# Talk:Eenoolooapik

@Nikkimaria: Apologies for the revert kerfuffle there. I understand WP:CITEVAR, using an updated form of citations when bringing in a new source is perfectly reasonable. The two sources prior to my rewrite were both websources (the Canadian Encyclopedia and Dictionary of Canadian Biography) where SFNs would be proper. Switching to SFNs when bring in citations for multipage journal sources is warranted; I tend to use SFNs whenever possible for academic journals, because if nothing else it makes things so much less of a headache for any future scholars or reviewers. Generalissima (talk) 05:55, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Generalissima, SFN isn't necessary for the typical journal source - this one is only 16 pages. It also doesn't require changing the other sources. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
I have been told by editors much more experienced than I to use SFNs when using journal sources of more than a few pages; heck, 3/4 of the rationale at WP:SRF aren't even dependent on source length. I see it as ultimately harmless, especially since I didn't apply them to the sources already in-use prior to my revisions (those continue to use longform citations) Generalissima (talk) 06:00, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Perhaps that is reflective of their own preferences? I don't see any requirement regarding journals at SRF. Nikkimaria (talk) 06:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
Yeah, it's ultimately up to taste. But I think the reason people get antsy about is that it's very difficult to use shortform cites when a multipage source is so frequently cited without running up against WP:IBID, which explicitly recommends using SFNs in those sorts of situations. Generalissima (talk) 06:27, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
IBID notes that what is most commonly used is named references with |pages=, which is what is done here; this seems quite reasonable given the relatively short page range. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:23, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
At some point you will presumably glance over WP:PAGENUM, and read CITEVAR in its context. Dahn (talk) 06:16, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I have, and it doesn't support your assertion that page-by-page citation is required - page ranges for journal articles are an accepted standard. Nikkimaria (talk) 06:20, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
No, what it says is that if you cite a whole article (as in, for one single citation), you can also use page ranges. However, this is no longer a reference "to an article or book as a whole", but to pages in that article. I realize you're familiar with using online sources that have all the text on one page, but this article has moved along to something more complex. Let it grow. Dahn (talk) 06:27, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
As a compromise, how about using {{r}} or {{rp}} to give page numbers right at the footnote in the body, sparing the need for a hierarchy of reference sections? –  Reidgreg (talk) 01:45, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
Hi Reidgreg, I've already implemented exactly that  Nikkimaria (talk) 01:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Eenoolooapik/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 15:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)
I'll get to this in the next few days. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:54, 17 January 2024 (UTC)


### Comments from Reidgreg
I also saw this nomination and found it interesting.  I'll post some notes in this section; feel free to ignore them as they're not really part of the official review.

The journal Arctic is available free here. https://doi.org/10.14430/arctic2069 . That can be addd to the citation, for those who don't want to go through Jstor.
Reidgreg (talk) 01:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

Is it alright to say "Baffin" instead of the more familiar "Baffin Island"?  Contemporary sources may have used "Baffin" or "Baffin Land" as the island probably hadn't been circumnavigated at that time and they may have been uncertainty if was an island, multiple islands, or a peninsula of North America, Greenland, or an unknown polar continent.
Possible expansion: Jones connects the migration of Eenoolooapik's family and the remarriage of his father to the economic effects of the European whalers, who provided sought-after items in exchange for labour.  It would seem likely that Eenoolooapik also worked for the whalers (how else would they have formed familiarity?).  (Whalers came to rely on an Inuit workforce, often employing whole families.)  (Addition:) Just found a short biography of Penny at Arctic (link, p 831) states that Penny brought "an Eskimo pilot" to Scotland in 1839.  This would seem to confirm Eenoolooapik's employment as a skilled ice pilot.  The Inuit were often employed as ice pilots, familiar with the characteristics of different kinds of sea ice, picking a ship's route through the ice to the likely position of whales and other marine mammals.
While I think you're probably correct, I don't think we can draw that conclusion without that source naming our subject, to avoid potential OR issues. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:27, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
I suppose that could be taken as WP:SYNTH (combining sources), but this was pretty much a singular event: Penny brought one Inuit to Scotland in 1839.  @Ealdgyth: what are your thoughts? – Reidgreg (talk) 06:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
Kalaallit is a proper name and doesn't have to be italicized.  If you wish, you could follow it with the parenthetic (West Greenlandic Inuit).
Reidgreg (talk) 22:05, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

The Bon Accord fished for several weeks in Melville Bay Lest there be any doubt, would you consider changing: fished → hunted whales?  (This is covered by the current source, Jones p.63.)
Reidgreg (talk) 23:29, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

At Cambridge UP (via Wikipedia library) "William Penny, 1809–92: Arctic Whaling Master" in Polar Record, Volume 15, Issue 94, January 1970, pp. 25 - 43 Author Clive A. Holland. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S003224740006037X
p. 30-31 Bon Accord was the only ship available at Aberdeen for whaling, as whaling in Davis Straits was in such decline. It also mentions a petition by the shipowners of Kirkaldy to the Admiralty, to mount an expedition to Frobisher's Straits (south of Cumberland Sound).
p.34: In 1846, Eennoolooapik joined Penny for three months of whaling. (more than "briefly").
wrote a biography of Eenooloaapik in 1841 The source says it was published that year, not written that year.  FYI, McDonald's book is available at CUP, https://doi-org.wikipedialibrary.idm.oclc.org/10.1017/CBO9781139150613  Its original publication date is MDCCCXLI, which I believe confirms 1841.
Reidgreg (talk) 06:12, 21 January 2024 (UTC)


