Talk:Eagle Woman/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 20:29, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello GreenMeansGo, This looks like a very interesting article. Thanks for nominating it. I will start the review shortly. I do that by reading through of the article first, and identifying any comments or questions by section of the article, and after that I use the GA table template to evaluate the GA criteria.

Would you mind if I went ahead and made any minor edits (punctuation, cite order, etc.) or link changes — that you could review to ensure agreement? Or, would you prefer me to list all of those? I am happy to go with whatever works the best for you.–CaroleHenson (talk) 20:33, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

It looks like you have been off-line for a couple of days. I will make minor edits, like links and give you a diff to see what I did.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Intro / lede

• I added some links, see this diff.
• It would be nice to round out the intro a bit more, perhaps with information about trading and trade disputes, delegation to D.C., and the Gold Rush period.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:02, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done? GMG^talk 13:42, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Great job!–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Early life

• Second paragraph. Regarding "In 1838, after her parents' deaths, she married Canadian fur trader Honoré Picotte,[c] a prestigious general agent in the top position[3]..." - I don't know what in the top position means? Did he run the American Fur Company? Or, was he the manager / lead trader at Fort Pierre?

 Done? GMG^talk 13:43, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, that is much clearer. Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

• I made a minor change re: the use of "previous" and "wife" in this edit. See what you think.–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:23, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 18:57, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Diplomacy

• I added a few links here and one comma after "To this end".
• Would this image be helpful re: the reservation?–CaroleHenson (talk) 02:44, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it may be. But I'm not sure there's a way to do it without running into stacking issues or sandwiching issues on wider monitors. GMG^talk 12:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

That's fine. It was just a thought.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• Life on the reservation. Regarding "This left Eagle Woman, along with her children, to take over the trade post alone as the territory's first Sioux businesswoman." alone seems a little confusing, since she has her family with her.

 Done GMG^talk 12:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• Black Hills Gold Rush. Regarding "The Black Hills Gold Rush began in 1874 as word spread of the discovery of gold in lands owned by the Sioux, according to the terms of the Treaty of Fort Laramie six years prior, including the Black Hills." what do you think about moving "including the Black Hills" to follow "lands owned by the Sioux?

 Done GMG^talk 12:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• This sentences seems out of place / order "Eagle Woman led the Grand River delegation to the meeting."

 Done Seems to be an artifact of content that was rearranged incompletely. GMG^talk 12:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• Regarding "Though Eagle Woman opposed the founding of the reservation and did not sign the 1876 treaty, she signed an 1882 treaty which reserved land for school purposes, modified reservation boundaries, and changed the government workers and rations they received." does it read better to swap "school purposes" for "schools"?–

 Done GMG^talk 12:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

CaroleHenson (talk) 03:16, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

• Looks great! This section is  Done–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Later life and death

• Regarding "Alma continued her generosity to white and Native people in the area alike," shouldn't "alike" follow "people"?–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:26, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

 Done GMG^talk 12:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• The note from Eagle Woman in the text box is signed "Your affectionate mother"... but she is her grandmother. Is that a typo? Or, perhaps she raised him?–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:32, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, Charles Picotte was her stepson, not her grandson. GMG^talk 12:48, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks! I added his name after "She wrote to her stepson," just to make the connection a little clearer. Sorry, I am not sure how I came to the conclusion he was a grandson.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Legacy

No comments.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:26, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

GA criteria

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Yes, the prose is clear and concise, with correct spelling and grammar. There are a couple of questions and comments above.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:54, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Yes, it complies with MOS guidelines.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Yes, the content is properly cited and verifiable.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Yes, the citations are for reliable sources.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	2c. it contains no original research.	There is no evidence of original research.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	There is no evidence of plagiarism or copyright violations from the copyvio detector and spot-checking a number of books.–CaroleHenson (talk) 04:51, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Yes, it covers the main aspects of the topic.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	No unnecessary detail–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Yes, the article is neutral.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Yes, the article is stable.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:42, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Yes, all images are appropriately tagged.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	Yes, the images are relevant.–CaroleHenson (talk) 03:53, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
	7. Overall assessment.

Comments

@CaroleHenson: Thanks for the review. Gimme a little bit to respond. Obviously things are a bit less than normal at the moment. Courtesy pings for @Originalmess, RebeccaGreen, and Indigenous girl: in case they're interested in weighing in. GMG^talk 13:52, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Absolutely. Take care.–CaroleHenson (talk) 17:07, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

• Repinging Carole to see if there is any additional feedback that needs to be addressed. GMG^talk 12:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The article looks great! I am passing it. Thanks for your work on it, GreenMeansGo.–CaroleHenson (talk) 16:45, 11 April 2020 (UTC)