Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Joseph Moir/1

Joseph Moir edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Endorse fail. Manifestly fails 3a, as well as having problems with sourcing and prose. I have noted close paraphrasing issues on the reassessment talk page, but where the article deviates from the source material, it seems to introduce errors or suggest unsourced conclusions: "dropping molten lead through a sieve at the top of the tower and by the time it hit the water at the bottom it was cold and spherical in shape" (a "sieve"? "cold"?) and "The date on the token is 1850, but this is the date of the establishment of his business" (and only one possible explanation). Geometry guy 23:56, 1 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The GA nomination for this article was declined, and the sole reason given was that it was too short. The reviewer referred to GA criterion 3a. However, this criterion explicitly allows shorter articles (footnote 3). So the reason I would like to put this to a community review (apart from getting this article to GA status) is for the community to make a judgement on the correct interpretation of criterion 3a. What is the minimum length for a GA article? Is there one? In any case, I thought this one would have made it. St Anselm (talk) 22:36, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

StAnselm is incorrect. The article was not failed because of its length but because it does not cover the major topics of its subject, GA criterion 3a. Malleus Fatuorum 23:03, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Do not list The article does not cover major aspects of the subject, and as a result is extremely short. If this is as much as you can write about him, then I would seriously consider merging it. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:40, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What major aspects does it fail to cover? St Anselm (talk) 04:49, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me reword that. While it may touch on major aspects, it does not delve into them very much. For example, there is nothing about his education or what influenced him to build. There must be more information about him; I suggest you have a look in your local library's archives. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Adabow and Malleus are correct. There are important aspects of the subject's life which aren't covered by the article. For example, one source mentions discusses a portion of Moir's life by saying:

A prominent businessman, Moir was active in Hobart’s civic affairs between 1846 and 1873, a year before his death. He revisited Britain in 1849 ‘to arrange to carry on an ironmonger’s business’, returning to Hobart with a stock of hardware items and opening a store with his brother at ‘Economy House’ in Murray Street.

Ommissions like this mean that the article does not currently meet criterion 3a. Not to fret; with a small amount of work the article can be expanded to cover all major topics and will be able to meet GA standards. Majoreditor (talk) 18:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]