### Review
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (inline citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 

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 non-free use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 

I randomly googled three phrases and only turned up Wikipedia mirrors. Earwig's tool shows no sign of copyright violation.
Spotchecks:
"Eenoolooapik (also written as Inuluapik) was born c. 1820 at the settlement of Qimisu on Blacklead Island, a small islet in Cumberland Sound (referred to as Tenudiakbeek by Eenoolooapik) offshore of Baffin" is sourced to the Dictionary of Canadian Biography  which supports some of the information - but not the "also written as Inuluapik" or the "offshore of Baffin". Also - Qimisu is spelled Qimisuk in the source.
"The coast of Baffin on the Davis Strait was a frequent hunting grounds for Scottish whalers, and the inquisitive Eenoolooapik became well-known to whaling crews in the vicinity of Cape Searle. He planned twice to return to Scotland with the whalers, but both times was convinced to stay at Aggijjat by his mother." is sourced to this journal source Arctic which supports the second sentence, but not the first.
"In 1833, Scottish whaler William Penny was sent to investigate circulating Inuit claims of a large "inland sea" (corresponding to Cumberland Sound), supposedly a rich whale hunting ground to the south of Exeter Bay that they called Tenudiakbeek. Penny was forced to turn back." is sourced to the Arctic journal article which sort of supports the information - there is no mention of "a large "inland sea" (corresponding to Cumberland Sound)" in the source.
The "inland sea" part was removed and the connection of Tenudiakbeek to Cumberland Sound is cited to Canadian Encyclopedia.  FYI, I found the "inland sea" part in Jones p. 59. – Reidgreg (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
"His condition improved after several weeks of rest and bloodletting, but he was again bedridden with fever for several months after performing a seal hunting demonstration. Penny attempted to teach Eenoolooapik reading and writing during his recovery, but he grew disinterested in study after learning the alphabet, seeing it as having no practical use." is sourced to Jones p. 60-61 which supports the information.
"With no sign of naval funding for an exploration mission to Baffin's "inland sea", Captain Penny outfitted a privately funded expedition aboard the Bon Accord. Eenoolooapik was homesick and eager to return home, but enjoyed large amounts of gifts given to him by local Scots, including a £20 Treasury grant including cooking utensils, firearms, and clothing" is sourced to Jones p. 63 which mostly supports the information - but the grant was for Eenoo's friends/guardians/protectors to buy supplies for him, it wasn't a direct grant of the stuff.
"communicating them with some difficulty due to differences between the Inuit languages." is sourced to Jones p. 63-66, but Jones says "As they came aboard, Eenoo greeted them in his dialect, which was at least partially understood" and then goes on to describe various discussions between Eenoo and the Greenlanders so I don't think "with some difficulty" is really supported by the source
"Eenoolooapik died in 1857 from complications of tuberculosis, first developed during his time abroad" Source says Eenoo died before Sept 1847, when Penny was told Eenoo was dead
I checked most of the rest of the article against Jones and the other sources and these were the only issues I discovered.
Lead:
"was an Inuit hunter and guide noted for his service with British whaler William Penny and visit to Scotland" perhaps "was an Inuit hunter and guide who served with British whaler William Penny and visited Scotland"?
"the only contemporary full-length biography of any Inuit published during the 19th century" given that the body doesn't say this is the only bio ... this should probably be "is likely the only contemporary full-length biography of any Inuit published during the 19th century"
Early life:
"was sent to investigate circulating Inuit claims of a large "inland sea" "circulating" here isn't useful and is somewhat confusing - I suggest removing it.
"Enquiring to Inuit at Aggijjat, Penny learned that Eenoolooapik" do you mean "Enquiring with the Inuit at Aggijjat, Penny learned that Eenoolooapik"?
"Penny returned with him to Scotland, believing that his presence" this is very confusing - it implies that Eenoo was the one in charge of taking Penny back to Scotland - which is pretty much not the case. Suggest "Penny recruited Eenoolooapik to return with Penny to Scotland, believing that his presence"
I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:20, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Thanks Ealdgyth - I've made edits to address all of these points. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:54, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
Okay, I'm ... not sure what is going on here. Reidgreg - are you wanting to take over the review? And who is the main editor responsible for making changes and which changes have been made? The nominator hasn't weighed in here, but has mad changes with the edit summary of "per GAN" but others are ALSO making changes without weighing in here. It's turning into a mess and I'm not sure what's going on. Some clarity for the person who is (at least on paper) the reviewer would be nice. Ealdgyth (talk) 15:02, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
@Ealdgyth: Sorry for contributing to any disruption of your review; I realize it can be difficult to look through all the diffs for changes. I feel you're doing a good job with the review and hope you will continue. Page stats show Generalissima and Nikkimaria are the article's major authors and look to be working toward achieving GA. The third editor, Dahn, is the DYK reviewer, with most edits seeming to be minor copyedit/cleanup (eg: category changes) without much in the way of content changes.  I went over your bullet points above and all the concerns appear to have been addressed. (Unfortunately, no check marks  were made.) Reidgreg (talk) 18:37, 21 January 2024 (UTC)
These look good, passing this now. Ealdgyth (talk) 16:53, 22 January 2024 (UTC)