Talk:Joseph Nathan Kane/GA1

GA Review edit

Latest comment: 2 years ago8 comments2 people in discussion

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

Reviewer: PCN02WPS (talk · contribs) 16:03, 21 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Hi there, I'll review this nomination over the coming days. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:03, 21 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

This one will require some work, but I think it can get there. Comments on the first few sections are below and the rest will be added in the next day or so. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 21:21, 22 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Improvements have been made to the article and my concerns have been fixed. There are three images - one is fair use and two have proper licensing, so no issues there. Referencing looks good, "Famous First Facts" section has been trimmed down so that the article is broad but not too specific, article is neutral and stable. I appreciate your patience and I'm happy to give this a tick, well done! PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 15:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Lead/infobox edit

Spouse and year of marriage should be converted to {{Marriage}} template
Done

"He is best known for being a researcher of who did what first and what came first for events, products, services, and inventions" → this is worded confusingly, I'd make this shorter and use more encyclopedic language (specifically for the portion of the sentence "...of who did what first and what came first...")
Done

"His book Famous First Facts with all its editions is a reference book" → goes from singular (his book) to plural (all its editions) to singular again (is a reference book)
Done

"on Famous First Facts" → is this saying the radio show was about facts or just about the book?
Done

"that he figures is really the true inventor" → wording gets a little clunky here again, I'd change this to "who he believes is actually the true inventor..."
Done

Early life edit

First sentence needs to be cited, as do many of the following sentences (if they're all covered by Ref 2, just include it after those sentences too)
Done

"His mother was Hulda (Ascheim) Kane" → I think the {{nee}} template would better than just the parentheses here.
Done

"Kane's grandfather on his mother's side" → "Kane's maternal grandfather"
Done

"He in turn inherited the paternal talent for music" → "He also displayed these musical talents"
Done

"Other hobbies of his when a child was" → should be "were"
Done

"collecting stamps and foreign currency" → link stamp collecting and coin collecting
Done

Education edit

This section has the same sort of citation issues as the previous
Done

"#10" → "No. 10" per MOS:POUND
Done

I think you can remove the other alumni of his school, those aren't directly related to Kane
Done

link "School of Engineering" to Fu Foundation School of Engineering and Applied Science
Done

Mid life and career edit

"There he interviewed many important people including John Wanamaker (department-store mogul)." → I'd either add some more names to back up the claim of "many important people" or change the beginning of the sentence to read "There he interviewed many people, including...". Another thing to consider would be moving the "department-store mogul" out of parentheses and before Wanamaker's name, to read "...including department-store mogul John Wanamaker."
Done

"His intention for the consultations with these distinguished people was to shed light on facts generally unknown" → This sentence gets a little flowery, perhaps slim down to "His intentions for these interviews were to..."
Done

"...from the Columbia School of Engineering" or "from Columbia's School of Engineering"
Done

Is "Morse-code operator" the proper term, or would something like "telegraphist" be more appropriate? I would think they would operate the telegraphs using Morse code, not operate the Morse code itself.
Done

Many readers, myself included, do not know what "D. Auerbach & Sons" is or what they do - this should be clarified.
Done

"to more than twenty publications for about 20 years" → the number 20 is given two different ways in this sentence; I'd make this consistent
Done

"and International Trade Review where" → comma after "Review"
Done

"State Department-accredited" → link "State Department" to United States Department of State
Done

"belief went to Elias Howe and Isaac Singer" → "contrary to the popular belief that the inventors were Elias Howe and Isaac Singer" or something similar to that
Done

"Kane received a handsome amount..." → specify you're talking about money here
Done

"He went to all the states and most of the major cities." → I'd either incorporate this sentence into the previous or remove it; it doesn't serve a lot of purpose on its own
Done

"Being an aviation enthusiast he became" → comma after "enthusiast"
Done

Famous First Facts book edit

I'll also add here quickly that this section fails GA criterion No. 3(b) as it currently stands, since this section (about the book rather than about Kane) is the largest of the article and is substantially longer than the article about the book itself. As a result, this section does not [stay] focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail.

Done Trimmed section down. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:26, 23 April 2022 (UTC)Reply

Title of the book in the section header should be italicized
Done

"Kane decided in 1930 to write" → "In 1930, Kane decided to write"
Done

"In his travels throughout the states Kane gathered" → comma after "states"
Done

"Additionally he obtained" → "Additionally, he obtained"
Done

"After Kane collected all this information he decided to publish" → comma after "information"
Done

"Kane then decided to mail or deliver in person a copy of portions of his manuscript to reference librarians across the United States" → did

he just do one or did he do both? If both, reword this to "Kane then decided to mail or hand-deliver copies of portions of his..."

