# Talk:John Wieting

This review is transcluded from Talk:John Wieting/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Kavyansh.Singh (talk · contribs) 14:50, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Nominator: Eddie891 (talk · contribs) at 14:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC) 


### GA criteria
### Comments
Missing short description
Added
Wieting spent "He spent"
sure
After purchasing equipment specify what type of equipments
Sure
at the age of forty-five in 1862, better write 45 in number
Sure
Mary Elizabeth (Manchester) suggesting {{nee}}
had immigrated to the US suggesting to spell United States
He eventually replace 'he' with his surname
over seventeen hundred body parts hyphenate, or write as one-thousand seven-hundred
Wieting gave talks any better word than 'talk'?
wrote that Wieting's lectures were aimed at shock[ing] and titillat[ing] audiences" the quote ends but never starts!
Done all the above
attempting to purchase it for $25,000 suggesting to use {{inflation}}
Hard to do b/c no exact start year
for 3/4 ownership use {{Frac}}
and was buried in Oakwood Cemetery fix the disambiguation link
His mausoleum whose?
done the above
Anything to say about his legacy?
added some stuff about the opera house
Image missing ALT text
Added
Footnotes all good!
The following sources are mentioned, but never used as footnotes:
Keim, Norman O. (2008-06-09). Our Movie Houses: A History of Film and Cinematic Innovation in Central New York. Syracuse University Press. ISBN 978-0-8156-0896-7.
Hirsch, Foster (2000-09-05). The Boys from Syracuse: The Shuberts' Theatrical Empire. Cooper Square Press. ISBN 978-1-4616-9875-3.
should be used now
Inconsistency in writing publication location: New York, NY v. Boston, Mass..
hopefully standardized-- cut all I found
Very high copyvio from https://smiletimegh.com/who-is-john-wieting-biography-career-net-worth/, which is very likely a mirror of Wiki. So, no issues.
That is pretty much all there is to say!

Thanks, Kavyansh.Singh, what do you think now? Eddie891  Talk Work  17:51, 20 January 2022 (UTC)
Wrapping up
We are pretty much near the end of this review, just take care of the following minor points:

Add something, a line or two, from the legacy section to the lead
Sure
Date format: 2018-06-05 in "References" v. July 28, 2005 in footnotes section. There are a few other instances as well
Should be good now
How are you ordering "References"? Suggesting to keep it alphabetical.
Alphabetized
That is it! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 18:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks again, Kavyansh.Singh, What do you think now? Eddie891  Talk Work  13:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)
Congrats on your zillionth GA! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:04, 21 January 2022 (UTC)