# Talk:William Finlay, 2nd Viscount Finlay

This review is transcluded from Talk:William Finlay, 2nd Viscount Finlay/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs) 19:02, 10 February 2019 (UTC)

I propose reviewing this article and will start my review shortly. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:02, 10 February 2019 (UTC)


### First reading
This article is in general well-written and well laid out. I usually leave reviewing the lead section till later.
The first sentence of the "Early life and career" section should include his date of birth. You may have mentioned it in the lead, but the lead should just be a summary of the main body of the text.
"He was educated at Eton and Trinity College, Cambridge" - You need to clarify who you are talking about because the subject of the previous sentence is his father.
"He was President of the Cambridge Union in Easter 1898." - probably not "in Easter".
"Sir William Finlay" - is this an honorary title as a result of his being the son of his father, or what?
In the infobox it says "Mr Justice Finlay in 1925"
"On the bench, Finlay tried the revenue list," - Could be phrased better, because I imagine you mean he was selected/appointed to that role by the Lord Chancellor's Department.
"Finlay sentenced him to a short term of twelve months' imprisonment." - Another instance of referring to him when Norman Birkett was the subject of the previous sentence.
"sworn of the Privy Council" - Is that the right terminology, should it not be "sworn in by"
"Finlay was also appointed chairman a British war crimes inter-departmental committee." - Word missing?
"He also complained that the British Army" - Who complained?
"Finlay's health was affected by a trip to Buchenwald concentration camp " - This seems strange. Do you know any more on his cause of death?
Looking back now at the lead, I feel it is too short and not an adequate summary of the rest of the article.
That's all for the time being. Give me a ping when you have dealt with these points. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:46, 10 February 2019 (UTC)
Hi Cwmhiraeth. I just saw your first reading review. I've expanded the introduction and addressed the other points above, except for the following:
Title: He was born William Finlay, then was knighted in 1920 so became Sir William Finlay. When his father died in 1929 he became Viscount Finlay. "Mr Justice Finlay" is his judicial title when he was on the High Court, and I've used it in the photo caption as a way of indicating his status when the picture was taken (since he's in court dress).
Otherwise, since his title and surname are the same I've tried to use Finlay in the articles except when it would cause confusion.
"tried the revenue list". There just isn't a good way of saying it, so I took that wording from one of the obits. I'm not sure if it's the Lord Chancellor or someone else (Master of the Rolls?) who assigns these things, or indeed whether anyone is actually assigned to it or if it was at the time done on a more informal basis.
"sworn of the Privy Council". That is indeed the customary wording.
Buchenwald: I have this from both contemporary obituaries and the DNB. It's not as surprising as it seems: his predecessor's health also broke down due to the work (he lived). And I remember at least another senior figure involved in war crimes prosecution dying under similar circumstances, although I can't remember his name right now.
Looking forward to hear your comments! Atchom (talk) 22:21, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
OK, I will take another read through. The lead is certainly better!


### GA criteria
The article is well written and complies with MOS guidelines on prose and grammar, structure and layout. 
The article uses many reliable third-party sources, and makes frequent citations to them. I do not believe it contains original research. 
The article covers the main aspects of the subject and remains focussed. 
The article is neutral. 
The article is stable. 
The image is relevant and has a suitable caption. I don't know enough about copyright so I will accept that it is in the public domain. 
Final assessment - I believe this article reaches the GA criteria. It is well-written, researched and laid out. Congratulations!  Cwmhiraeth (talk) 19:25, 24 February 2019 (UTC)