Talk:Idah McGlone Gibson

Feedback

Hi Donna - very enjoyable read. I've made a bunch of not very important changes.

I think the main bit of feedback for now is about tone and/or the authorial voice. Examples:

• "But there was no question..." is the author offering an opinion. WP authors should not offer opinions.
• ".. about their actual age. McGlone Gibson was no exception: " again, this is the author offering their opinion that IMG was no exception
• " And while she had also said that her first priority was her career, that was not entirely true." again: "that was not entirely true" is the author's opinion

One other thing: in the section about her marriage age"

• "Little is known about her childhood, and later assertions that she married at 16 are incorrect. According to marriage records, she married Henry H. Gibson in Flint, Michigan in 1878, when she was 18." ... There are probably other ways to convey this information without saying "are incorrect" (which is autorial voice again) (e.g. "Although some sources specify she was married at 16, her marriage certificate suggests she was 18 at the time of her wedding to Henry..." It would be ideal if we had a source for the weding certificate information - this bit is bordering or over the border of original research.

More generally, encyclopedia articles are normally quite dry & dessicated. This article, or, at least, the lead, is more in the style of a human interest story; in particular this part: "from movie stars like Mary Pickford,[5] to baseball players like Christy Mathewson,[6] to the wives of presidents, like Edith (Mrs. Theodore) Roosevelt.[7] Most of her newspaper columns were published on the women's page, where she covered human interest stories like the honeymoon of President Woodrow Wilson and his new bride Edith;[8] or shared the beauty tips of famous actresses like Jane Cowl;[9] or went overseas to chat with General John J. Pershing on behalf of the American Red Cross.[10]" ... I would not expect to see this style of writing in a lead, which should be a summary of the rest of the article - see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. It might well be that those sentences could be introduced somewhere within the body of the article?

But mainly, carry on carrying on. We can always haggle over style and the fine detail of content, but mainly it's a good and interesting article; thank you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:54, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh, one more thing. I'm troubled by the front page which credited her with originating the "newspaper serial story." Did they really make that claim, when clearly (and as you indicate in the note) she was 50 or 60 years late to that party. Right now the key sentence "helped to popularize the genre for a new generation of newspaper readers" is buried in the notes, presumably because we don't have a source which says that ... I think my problem is in putting into the lead an assertion, which though it may have been made, is nevertheless obviously untrue. So, not sure as I write how best to handle that, and so I thought I'd start by checking *exactly* what the source claim was. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:10, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

And for interest, let me share with you Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Elizabeth Willing Powel/archive1, to illustrate the extent to which articles are put under the microscope - every last word haggled over. That was for a featured article nomination, which is the topmost quality of article; but it makes the point that every aspect of an article is always up for question :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:15, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon One quibble: death date in lead and death category differ. Presumably one is a typo! PamD 12:16, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Oops. Sorted. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:20, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

First, regarding what seems to be my opinion on her age at marriage, I DO have the marriage certificate, courtesy of Ancestry.com but nobody ever taught me how to cite it so that non-subscribers can find it. I can assure you I would not cite something (like Idah's age of marriage) without finding concrete evidence. That's the case several times: census info, for example. Not sure how to cite when not everyone is a subscriber. That said, I'm not in any way upset with your feedback. I work for you & the readers, and you know what you are seeking. I will defend my choices in a couple of cases, but for now, it's a work in progress and I just needed to know if I'm on the right track. I will get back to it and incorporate some of your kind suggestions. Much love to you from sunny Boston. DonnaHalper (talk) 19:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Yup, that is what the quotes actually said-- and in fact, several newspapers asserted that she was the woman who created the newspaper serial. (They were citing family members in one case, but in others, like the Cincinnati Post article from 1929, the author of the article made that claim.) Of course, she was not the first, which is why I thought it important to add a caveat. DonnaHalper (talk) 19:55, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

The reason I put a brief compendium of Idah's accomplishments in the introduction is I've seen other Wikipedia articles do that. It's a way to demonstrate that she is an important figure in her field and sufficiently notable for a bio. Would you rather that I not introduce a small sample of her achievements up front? I just thought it fit with how an introduction reads, and as I said, I've seen other articles do it that way. DonnaHalper (talk) 21:04, 13 October 2023 (UTC)

Per the pointer to the WP manual of style on leads, the lead summarises content in the body of the article. Several lines of examples of the the sorts of people she interviewed is not a summary. A neutral way of summarising those sentences in the lead would be along the lines of "she interviewed a range of celebrities, sportsmen and prominent people". --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:51, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Ah okay, thanks for explaining that. But if I state that she interviewed prominent people, don't I need examples? (That's how I was taught in academia!) And on another matter, can you show me how to cite a document on Ancestry? As I said in my other comment, I didn't just make an assumption about Ida's age at marriage-- the document is available, but it's pay-walled, as far as I know, and I'm not sure how to cite it in a quote. Not trying to be annoying.Appreciate your time. DonnaHalper (talk) 16:11, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't want to be dogmatic about it; my view is that the article probably does not need examples, and the lead almost certainly does not need examples. You may take a different view. The question must be, does the reader learn more by the use of examples than they will learn if examples are absent? I think my best advice is to write the article first, and its lead last, so that the lead does summarise the body. Add examples in the body if you think they improve the article / the reading experience / the reader's understanding. Add examples into the lead if ditto.

On the wedding certificate / Ancestry question, first, I'll note that WP takes an incredibly dim view of using primary sources (e.g. this discussion and WP:PRIMARY) because it tends to be a means by which original research is introduced into the article. Equally, WP:IAR (ignore all rules) says to hell with that, in this case there's good reason to introduce the certificate. So that being the case, I'd be inclined to use the {{Cite web}} template, with parameters of title=whatever the page title is, website=Ancestry.com url=whatever the URL is and access-date=whataver date you accessed the page. The fact that Ancestry is behind a paywall is neither here nor there. But do be advised that other users taking dim views may notice the use of the certificate and edit it out. It's one of the not-fun parts about WP. Sometimes you get away with it, sometimes not. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Can't thank you enough. I will go back in tonight and/or tomorrow, make revisions, and you can then let me know if I am closer to where you need me to be. Regarding Idah and Henry's marriage certificate from Ancestry.com, I tried to figure out the cite web template, but I'm just not able to understand it. I mean, yes I can read it, but to be honest, the instructions make my head hurt! I've been told I'm a visual learner, so maybe sometime, once this is finished, someone can walk me through how to do it, step-by-step, and then I'll be better able to apply it. That's how I learned to use the ref tags when I'm citing a source. Sorry to ask so many questions. Just want to write a good article so that then I can do others and do them the right way. Much love to you. DonnaHalper (talk) 21:04, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, and no probs. Maybe just bung the URL and the page title, if there is one, between a couple of ref tags in the text, or even here, and I'll do the necessary. Happy writing :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:19, 14 October 2023 (UTC)

@DonnaHalper: Let me know if you'd like this promoted now; it's in very good shape indeed, all feeback issues sorted (bar a ref for the wedding certificate). Thank you for your work; it's a very good article indeed.

Three things for you:

1. We split her name into First / Last for the references: should that be first=Idah, last=McGlone Gibson, or is it first=Idah McGlone, last=Gibson?

2. I'll point to the image caption; not sure if you want to change that in any way?

3. Finally, a question about newspaper names in the references ... I've been though and converted any bare refs into {{Cite news}} type refs. Quite a number of newspaper names are in the form "Bay City, Michigan Times", and I'm not sure if this is a title, or a concatenation of publication place and title. If you'll confirm it's the latter, as I suspect, I'll go through and make a final amendment (by adding publication-place= ) ... those I've spotted are below. --Tagishsimon (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2023 (UTC)

I am SO glad you liked it. I wanted to do it for ages and ages, and I'm delighted I was able to contribute. Thanks for the help. And let me know when YOU think it's ready to be published-- I don't know how to do it!!! Regarding those newspapers I cited, I write a lot for SABR (Society for American Baseball Research) and they want the city and state if it's a small town newspaper that folks may not have heard of. The actual newspaper title is the Bay City Times, for example, but I was told to include where Bay City is. If Wikipedia does it differently, then you don't need those states in any of them-- except for the Wisconsin State Journal, which perhaps should have (Madison)? Or maybe we don't need it? And as for Idah's name, she lived in a world of no hyphens, so she could not be McGlone-Gibson. Nor did she seem fond of being referred to as just Gibson: she never wrote as Idah Gibson. In fact, she seemed adamant about keeping her maiden name and adding her married name. Her byline was always Idah McGlone Gibson. So, yes, I'd imagine that it's Idah (first name) and McGlone Gibson is last name. And what did you mean by pointing to the image caption? I saw a cute caption saying Idah was sad that she had no entry on Wikipedia, but now, I hope, she does, so perhaps she's happy? As for the marriage certificate, I still don't know how to cite it, but I got it here: Michigan, U.S., Marriage Records, 1867-1952 for Ida McGlone DonnaHalper (talk) 00:02, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-content/view/3806169:9093?_phsrc=lhD92973&_phstart=successSource&gsfn=Ida&gsln=McGlone&ml_rpos=1&queryId=cac8038cae0b0be16aa55578e5e60099 DonnaHalper (talk) 00:04, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

• Bay City, Michigan Times
• Mansfield, Ohio News
• Marion, Ohio Daily Star
• Lancaster, Ohio Eagle
• Akron, Ohio Evening Times
• Covington, Kentucky Post
• Muskegon, Michigan News Chronicle
• Covington, Kentucky Post
• Madison, Wisconsin State Journal
• Brooklyn, New York Citizen
• Evansville, Indiana Courier
• Lancaster, Pennsylvania Examiner
• Greenfield, Indiana Hancock Democrat

Published!

