Ernest Joyce edit
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I am requesting a peer review for this biographical article, which has been worked up from scratch. It deals with a somewhat controversial and unusual Antarctic explorer, a sort of Harry McNish (FA) figure, competent in his way, but often at odds with authority. Unlike the strong, silent heroes of Antarctic lore, Joyce was a tremendous boaster, who aggrandized his exploits and promoted himself as a hero. Yet he was undoubtedly a man to be trusted in the field, and brave, too—he received the Albert Medal for Lifesaving. I'd appreciate some general feedback, and any suggestions for improvement.
Thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: I apologize I have been so slow in reviewing this - it is very good and while I have some suggestions they are nit picks.
- A bit awkward From a humble seafaring background he began his naval career as a boy seaman in 1891, and ten years later joined Captain Scott's Discovery Expedition, 1901–04, as an Able Seaman. perhaps this would be better He came from a humble seafaring background, began his naval career as a boy seaman in 1891, and ten years later joined Captain Scott's Discovery Expedition, 1901–04, as an Able Seaman.
- I agree that your suggested rewording is better
- Perhaps briefly identify Huntford in Roland Huntford sums him up as a "strange mixture of fraud, flamboyance and ability"[7]
- Done: "Polar chronicler..." (I don't want to call him an historian, because his objectivity in certain matters has been questioned. He is reckoned a good source on matters unconnected with Captain Scott).
- Also a bit awkward He was born at Bognor, England in, it is thought, 1875, but the exact date is not known.[8] Perhaps just It is thought that he was born in 1875 at Bognor, England, but the exact date is not known.[8]
- Agreed and changed
- I generally think the same ref for two or more consecutive sentences can just be one ref at the end (as long as nothing is too controversial or a quote), see ...he received a vocational education that would fit him for a lower-deck career in the Royal Navy.[11] Leaving the school in 1891, he joined the navy, aged fifteen, as a boy seaman, progressing during the next ten years to Ordinary Seaman and then Able Seaman.[11] Why not just the second note 11?
- Agreed and done
- There are also some places where the footnote is in the middle of a sentence, not at the end of a phrase or after punctuation, as is more the custom, such as and in another version[37] Joyce was dropped when Mawson reduced his expedition from three shore parties to two.
- Done in this case - on the lookout for others
- Any idea how much money was involved in this To join the expedition, Joyce bought his release from the Navy ... would it help to include it if known?
- Money details aren't in the main sources. I don't think this information is essential to the article, but it would be interesting to know, so I'll keep looking.
- First mention of Great Ice Barrier does not identify it as the Ross Ice Shelf - the second mention does this nicely
- Shifted explanation to first mention
- Would it be worth using Image:Mackintosh and Spencer-Smith.jpg in this article in The Depot-laying journey section - assume Joyce is either pictured or took the picture
- This image is actually a drawing done after the event. I've put it in, but I am conscious of the need to avoid crowding the text, so it's pretty small.
- I think it might help to briefly expain why fresh meat cures scurvy and what snow blindness is
- I've linked snow blindness - and also frostbite. As to the fresh meat thing, this is covered by a slight textual change, and by an explanatory footnote (so as not to interrupt the main text).
Hope this helps, and let me know when this is at FAC as I will support, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:10, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for these useful comments and suggestions, which I have generally adopted. I was a little uncertain about this article's FA-worthiness, but as the Harry McNish precedent shows, minor polar figures can become FAs. If you think it is a suitable candidate, I'll certainly nominate it. Brianboulton (talk) 09:18, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
- It seems well beyond GA and I think it is FA. You might want to ask someone else to be sure, but I think it is FA worthy. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:54, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
Finetooth comments:
This is a delightful and easy read about an interesting character. I changed a few bits of punctuation as I read, but I didn't see anything big to grumble about. Here is a very short list of suggestions for improvement.
- I think this complex sentence in the Nimrod section might work better if re-cast or broken into two sentences: "In the ensuing months, he made further support journeys, increasing the depots to ensure the southern party's eventual safe return, including a cache of luxury foods taken to Minna Bluff, which earned Wild's spontaneous praise."
- This one in the Imperial Trans-Antarctic section may also be a bit too complex: "However, the party, rather hurriedly assembled, was inexperienced for this work, with only Joyce and Mackintosh having previous Antarctic knowledge, Mackintosh's being slight."
- I've rearranged the prose for both of these unwieldy sentences.
- I think the "W" in Richard W Richards should probably have a period after it even though the main article about him does not use one. This appears in the "Rescue" section.
- He's become Dick Richards, withthe aid of a pipe
- You might consider breaking the long single paragraph in "Post-expedition career" into two paragraphs to ease the reading a bit.
- Done
- On my computer monitor, the ISBNs in the "Sources" section are being split by line-break ("carriage return" in oldspeak). To prevent this, I'd suggest using hyphens as in 0-7869-1850-8.
- Done
- In "Early years", the caption refers to "Naval Orphans" but the main text says "Navy Orphans". One or the other might be the official name but probably not both.
- corrected (Navy Orphans)
I hope these suggestions are helpful, and I agree that the article is FA-worthy. Finetooth (talk) 18:52, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
- Thank you for these suggestions, all of which have been implemented. Also for some useful copy-editing. Brianboulton (talk) 22:02, 6 July 2008 (UTC)