something that radically changed the economy and landscape of Vermont and New England. Collectively, these lead to a state of quality for the article less than the typical B-Class article I have read in the last couple years. 5-8 years ago, it might have been a B class -- but not any more.Sadads (talk) 17:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC) — Preceding text originally posted&#32;on User talk:Sadads&#32;([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sadads&diff=prev&oldid=779394896#Assessment_of_William_Jarvis_.28merchant.29 diff])&#32;by Sadads (talk&sdot;contribs)&#32;17:23, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for moving my comment! I didn't read your request very well. Sadads (talk) 20:03, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
 * No worries! Thanks for taking the time to reply in the first place. Ibadibam (talk) 20:10, 8 May 2017 (UTC)