Talk:Guy Fawkes Night/GA1
Latest comment: 13 years ago by Parrot of Doom in topic GA Review
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Jezhotwells (talk) 23:11, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
I shall be reviewing this article against the Good Article criteria, following its nomination for Good Article status.
Disambiguations: none found.
Linkrot: none found. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:13, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
Checking against GA criteria
edit- It is reasonably well written.
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- By the beginning of the 18th century, 5 November had become "a polysemous occasion, replete with polyvalent cross-referencing, meaning all things to all men", but as one of 49 official holidays it had lost some of its meaning. For society's elite, Guy Fawkes Day became overshadowed by events such as the birthdays of Admiral Edward Vernon, or John Wilkes, and under George II and George III, with the exception of the Jacobite Rising of 1745, the day was largely "a polite entertainment rather than an occasion for vitriolic thanksgiving". For the lower classes, the anniversary became a chance to pit order against disorder, a pretext for violence and uncontrolled revelry. This theme continued into the 19th century, with reports in Lewes of annual rioting, intimidation of "respectable householders", and the rolling of lighted tar barrels through the streets. The quotations here need attribution and citations.
- There's only one citation following that entire section - its from there that the quotes are taken. I'm all for citing things where they're needed, but citing every quote is messy and not something I'm inclined to do here. Of course if more text is added and the source of those quotations becomes confusing to find, I'll change that, but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon.
- OK, I accept that all is supported by Cressy 1992, pp. 76–79. It would still be good to have attribution, e.g who said "a polysemous occasion, replete with polyvalent cross-referencing, meaning all things to all men". Is this Cressy? or someone that he is quoting? Likewise "a polite entertainment rather than an occasion for vitriolic thanksgiving"? I added wikilinks for polysemous and polyvalent as these are words previously unknown to me. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Cressy in all instances. I'd rather not have wikilinks within quotes, it doesn't look right, so I've removed them. There's always a dictionary. Parrot of Doom 20:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I won't make a federal case about this. WP:MOSQUOTE is somewhat ambivalent about this.
- Cressy in all instances. I'd rather not have wikilinks within quotes, it doesn't look right, so I've removed them. There's always a dictionary. Parrot of Doom 20:10, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- OK, I accept that all is supported by Cressy 1992, pp. 76–79. It would still be good to have attribution, e.g who said "a polysemous occasion, replete with polyvalent cross-referencing, meaning all things to all men". Is this Cressy? or someone that he is quoting? Likewise "a polite entertainment rather than an occasion for vitriolic thanksgiving"? I added wikilinks for polysemous and polyvalent as these are words previously unknown to me. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- There's only one citation following that entire section - its from there that the quotes are taken. I'm all for citing things where they're needed, but citing every quote is messy and not something I'm inclined to do here. Of course if more text is added and the source of those quotations becomes confusing to find, I'll change that, but I doubt it'll happen anytime soon.
Likewise a local minister wrote "a Great number of people went over to Dorchester neck [South Boston] where at night they made a Great Bonfire and plaid off many fireworks", although the day ended in tragedy when "4 young men coming home in a Canoe were all Drowned." Ten years later the raucous celebrations were the cause of considerable annoyance to the upper classes, and a special Riot Act was passed, to prevent "riotous tumultuous and disorderly assemblies of more than three persons, all or any of them armed with Sticks, Clubs or and kind of weapons, or disguised with vizards, or painted or discolored faces, on in any manner disgused, having any kind of imagery or pageantry, in any street, lane, or place in Boston."- As above.
- I accept that the local minister is being reported, also the Act, also by Cressy. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- I assume good faith for all off-line sources. Online sources check out.
- By the beginning of the 18th century, 5 November had become "a polysemous occasion, replete with polyvalent cross-referencing, meaning all things to all men", but as one of 49 official holidays it had lost some of its meaning. For society's elite, Guy Fawkes Day became overshadowed by events such as the birthdays of Admiral Edward Vernon, or John Wilkes, and under George II and George III, with the exception of the Jacobite Rising of 1745, the day was largely "a polite entertainment rather than an occasion for vitriolic thanksgiving". For the lower classes, the anniversary became a chance to pit order against disorder, a pretext for violence and uncontrolled revelry. This theme continued into the 19th century, with reports in Lewes of annual rioting, intimidation of "respectable householders", and the rolling of lighted tar barrels through the streets. The quotations here need attribution and citations.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Pope Day: Does Guy Fawkes or Bonfire night survive in any form in North America or elsewhere?
Not in North America. There are instances of it being observed in former British colonies but there aren't any sources I've found which place such celebrations in their proper historical context, and so I've omitted their mention. They're usually web links written by journalists or editors who aren't familiar with the subject, and so instead I've settled for "Guy Fawkes Day was exported by British settlers to colonies around the world, including those in Australia, New Zealand, Canada and various Caribbean islands". If further information comes to light, I'll consider adding it.Parrot of Doom 23:38, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
- OK. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- Pope Day: Does Guy Fawkes or Bonfire night survive in any form in North America or elsewhere?
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- No edit wars, etc.:
- It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Tagged, licensed and captioned correctly
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
On hold for seven days for above issues to be fixed.- Thank you for answering my queries. Just one query re attribution, above. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
- OK, thanks for answering my concerns. I am happy to list this as a good article. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:20, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- Thank you for answering my queries. Just one query re attribution, above. Jezhotwells (talk) 18:25, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
-
- Thanks. This is probably as far as I'll take this article as to be honest I'm a bit sick of the whole subject now (having expanded all the plotters' articles). Parrot of Doom 10:07, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
