Jump to content

Talk:Statue of Franklin Pierce/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA review

[edit]
Passed. RoySmith (talk) 00:29, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: JJonahJackalope (talk · contribs) 16:03, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 14:52, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Starting review... (looking at Special:Permalink/1269059130)

General text review

[edit]
  • In the 1820s, after graduating from Bowdoin College do we know the exact year he graduated?
    • The source I cited didn't specify an exact year, though his Wikipedia article specifies that he graduated in 1824. I can add an additional reference and add the exact year if you feel that that would improve the article, though as it stands currently, I don't know how specific we want to be with the background section. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It wouldn't be a show-stopper if it was unknown, but since we know it, it makes sense to use it. https://www.bowdoin.edu/about/history-traditions/historical-sketch.html looks like it would be a good source for that. RoySmith (talk) 21:16, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • heightening sectionalism explain briefly here what sectionism is.
  • Terms like "doughface" and "copperhead" need some brief in-line explanation so the reader doesn't have to click to find out what they mean.
    • I can add a footnote further defining these terms if you feel that that is necessary, but having reread the section, I don't know how to add additional information that would not seem redundant. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Right now you've got he was a doughface who supported the slave-owning interests of the Southern United States" which sounds like you're saying he's two things. 1) He was a doughface, and 2) he was a supporter of the south. I think what you intended was that the stuff after "who" explains what a doughface is, but it doesn't really read that way. Perhaps change it to he was a doughface (a supporter of the slave-owning interests of the Southern United States)? And some similar treatment with copperhead later on. RoySmith (talk) 21:25, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pierce died in 1869.[5][2] He was the first and only president to hail from New Hampshire.[6][7][3] It shouldn't take five citations to support these two basic facts. See WP:OVERCITE. Pick the one best for each fact and use that. Even better would be a single source which supports both facts, assuming one exists.
  • Chandler promised Democratic politicians in the state that, if they would support his measure, he would support their campaign for a statue of Pierce to be erected on the grounds of the New Hampshire State House in Concord, New Hampshire, though while the National Statuary Hall bills passed into law, Republican legislators blocked passage of the bill for the Pierce statue.[9] Break this up into at least two sentences. Also, you've got several sentences in a row all cited to the same source ([9] in the version I'm looking at). These can all be coalesced into a single citation at the end.
    • I edited the above section so as to increase the number of sentences present. Additionally, I coalesced the citations present into a single citation, affixed to the end of the stretch of sentences. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • led to a split in the Republican Representatives Representatives should not be capitalized (multiple places in the article).
  • opposed the bill for similar reasons to in past debates I think either "to" or "in" works, but not both together.
  • the Daily Patriot floated the idea of a public subscription campaign link to Subscription (finance)
  • New Hampshire Governor Samuel D. Felker. WP:SEAOFBLUE]
  • "a superior wisdom, an admirable level-headedness in a hyper-emotional age, and a practical political sense more in tune with humans as they were, rather than abolition's idealistic and dogmatic fantasies on how they should be" a long quote like this might work better with {{blockquote}}
  • Lukeman consulted Kirk D. Pierce, Pierce's nephew I'd be explicit that he was "Franklin Pierce's nephew", to avoid confusing the reader.
  • installation and design of several nearby electroliers say what an electrolier is.
  • the design of which the committee accepted.[29][25][6] as above, just pick the one best source for this.
    • I made an edit to this section so as to reduce the number of references. -JJonahJackalope (talk)
  • In total, the monument cost $14,500 (equivalent to $455,000 in 2024).[25][6][10] and here too, one source probably suffices.
  • Governor Felker suggested inviting a Southern Democrats I'm not sure what this is supposed to be, but there's a plural/singular mismatch.
  • "a serious error, serving only to revive a sectional feeling which has happily subsided ... These old charges of copperheadism [sic] against the President, unjust and unreasonable, have now somewhat subsided, and I should think it was hardly the best of judgment to revive them again".[28] use {{blockquote}}
  • The monument was dedicated on November 25, 1914,[2][10][7][note 3] Oh my, three sources plus a note to verify a date?
    • The note does not verify the date, but provides additional information pertaining to the date. Additionally, I have made an edit to this section to reduce the number of references from three to one. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 55 inches (140 cm) by 38 inches (97 cm) This would be better as 55 by 38 inches (140 by 97 cm) (and similar later on)
  • Per MOS:ALLCAPS all the inscriptions should be converted to title case.
  • Some of the long notes (especially note 2) seem like they should be in-line with the main text. Why are they set off as notes?
    • I included several footnotes in part because I was a bit concerned with the length of the article, and while I felt that excluding the information presented in the footnotes would not detrimentally damage the article, I felt that it would still be for the best to include the information, much of which either clarifies the information presented in the body or adds additional context to help readers gain a fuller understanding of the topic. As far as how much is too much and where to place some of the information presented, I'm definitely open to hearing suggestions and we can discuss the matter further if you wish. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, that does it for a basic read-through. Overall, a very nice piece of writing. More to come per WP:GACR. RoySmith (talk) 15:45, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @RoySmith and @JJonahJackalope! I did some of the GA copy-edit points to save time for nominator, you may strike them out if it's good, ping me otherwise. RFNirmala (talk) 14:39, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RFNirmala thank you for that, but @JJonahJackalope I'd still like to hear from you. RoySmith (talk) 14:46, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other items per GACR

[edit]
  • No evidence of copyright violations
  • All images appear to be appropirately licensed, relevant to the article, and properly captioned.
  • Except as noted above, no significant MOS violations
  • Article broadly covers the main topic
  • No problems with neutrality or stability.
  • Sources all appear to be WP:RS and properly cited with in-line citations (but note my issues with MOS:OVERCITE in a few places, and I may not have found them all so please check to see if there's more of these).

