Talk:Chun Afong/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 07:00, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I will get started on the review tonight and likely finish up tomorrow.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Intro and infobox

• The intro section could use more a little more summary information about the milestones of his life and legacy.

• I added a bunch a lot already. What other milestone do you think is missing?— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

Some options (but not necessarily the exact wording) are: He was a co-owner of a chain of stores selling Oriental novelties. In 1856, Afong helped hosted a ball in honor of the wedding of King Kamehameha IV that helped to solidify the Chinese community's position in Honolulu. His political appointments. After his death, he was made a mandarin of the first rank by imperial edict and was acknowledged for his charitable contributions.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:39, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Made the suggest changes.KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:51, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Excellent job! I really like the intro!–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe 3 or so of those options.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• In the infobox, is Meixi the same as Meixi Village? I see that you short-handed the place of death information, since it is the same as the place of birth. But, I wondered if Meixi is the same place.

• It is the same. Added Village to make it less confusing.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

Cool, thanks for the edit.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• Regarding all interlanguage links:
  • Is Qianshan Subdistrict the proper link for Qianshan Town in Xiangshan County, Guangdong?
  • If there is not an English language article, then the MOS guidelines for interlanguage links state that this template {{ill|English article title|language code|Title in foreign language}} should be used.

For example, if Qianshan Subdistrict is not the right place, Qianshan Town would look like: {{ill|Qianshan Town, Xiangshan County|zh|前山镇}} in wikicode and Qianshan Town, Xiangshan County as the reader would see it. (Qianshan Town redirects to a disambiguation page, so it needs to be differentiated in some manner.)–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:34, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• It is the same place. Qianshan was a 镇 which translates into town and was larger than a village.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

Excellent, thanks for the edit.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:42, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• I added a few links. See this diff.–CaroleHenson (talk) 07:57, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC) (Helps me keep track)

Biography

• Interesting!
• I tweaked a link and fixed a cite order. Feel free, by the way, to remove links. They are suggestions and easier to add than typing out each one as a request/suggestion here.
• Shouldn't "Marriage and children" be included in the Biography section? It may be that it was located at the bottom of the article because the content is in list form. If that's the reason, I understand.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• Yes, I moved it down since it is such a long list. The marriage is explained in the main part of the article as well.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

Okay.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Legacy

• The second half (or a bit more) of the first paragraph is about the larger Chun family estate, and not really about his legacy. Should this be its own section?

• I don't think so.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

• The second and third paragraphs are interesting, but they aren't really about his legacy. Perhaps the second and third paragraph could go into the same section as the Chun family estate in China. Perhaps titled Residences... or Estates. What do you think?–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:29, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• It is kind of loosely about what he left behind (what I mean by legacy) and how he is remembered through the plaque at his former residence, the lychee trees in Hawaii, the museum of his family estate and the archway.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

Please sign your comments. That would help a lot to keep track of the conversation.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:47, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Just thinking... maybe there's a broader title for this section... or perhaps a subsection for his residences/trees. Think about it. We can chat more tomorrow.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:51, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Added subheading of "Former residences and memorials" which encompasses everything KAVEBEAR (talk) 08:55, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Lovely! I love easy solutions!–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:57, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:57, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Literary representation

• I added a few links. Please check Imperialism, which seemed to be to be the closest to what the impact of "white capitalist establishment" would be in colonial Hawaii. Capitalist doesn't capture the paradigm. Of course, please remove any links you don't find appropriate.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:29, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
• I have no other comments.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:29, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Marriage and children

• It would be helpful to match up the families with their residences. For instance, I assume that his first wife lived in China on the large family estate... and his second wife lived in the villa in Hawaii. Did he provide a home for his concubine?

• How so? They are in different sections and given how rich he was he had multiple houses throughout his lifetime. It seems trivial.KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:44, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
• Made this change.

Yes, that works. Thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• For Chan Lung, "He graduated from Yale University and co-partner with his father in his business in Hawaii." a wording change is needed, like to "co-partnered" or "was co-partner".

• Changed. KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Great, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• More out of curiosity than anything else, do you know if Helen Gertrude Afong's husbands were brothers?

• Not sure, not mentioned although I can look.

No worries. If that was the case, it would likely have been mentioned.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• For consistency in approach re: people with second marriages, "Caroline Bartlett Afong (1874–1942), married first Jacob Morton Riggs and married secondly Leonard Camp. No children from both marriages." should have a semi-colon after Riggs, right?–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:39, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• Changed. KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:43, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Excellent, thanks!–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:58, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:04, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Other

• There is a permanent deadlink in the External links section. Is there an alternative?

• Removed it. It doesn't seem to be retrievable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

• Is it possible to add the English language titles parenthetically for the last link(s) with Chinese labels?–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• Changed and it was also another deadlink but I was able to find an archived version of it.— Preceding unsigned comment added by KAVEBEAR (talk • contribs)

Excellent, thanks! I am calling it a night (or morning). But, I will be back tomorrow to finish up.–CaroleHenson (talk) 08:50, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• Notes: "Dye's wife Tessa Gay Magoon was a great-great granddaughter of Chun Afong." is redundant. That sentence was stated in the Literary representation section two times - once in the body of that section and again as a parenthetical in the quote.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:45, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• Removed.KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:48, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

• This section is  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:04, 5 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, it is very well-written, clear and concise. Thanks for that, it made it very easy to review.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 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.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 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 verifiable.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 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 sources are reliable.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
	2c. it contains no original research.	There is no evidence of original research, but there is at least one place where there are several citations at the end of the paragraph (The Former residences and memorials section, first paragraph). So, I will double-check.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC) This is  Done and looks good!–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:16, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	Copyvio only picked up quotes and titles, except one sentence that I will add to the comments section below.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC) This is now  Done.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:03, 5 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) 21:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Yes, no unnecessary detail.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Yes, it is neutral.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 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) 21:54, 5 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.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

Comments

• Please paraphrase "He died peacefully, on September 25, 1906, in his home village of Meixi." It is the same verbiage as in this source.–CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

KAVEBEAR, Thanks so much for the great job that you did on the article. As I said elsewhere, you made it very easy to review. It was also very interesting! I love the way that he sought to bring the cultures together.

If you could just paraphrase the one sentence, we'll be done. Probably the most that can be done is scrambling the order of the words, using a synonym for peaceful, etc.–CaroleHenson (talk) 22:20, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

@CaroleHenson: Made the change. KAVEBEAR (talk) 22:56, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Excellent, done. The article has passed the GA criteria.–CaroleHenson (talk) 23:03, 5 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. KAVEBEAR (talk) 23:41, 5 April 2020 (UTC)