Talk:George W. Hotchkiss/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Wasted Time R (talk · contribs) 01:40, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

---

Nice work, a few comments here and there

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   A few prose and MoS issues, see below

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Some later sources might be useful

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Re prose/MoS issues in the lede and article text:

A period in 'W.' is needed in infobox title.

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:40, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

Arguably 'forty-niners' is better in roman font and quotation marks than in italics – that's how the California Gold Rush article renders it – but I think it's up to editor discretion.

 Done roman font and quotation marks --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:40, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

In until 1862 when merchants of the United States were compelled to stop their Canadian operations due to the American Civil War., a brief reason should be given as to why this was.

 Done - The source gives because of the events of the American Civil War as the reason. Nothing more specific there, so I copy edited to use this term.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:40, 5 October 2020 (UTC)

In first barge line - the link to 'line' here doesn't seem appropriate to this meaning; maybe a link to shipping line would be better.

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:28, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

The language Hotchkiss identified himself as a Presbyterian sounds like an anachronism. Back then somebody simply would have said they were a Presbyterian.

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:28, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Re MoS issues in the References:

The Bibliography entries should represent the whole book, not individual uses of it. Therefore the Bibliography entries should not have a page number or a text quote. For instance, it makes no sense to include page 289 for the Currey book in the Bibliography when there are footnotes to pages 287 and 290 as well. As for text quotes, I'm not a fan of them - they basically tell the reader, 'Wikipedia is so untrustworthy that we have to quote the source to convince you it is being used fairly.' But if you do use them, they should be on the individual citations as well, for the same reason.

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

For fn 7, is p. XX. a place-holder for a missing page number? Or a reference to a roman numeral preface page, in which case it is probably lowercase xx?

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Is Category:American technology journalists really warranted? Seems like a stretch. The other categories all make sense.

 Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 13:47, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Regarding content:

There are some newspaper obituaries for Hotchkiss that can be seen at Newspapers.com. One that I saw that has an impact from a human interest vantage point is this United Press story, which talks about how the last 16 forty-niners were a group who eulogized each other at each successive funeral, and then Hotchkiss was the last to go and there was no one left to speak for him. That seems worth including in the article.

•  Done - added a paragraph. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 14:14, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

One thing that is striking is how old the sources are in the article – with one exception, they are all from 1926 or earlier. Is this because no one remembers Hotchkiss in current times? One potentially valuable later source is this 1976 article in the Journal of Forest History, "Sources of Forest History: The First Quarter Century of Lumber Journalism". It contains a biographical account of Hotchkiss and his life and some of the contributions he made. I didn't look through it in detail, but it might provide some useful additions here. It then includes excerpts from Hotchkiss's own "History of lumber and of the forest industry of Northwest" (which is listed in the Bibliography but might be mentioned in the article text as well).

•  Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

So I'm putting this GA nomination on hold, but I don't think there's too much work needed to bring it to the pass level. Wasted Time R (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

•  Working --Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:02, 5 October 2020 (UTC)
• @Wasted Time R: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:07, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

A few aspects of the references need further attention or explanation:

his own 1898 book "History of lumber and of the forest industry of Northwest" – if it's a book it should be in italics not quotes (I originally messed this up in my comment above). It's correct in the Bibliography.

•  Done

You took out almost of all of the page numbers in the Bibliography but left in one for the Marquis source. Not sure if that was an oversight or intentional.

•  Done

You took out one quote in a Bibliography entry, for the Currey source, but left all the others in. What was the rationale was for that?

•  Done

The Sterling Daily Gazette cite should give the wire service credit – use "agency=United Press" in the cite news template.

•  Done

For consistency with the rest of the article, the "Sources of Forest History: The First Quarter Century of Lumber Journalism" cite should be in the Bibliography and short-form cited in the footnote. The author of what you are citing is not Hotchkiss, but the editor who wrote that two-page introduction; looking at the front matter for this issue at https://www.jstor.org/stable/3983393, it isn't clear which editor that was, so you can go with "author=Editor's Introduction" and leave it at that. The issue number is 3, not O3. It doesn't need a retrieval date, since a JSTOR url is guaranteed to be stable.

•  Done

I think the second page of that editor's introduction has some biographical aspects that could be added to the article. In particular, his involvement in local politics, where he got elected to local office as a Jeffersonian Democrat in what was then a very Republican town.

@Wasted Time R: I can not get access to page 150. Apparently you have access to it. Can you help me out here. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:28, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

@Doug Coldwell: I've added everything from page 150 that I thought was relevant and not already in the article. Let me know what you think. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:02, 18 October 2020 (UTC)

@Wasted Time R: Wonderful. Those are great additions. I looked them all over and definitely approve.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:30, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Okay, all the other items are resolved, I am passing it for GA. Wasted Time R (talk) 23:52, 19 October 2020 (UTC)

Otherwise, the changes look good. Wasted Time R (talk) 13:27, 17 October 2020 (UTC)