Done

"Based on this they then published Kane's book Famous First Facts" in 1933" → "As a result, they decided to publish Kane's Book Famous First Facts, in 1933"
Done

Remainder of the paragraph is in italics
Done

Third paragraph is a bit too redundant - I'm not sure separate sentences explaining the subject matter of Facts about the Presidents and

Facts about the States are necessary, given the titles are pretty self-explanatory. If you wanted to give a brief explanation, something like this would be more appropriate: "Kane continued his work, writing Facts about the Presidents in 1959 and Facts about the States in 1989 about the US presidents and US states and territories, respectively."

Done

Radio and television edit

does "Famous First Facts" in the first line need to be italicized?
Done

"He got involved with all kinds of quiz shows" → this sentence is unencyclopedic, particularly the phrase "all kinds of"
Done

remove quotation marks after "The $64,000 Question"
Done

Information after "...Break the Bank." detailing the details and format of the shows can be removed as it is not pertinent to Kane, rather to the shows themselves.
Done

Interviews and reports edit

Italicize Current Biography as it is the title of a magazine
Done

"...who was gathering information for his article" seems redundant to me
Done

"but how did they know that for sure?" → recommend rewording this to avoid sounding like you're asking the question to the reader
Done

"He pointed out that then it was usually the end of the lesson at hand." → Irrelevant detail
Done

"and because he had read most of the pertinent books at the Columbia University Library before he entered the Columbia classrooms where the lessons were being taught" → a couple things here:

- "because" seems out of place, like the sentence is missing some parts at the end, or like this part should be rephrased
Done

- link Columbia University Libraries
Done

- The last half of this selection seems like an oddly formal way to write "before he went to class" or "before he attended the class", if I'm interpreting that correctly
Done

"for Associated Press" → "for the Associated Press", and link Associated Press
Done

"that he was dumb enough not to believe everything told to him until he could see the actual proof why that was so" → seems contradictory; he is saying that he is dumb because he does his research properly?

Done - Source of 2002 obituary of New York Times says that Kane said, I'm stupid enough not to believe anything until I see the proof. To me, the wording I wrote in the article (above) is clear and conveys the same thought. Suggestions? --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

month and year of the Liberty issue seems unnecessary
Done

"that nobody knew exactly who did it first" → what does "it" refer to here?
Done

"The credit always went to the innovator or discoverer with the best sounding publicity. The common person that did the actual work was too engrossed in his project at hand to broadcast his accomplishments and they simply slipped through the cracks and many times others wrongfully got the credit" → this seems like a generalization; I'd clarify that this was his perspective or opinion if that is the case, otherwise it sounds like this is Wikipedia's opinion
Done

He claimed that only those firsts for which there were definite records were included in his writings" → is there a need for "firsts" to be in italics?
Done

"that would shed more light" → shed more light on what?
Done

"He thought of himself as a campaigner against myth..." → The first sentence of the paragraph is about the reporter and the second sentence refers to the reporter using "he", but "he" is switched to Kane here, which could cause confusion
Done

Later life and death edit

"Kane told Myrna Olive, a reporter for the Los Angeles Times, on his 100th birthday celebration in 1999 that he..." → reword to something like this: "On Kane's 100th birthday in 1999, he told a Los Angeles Times' reporter that he..."
Done

Second sentence should be reworded as well, perhaps like this: "On September 22, 2002, Kane died at the age of 103 due to natural causes." The term "passed away" should be avoided per WP:EUPH.
Done

Points of interest edit

The information in this trivia section should be integrated into the prose of the article, or removed if that cannot be done.

Done

Works edit

"Kane wrote a total of 52 books, that included -" → incomplete sentence; I'd reword this so that it introduces the list of works that follow but is also a complete sentence.
Done

References edit

Link sources in the website and work fields, such as Newsday (2), The New York Times (3), The News & Observer (4) [note that this should be an ampersand rather than the word "and"], The New York Times (7), The Spokesman-Review (9), and The Herald-Sun (10)
Done

What work is cited in Ref 5? Only the author, year, and title of the article (book?) are given.
Done - Book is already given as "Current biography yearbook, 1985." That is confirmed at WorldCat with OCLC number of 13134027 at Ref 5.

Ref 6 is formatted incorrectly
Done

Ref 7's title should be altered to include only the title of the article and not "New York Times article Sept 27, 2002"
Done

Ref 8 should use {{Google books}} for the url field, and the overall citation should be {{Cite book}} since you're citing the book (given the publisher field has the publisher of the book itself)
Done

Comments edit

@PCN02WPS: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)Reply
@PCN02WPS: Did I cover everything? Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:02, 5 May 2022 (UTC)Reply

Add topic