This review is transcluded from Talk:Marguerite Agniel/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lightburst (talk · contribs) 20:41, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would love to review this article

Many thanks. If I can help with anything, just ask. Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:45, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

my pleasure Chiswick Chap this one is short and we can wrap it up pretty quickly after you see my suggestions. This article says she is on the cover of a book. Lightburst (talk) 23:37, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think I've replied to everything that needs attention. Chiswick Chap (talk) 06:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. [1]
2. [2]
3. [3]
4. [4]
5. [5]

1. "The scholars Mary O'Connor and Katherine Tweedie comment" May need a comma after scholars?

   Seems fine in my diction

2. "was a Broadway actress and dancer, and then a health and beauty guru in New York in the early 20th century. " suggest a change of (and then) which reads funny

   Done.

3. "Marguerite, born January 21, 1891, was one of the six children of George Agniel, an Indiana farmer, and Ada Lescher Flowers." suggest, (Marguerite was born January 21, 1891 and was one of the six children of George Agniel and Ada Lescher Flowers. Her father was a an Indiana farmer.) what do you think?

   Done.

4. "Her father died in 1893 while she was an infant, leaving her mother to raise all the children." suggest (leaving her mother to raise the children alone)

   Done.

5. "she notes in the Preface" Should preface be capitalized?

   Both ways can be justified. Lower case it is.

6. Can we nail down her date of death? 1971 is relatively recent.

   I've not found it. Wikipedia doesn't trust Ancestry-type sources.

It is a nice short article, well illustrated and it follows MOS:ORDER.

1. Wanted to get your thoughts as to why the gallery appears in the middle of the article

   It illustrates the author in the Author section. Seems a reasonable choice, in line with placing images with the relevant text.

1. Citation 1 checks out

2. Citation 2 checks out

3. Citations 3, 4 and 5 check out

4. Citation 13 checks out

5. Citation 15 checks out I suggest being specific about page numbers with {{r|O'Connor 2007|p=?}}

   The page range 91-92 is given in the citation. I don't use the r format.

6. Citation 10 unsure what this citation supports.

   Repositioned it. It' a very helpful introductory source.

7. Citation 11 covers 19 pages. I wonder if we might consider saying which page with this style {{r|Schrank|p=?}}

   It's a reasonable range. I don't use the r format.

8. Citation 12 also covers 2 pages. I wonder if we might consider saying which page with this style {{r|Schrank|p=?}}

   As above.

1. I see the File:Head and Hand portrait of Marguerite Agniel.jpg is non-free and probably ok

   It has a full NFUR and is as essential component of the article.

2. Other images are a mix of LOC and PD.
3. File:Marguerite Agniel in a Buddha position with her legs crossed Wellcome V0048585.jpg and File:Marguerite Agniel posing with her back arched and legs stret Wellcome V0048584.jpg are properly licensed

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. 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):

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   I too searched for an exact death date and was unsuccessful - as was the nominator

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: