Talk:Elsie MacGill/GA1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] GA Sweeps review

In order to uphold the quality of Wikipedia:Good articles, all articles listed as Good articles are being reviewed against the GA criteria as part of the GA project quality task force. While all the hard work that has gone into this article is appreciated, unfortunately, as of May 29, 2008, this article fails to satisfy the criteria, as detailed below. For that reason, the article has been delisted from WP:GA. However, if improvements are made bringing the article up to standards, the article may be nominated at WP:GAN. If you feel this decision has been made in error, you may seek remediation at WP:GAR. --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 20:02, 29 May 2008 (UTC)


This article was reviewed on 20 May 2008 as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed.

  • There are some claims that need to be cited, particularly in the first two paragraphs of Early life and education, where it is claimed that MacGill was the first woman to get a degree in electrical engineering and the first woman to get a master's degree in aeronautical engineering.
  • The education material seems to be missing a few links. Her doctorate is just thrown in at the end, almost as an aside to her article writing, but from the fact that she undertook that to finance her studies are we to assume that she had left the American Austin Car Company by that time? Did she go back to the company after completing her first degree? Did she leave the company to embark on her first degree? What was the subject of her doctoral thesis? Did she go straight into her doctorate immediately after completing her masters degree? More questions than answers it seems.
  • There are a few peacock terms like famous that should really be avoided, as they clearly imply a certain point of view, like "using her then-famous nickname" for instance. Is there a source to support the claim that it was famous?
  • The Women's rights section seems a little light. We're told only that she spent "an increasing amount of time dealing with women's rights during the 1960s." That seems rather vague, doing what?
  • The Quotes section is far too short to stand alone. if the quotations are notable, then they ought to be incorporated into the text at an appropriate place. If not, then they should be removed and perhaps moved to Wikiquotes. If the quotations are kept somewhere else in the article, then they should be formatted according to the WP:MOS guidelines, using either <blockquote></blockquote> or {{quote}}. The {{cquote}} template should only be used for pullout quotes.
  • In passing is too sentimental a name for an encyclopedia. I'd suggest moving the sentence about MacGill's death into the previous section – perhaps renaming it to Later life or something like that, and merging the remainder into the subsequent awards section.
  • The lead is a litle on the short side, and could probably do with another sentence or two to better summarise the article.
  • The pictures in the Gallery ought to be incorporated into the text or removed. I've moved the gallery images into the body of the Awards section to demonstrate how that might conveniently be done.
  • The information given in the latter half of the Awards section needs to be cited. That she was the first woman to chair a UN committee also needs to be cited.
  • "Although the Maple Leaf II did not enter service with any Commonwealth forces, a number were sold to Mexico where its high-altitude performance was important given the many airfields from which it had to operate." That is a non-sequitor. I imagine that its attractiveness to the Mexicans was perhaps the altitude of many of the airfields from which it had to operate?

I will check back in no less than seven days. If progress is being made and issues are being addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. Regards, Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 19:28, 20 May 2008 (UTC)