Talk:William R. Farrand/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: AhmadLX (talk · contribs) 16:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

I will review this. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 16:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

• Lead is not the representative summary of the article (or maybe other way around; see below). Should be expanded.
• "Farrand was born in Detroit, Michigan, on September 9, 1853. His parents were Jacob S. Farrand and Olive M. Farrand." These two sentences should be combined into one: ...born in... on... to [parent names here]
• In the section "Early life", initial name should be used to distinguish from his parents.
• "Farrand received his initial formal schooling at the Detroit public schools when he grew up." Why do you need "when he grew up"?
• Section "Personal" has little info on personal life; that single sentence should be moved to some other section. In general, tiny sections should be avoided.
• Same with the section "Later life and Death".
• Seriously ill: from what?
• "His estate left to the heirs $200,000 at the time of his death. Bureau of Labor Statistics says that is equivalent to over $3 million in 2020." This should be rephrased.
• "He had a younger brother, Jacob S. Farrand Jr. and two younger sisters, Mary Coe and Olive C." Unless the siblings were notable, this is irrelevant here.
• Section "Clubs and Associations" is a collection of facts whose significance or notability is not established in the article.
• Same with much of the section "Mid life".
• Death of his wife, which happened after his own death, is irrelevant to this article.
• Lead states that he was "an American businessman, inventor, industrial designer, and manufacturer of pianos and organs". Article body fails to discuss these proportionally and much of the article contains irrelevant/trivial info.
• Broadness is defined by nature of the subject and not by, as some people erroneously believe, coverage in the sources. If the sources do not contain enough information, then an article cannot be promoted to GA.
• I am sorry if I am a little too harsh, but this article does not, at least in my opinion, meet the GA criteria. This is a quick fail in my opinion. Kind regards. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 17:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed