Talk:Austin Church

Austin Church was one of the Natural sciences good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 24, 2020	Good article nominee	Listed
February 25, 2023	Good article reassessment	Delisted

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 21, 2017.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that Austin Church and John Dwight were the first to commercially manufacture baking soda in the United States, and the former was first to use the Arm & Hammer trademark logo (pictured) for selling it?

Current status: Delisted good article

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Connecticut Mid‑importance

	Connecticut portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Connecticut, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Connecticut on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ConnecticutWikipedia:WikiProject ConnecticutTemplate:WikiProject ConnecticutConnecticut articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Austin Church/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: MWright96 (talk · contribs) 20:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will review. MWright96 (talk) 20:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Lead

"He was a co-founder of the company that first made the product in America." - I think some clarification on what "made the product" means will help things here

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"He was a businessman and involved" - think the word in bold is unneeded

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The extra space between the paragraph and the early life section is not needed

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

Church's death place is missing from the infobox

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:08, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

Better to use the née template on the term's sole mention

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:17, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"However, Church did finish high school" - how about was able to finish

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:17, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"In 1826 he moved and practiced in Cooperstown, New York, and in 1829 he moved to" - repetition of the word "moved"

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:17, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Career

"10,000 tons" - the ^{[convert: needs a number]} template is better off used here

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"but a recent investor in the company objected." - what were the reasons (if any) given to this objection?

Done - Williams quote. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Wikilink Vulcan to the appropriate article

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:12, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"to sell the Arm & Hammer Baking Soda product for hundreds of uses" - what sort of uses?

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:23, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philantrophy

generous contributor to various charities across the country." - Any notable charities? Any type of charities?

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:31, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

newspapers.com is spelt as Newspapers.com

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 6's page number should be D13 instead of 100

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 7 should include United Press International as the agency

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 9 is missing the author and the page number is C9 not 29

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 13 is missing the author

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reference 16 is missing the author

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:15, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

"Rice, Randall Peter. Beyond The Bottom Line... Randall Peter Rice. The Arm & Hammer trademark came from another Church family business, Vulcan Spice Mills." - the date is missing here

Done --Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:22, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will put the review on hold to allow the nominator time to address/query the points raised above. MWright96 (talk) 16:56, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@MWright96: All issues have been addressed. Can you take another look. Thanks. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:33, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Doug Coldwell: Now promoting to GA class. MWright96 (talk) 13:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright contributor investigation and Good article reassessment

This article is part of Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20210315 and the Good article (GA) drive to reassess and potentially delist over 200 GAs that might contain copyright and other problems. An AN discussion closed with consensus to delist this group of articles en masse, unless a reviewer opens an independent review and can vouch for/verify content of all sources. Please review Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/February 2023 for further information about the GA status of this article, the timeline and process for delisting, and suggestions for improvements. Questions or comments can be made at the project talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]