Talk:Eustace Balfour

Eustace Balfour has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: September 28, 2014. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Eustace Balfour appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 6 July 2014 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Scottish architect Eustace Balfour (1854–1911) was the brother of one British Prime Minister and nephew of another?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2014/July. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eustace Balfour.

Wikipedia

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

Architecture Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture 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.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

GA Review

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

Reviewer: CaroleHenson (talk · contribs) 06:54, 31 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overview

The article is well-written, with a good lead and article layout. The sources are verifiable and there is no evidence of original research. It is written in a neutral point of view, is stable and has a good broad coverage without excessive detail. There is a good use of images, which have been checked for copyright status. The article is in great shape, there are just a couple of questions.

Content

I am wondering: why not name the individuals rather than just the titles in the introduction?

It looks like I already made the changes (yikes). Since there's no response about why it's better not to have their names, just leaving the changes and marking this

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:24, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is there a reason for repeating the social connections information in the Architecture section that had been stated in the Early life section (i.e., couldn't " Balfour's social standing appears to have been a significant factor in his appointment.[2]" stand on it's own without the following sentence?

Never mind, not all of it was duplicated, better to leave it alone.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:24, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What is the point about France's father being shocked at the hasty wedding (did this impact their relationship, other)?

I love juicy stories, no juicy story. I wonder if it might have been because he thought that it would be hard for his daughter to find a mate due to her insecurity about her disability... who knows?

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Open issue: still need to check for copyright / paraphrasing

It's looking good.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "writing widely about defence issues" - are there papers, books, etc. to use as examples?

Found The Conditions and Requirements of the Volunteer Force. If he's written extensively, it might be nice to have a section for his published works.

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Why was his offer to raise 1,000 men for the 2nd Boer War ignored?

Too early - added a note.

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What did Balfour have to do with the 20K volunteers later called up?

I'm not seeing anything - marking

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What controls were placed on the volunteers?

The date seems to be 1900 rather than 1902 - based upon the newspaper date.

The sentence was modified to "when he resigned in protest at financial controls that restricted payments to volunteers if the full contingent of the needed forces was not raised." - hopefully that works. I'm calling it

Done.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've rewritten this in a simpler style that I've adopted since I did this on August 31st.--CaroleHenson (talk) 02:27, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Marked off a couple of quick ones... going to research the others.--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:24, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks good to me, just a few minor tweaks.

Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 21:54, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone interested in having this reviewed for a Good article?

Hello,

I reviewed this nominated good article a month ago... is anyone interested in having the article for a Good article?--CaroleHenson (talk) 01:08, 28 September 2014 (UTC) -- Done--CaroleHenson (talk) 22:05, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]