User talk:Jmidgaze/sandboxMaryStewartCutting

Hi, a few notes about your question and work so far. As far as article titles go, here are the Wikipedia policies. If you have two people with similar names, the first preference is to use an alternative name. So even if you had two people who both went by "Jane Smith" most commonly, they might instead be titled as "Jane A. Smith" and "Jane S. Smith", even if neither of these women published using their middle initial. Less preferable is what is called parenthetical disambiguation. So that would be "Jane Smith (sociologist)" and "Jane Smith (author)". In this case, I think it would be fine to differentiate between these two women as "Mary Stewart Cutting" and "Mary Stewart Cutting Jr.", though I'm not sure if that is necessarily an improvement. We would just need to do some rearranging if that's the course you want to follow.

Another option would be to turn Mary Stewart Cutting into a disambiguation page. It would look similar to Catherine Jones. So readers would land on this page and then decide which Mary Stewart Cutting they were looking for.

Regardless of what the article is titled as, the first instance of the subject's name in the article is their full name. See Marie Curie for example, which begins as "Marie Skłodowska Curie". So even if Mary Stewart Doubleday Cutting was moved to the article title "Mary Stewart Cutting", the first instance of her name in the article would be "Mary Stewart Doubleday Cutting".

As far as evaluating the article, you can do this formally or informally. You would go to the talk page, Talk:Mary Stewart Doubleday Cutting. Then you would edit the article. It's currently a "start" class article, but say you think it should be a C class. Find this line of code at the top:

And then change "class=Start" to "class=C"

If you wanted to leave a more informal assessment of the quality, you could click "new section" and leave some notes about specific parts of the article. I noticed, for example, that several of the paragraphs end without citations.

Regarding linking to online versions of books, I don't think it really matters what website you link to. I think Wikipedia has a slight preference of using a free website over a subscription-based website, but if there are two free websites, then it doesn't really matter.

It's good to remove inaccurate photos! Even if you don't have something to substitute into the daughter's article. All content on Wikipedia should be cited. If you want to add or change someone's birth or death dates, you should add a citation to a reliable source. It's fine to de-emphasize her relationship to her grandfather--Wikipedia is not a genealogical repository!

As for the NY Times link, it is 100% fine to cite and link to a subscription-only reliable source, or things that are otherwise behind paywalls.

Regarding your draft so far, it is preferable to omit the comma before "Jr"/"Sr" according to the Wikipedia style guide.

Let me know if you have further questions! Elysia (Wiki Ed) (talk) 22:33, 6 February 2020 (UTC)