Wikipedia:Peer review/James Tod/archive1

James Tod
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because:
 * I am not 100% sure that the organisation is optimal, since some points are introduced in one place but discussed more deeply in another
 * There is quite a complex backstory to the subject, in terms of his worldview, and I would appreciate feedback regarding the depth of coverage in this regard
 * Just a general check prior to a GAN run. Three admins (therefore, s/b experienced!) have commented positively but it has been significantly expanded in the last two or three days. Subject to my second point, I do not anticipate further expansion.

Thanks, Sitush (talk) 07:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Thank you for your work on this most interesting article. I find the "Worldview" section especially interesting in that it explains to me a kind of imperial thinking that I'd not read about before. I have limited knowledge of India and its history, and I find this account fascinating. Here are my suggestions:

Infobox
 * I'd suggest adding an infobox, either infobox person or another from the list of possibilities at WikiProject Biography/Infoboxes.

Map
 * Readers unfamiliar with the geography of early 18th-century India would probably find a map quite helpful. For example, where is the Sindia mentioned in "who had been appointed as Envoy and Resident to a royal court in Sindia"? Or, rather, where did the peripatetic court usually reside? What did Tod mean by "central India"? Would it be possible to find, scan, and upload his topographic map from a book no longer protected by copyright? Where was Marwar? Rajputana? Where were Mughal and Maratha in relation to Rajputana?


 * Tried & cannot find a PD copy, which seems bizarre to me. Have appealed on the India project talk page. It is printed in Freitag's biography but I am wary of copyright (specifically, derivative). - Sitush (talk) 00:25, 12 August 2011 (UTC)

Background
 * Thinking about the map made me want to know a bit more about Tod's educational background. What did he study, and where? How did he know how to make maps that included geology as well as topography? Where did his ideas about nation-states come from? Was romantic nationalism taught in school? Was it something that would have been reinforced during his military training? Where did he learn how to do research and how to write? He was largely self-taught in some areas such as philology, it seems, but what did his early formal studies include? Who reviewed his work before publication? Did he collaborate with other historians and scholars?


 * There is no extant knowledge regarding his education, beyond that already stated. I have added a note to this effect. Annals was apparently self-published but I need to confirm this before adding. - Sitush (talk) 17:45, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

Lead


 * "died in 1835 aged 44" - His birth and death dates in the first sentence are separated by 53 years. Something's amiss with the numbers.


 * D'oh, an inherited statement. Fixed, per ODNB. - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * "Tod's major literary works have been criticised, both in contemporary and modern literature, as containing inaccuracies and bias." - "Contemporary" is vague, I think, because it can mean contemporary then, or it can mean "modern".


 * Yes, it was confusing, Now fixed by simply removing it. - Sitush (talk) 19:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * "However, they are highly regarded in some areas of India, with the Maharana Mewar Charitable Foundation naming an award after him in 1997, and it was for some time widely read by British colonial officials in India." - In this sentence, "it" is ambiguous. It does not refer to "award", and it does not echo "they", which in turn refers to "works".


 * Yes, it was confusing, Now fixed. - Sitush (talk) 19:52, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Worldview
 * "the Rajputs had merely swapped the onerous overlordship of one government by that of... ". - Shouldn't that be "for that of" rather than "by that of"?


 * Fixed. Spotted this while you were reviewing. - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * "saw the system as one one that prevented achievement of true nationhood". _ "one one" is a typo.


 * Fixed. - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Reputation
 * A minor point: nothing should be linked from within a direct quotation. "Philology" should be unlinked in the phrase "excursions into philology".


 * Will do. - Sitush (talk) 19:41, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

Bibliography
 * Another minor point: ISBNs should include the hyphens. A handy ISBN converter lives here.


 * Done. - Sitush (talk) 21:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Books should include the place of publication as well as the publisher. That kind of information as well as ISBN and OCLC numbers and other data can often be found via WorldCat.


 * Done. - Sitush (talk) 21:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)


 * Was already aware. - Sitush (talk) 21:05, 8 August 2011 (UTC)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:24, 8 August 2011 (UTC)