Wikipedia:Peer review/John William Finn/archive1

John William Finn
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I intend to submit this article for good article assessment. Before that I would like other editors to take a look at the article, and provide suggestions for improvement for it to pass GAR, and possibly conduct some copy editing while reviewing the article.

Thanks, RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 02:13, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments by Ian Rose
 * Prose: Took the liberty of copyediting, as is my wont -- feel free to discuss any of it.
 * Structure:
 * I moved the short Additional Honors section info to Later Life, to make a Later Life and Legacy section -- I think this improves the flow.
 * Another thing that would improve the flow considerably is moving the Awards and Decorations section to after the Later Life section, i.e. before or after the MoH Citation section. However, you have a problem with the Awards and Decorations section anyway in that nothing apart from the MoH is cited in the text. Unless you can cite his receipt of these medals, they need to be deleted (if it were me I wouldn't include this picture-book style of award ribbons cited or uncited but I know US military articles often have them).
 * Referencing:
 * Since everything in your References section seems to be online, you may as well lose the entries there, and just include their retrieval dates in the citations.
 * Looks to me like you have a dead link in your ELs.
 * Supporting materials: Image licensing looks okay.
 * Content/detail: Looks adequate for GA-level, though I'd be interested to know if there was anything to add to the bit about his membership of the John Birch Society.
 * In short, I'd say this has the makings of a GA if the above points are addressed. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:44, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * I have implemented the changes recommended above, please see this diff, and let me know if there is anything additional I should do. Thanks for the C/E BTW.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:18, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, satisfied with all that, I think it's about GA quality now -- just tweaked the position of See Also to where it normally goes in articles. I assume nothing more about the Birch Society, if so fair enough, however I note in the short bio you used to cite his medals (dang, I was hoping they'd be none and the ribbons'd have to go!) that he was the first MoH recipient of the war -- unless you have other sources that contradict this, be worth mentioning I think - if not in the lead then at least in the main body, say after the bit about when the decoration was pinned on him. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:19, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I have added more content, all verified with RSs and added the first recipient content, please review this diff to see the change.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 17:12, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Cool, I tweaked a bit. Only remaining hting is purely formatting: for some reason the table of awards under the ribbons is now off-centre (I mean off-center!); it seemed to occur with this edit, not sure why... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:31, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Appears good on my screen. I will nominate for GA. Thanks a bunch!--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 20:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)