Next up is a source spot-check.

Hmmm, looks like I'll be a little delayed completing this. Please ping me if I haven't gotten back to this in a few days. RoySmith (talk) 21:08, 6 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spot check

[edit]

Claim 1

[edit]
  • As president, Pierce became embroiled in controversy due to his support of the Kansas–Nebraska Act , which many anti-slavery advocates in the Democratic Party criticized for allowing the spread of slavery and for heightening sectionalism.[1]
    • Verified

Claim 2

[edit]
  • At the time of his death, historians' opinions of Pierce's legacy were mostly negative.[5]
    • Verified

Claim 3

[edit]
  • the Republican Party was the dominant political party in New Hampshire and counted among their members many Union Army veterans, including members of the Grand Army of the Republic.[7]
    • Verified

Claim 4

[edit]
  • During the 1909 legislative session, the Republican-dominated legislature again rejected a bill to fund a public statue of Pierce, as well as a different bill which would have honored Pierce and his father by naming a bridge across the Merrimack River in Concord the "Pierce Memorial Bridge".[11]
    • Verified

Claim 5

[edit]
  • In New Hampshire, Democrats took control of both chambers of the legislature and the governorship,[7]
    • Verified

Claim 6

[edit]
  • Local newspapers argued that a more economical way of honoring Pierce would be in the naming of a new government building or mountain, and in February of that year, in partial response, the government passed a bill naming one of the White Mountains Mount Pierce.[20]

Claim 7

[edit]
  • Lukeman was considered a protégé of both French and fellow sculptor Augustus Saint-Gaudens.[28]
    • It's really page 249, and only a protege of St. Gaudens and a friend of French, but basically verified.

Claim 8

[edit]
  • Casting of the statue was carried out by Jno. Williams, Inc. of New York City.[10]
    • verified

Claim 9

[edit]
  • Politician Clarence E. Carr served as the president of the event, which featured speeches from Oliver Ernesto Branch , Aldrich, Chandler, Felker, and Carr himself, among others.[33]
    • Basically verfied, but I'd find another word other than "president" to describe Carr. In the context of this article, "president" pretty much mean Franklin Pierce and to use it for somebody else is confusing. Also, the source says "Oliver W. Branch", not "Oliver Ernesto Branch". Chandler doesn't get mentioned until page 257, so adjust the page numbers.
      • I'm not sure what word to substitute for "president" in this case. That is the terminology used by the source, and in my opinion, I do not believe a reader of the article would confuse the use of the word here to refer to Pierce. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Claim 10

[edit]
  • The statue weighs 2,230 pounds (1,010 kg) and stands approximately 8 feet (2.4 m) tall, with side measurements of 55 inches (140 cm) by 38 inches (97 cm), while the granite pedestal supporting the sculpture is approximately 63 inches (160 cm) tall and has side measurements of 62 inches (160 cm) by 48 inches (120 cm).[10]
    • verified.

Summary

[edit]

OK, that does it for me. There's a few minor nits on the source spot-checks, but it certainly passes that. Ping me when you've resolved the other list of issues. RoySmith (talk) 02:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS, I'm mildly concerned that this relies so heavily on a single source (and even more so, on just two sources), but that's not a WP:GACR, so just an observation. RoySmith (talk) 02:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@JJonahJackalope I have not seen any response from you in the almost two days since I began this review. I'm placing this on hold for 7 days. RoySmith (talk) 10:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Terribly sorry, I'm on vacation this weekend, but should have all your points addressed once I get back to my computer on Monday. JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RoySmith:, I just wanted to reach out to let you know that I have made some edits to the article to address some of the points you raised in the Good Article review you performed a few days ago. Apologies again for the late response, as I was on an aforementioned vacation. Thanks for initiating this review process, and if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns about this article, please do not hesitate to ping me. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 17:33, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, thanks. I left a couple more comments about specific items in-line. As far as the extensive notes go, I don't think they're wrong, and certainly not contrary to WP:GACR, but I think you'd do better to pull some of it up into the main text of the article. It also looks like you've got two different references named FOOTNOTEConnolly2013248. I'm getting an error

Cite error: The named reference "FOOTNOTEConnolly2013248" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page)

on what's currently refs 17 and 19. So you need to track that down.
Overall, this is a good read and appears to be well researched. Once you've fixed up the few remaining items, I don't see any further impediments to completing the GA review. RoySmith (talk) 21:35, 10 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@RoySmith:, it seems that the issue with references 17 and 19 was due to the fact that some of the references for those pages were using "pp" instead of "p", which has been fixed. I also made some edits to the article related to the discussion above. Let me know what you think, and again, if you have any questions, comments, or concerns, please reach out. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This all looks good now. A nice piece of work, thank you for contributing it. RoySmith (talk) 00:28, 12 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Statue_of_Franklin_Pierce/GA1&oldid=1280023691"