@DonnaHalper: - Congratulations! Your article is published. I fixed up the publication-place information for all of the newspapers - Wikipedia does want that info ... I was just being a bit slow. Wedding certificate reference sorted. My comment about the caption relates to the photo on the article; it's fine if it stays as it is, but if you know any more about the photo, feel free to amend the caption. I've linked to this article from various other articles - that's the other trick on WP ... make sure there are paths leading to new articles.

It is a very good article, well above the quality of most biographies. I hope you'll come back and do more work on Wikipedia when the mood takes you. Thank you for this one. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:32, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Wow, thank you for the kind words. This means a lot to me. I try to write good quality articles, and I'm known for being accurate. But I am so grateful for your help in shaping this one up. Couldn't have done it without you! I'm fine about the photo, and I don't know much about it-- I just saw it in many newspapers. If I find a better one, I'll share it. And I am delighted that now, Idah will be remembered, as she should be!!! I'd love to do some more biographies, especially my cultural hero Eunice Randall, one of the first women radio announcers in the USA. Is she notable enough? https://www.massbroadcastershof.org/hall-of-fame/hall-of-fame-2011/eunice-randall-thompson/ DonnaHalper (talk) 20:59, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

And one quick query. When I posted the link to my followers on Twitter (X), the photo that appeared was Henry's not Idah's. Why is that? DonnaHalper (talk) 21:10, 17 October 2023 (UTC)

Eunice Randall seems to me to be notable; many sources seem to mention her. There is a section on her at Women in early radio#Women as broadcast radio engineers, but that is no bar to creating a self-standing article.

I don't know why Twitter is selecting Henry's photo. Can only suggest taking a screengrab of the top of the article and using that, instead of accepting twitter's decision. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:30, 18 October 2023 (UTC)

Quick question. What does it mean that my essay say "Low importance" at the bottom? Also, is there a category we don't have a lot of entries in, that you might want more of? I mean, my expertise is in journalism history, radio and TV history, and women in non-traditional occupations (like early women baseball writers). I'd love to do a stand-alone entry on Eunice Randall, but are there other folks you might like an entry on that are better known or higher priority? Again, my deepest thanks for your help with my Idah article. Very grateful for your feedback. DonnaHalper (talk) 00:42, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Low importance doesn't mean all that much. Articles are rated on two axes, quality, and importance. Importance has four main grades: top, high, mid, low. Wikiprojects such as Wikipedia:WikiProject Journalism can define what top, high, mid & low mean, in terms of the articles they are interested in. But as far as I can see, WP Journalism does not define top, high, mid & low. Suffice to say, if, given that there is no guidance, you feel that Idah should be mid, or high, or top, by all means amend the 'low' setting which you'll find right at the top of this page (third line of the page - WikiProject Journalism|class=c|importance=low ). (I set the article to low, fwiw, having given it at least 0.2 seconds of thought.) The main use of the importance setting is in drawing up a matrix of articles for each combination of quality and importance, as seen here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Journalism#Statistics and quality content listings. You'll see that there are 70 top, 488 high, 1,790 mid and 21,873 low articles, and if you click through on those numbers, you'll find reports which list the articles.

I don't think I can point you to any more or less empty categories. Women in Red maintains redlists - lists of women who have no article - and some of those redlists have a column "sitelinks", showing how many other wikipedias (e.g. other languages, wikisource, &c) have articles / pages on the person ... and so sitelinks can be thought of as a proxy for 'importance'. You'll find that column on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Journalists - US, but not on Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Missing articles by occupation/Journalists. You can click on the column to re-order the rows sorted by the value in that column, but I wouldn't greatly recommend doing so, since you'll only discover that the two most important journalists are porn actors who, for some reason, have articles on tens of language wikipedias (and who are, presumably, also journalists). There are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index hundreds of lists of women without articles, some of which will have the sitelinks column. I think, all things considered, you should decide your own priorities based on your own interests. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:19, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Last question, since I'm new at this. What makes something a C-class article? In my world, C means average or mediocre. Does this mean the article needs improvement? I tried my best to write a good article, but I'm always open to suggestions to improve it. DonnaHalper (talk) 17:17, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

That's easier to explain: Wikipedia:Content assessment#Grades. Having looked at it, it probably fits B class rather than C. To get higher than B, it would need to go through processes of independent review. I've bumped it up to B / Mid. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:27, 19 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. When I do my next one, I hope you will be among the folks giving me the critiques. I really did appreciate your guidance. Do let me know if I might be of any assistance on any of your projects. I'm always glad to pitch in. DonnaHalper (talk) 18:12, 20 October 2023 (UTC)