# Talk:SS James Gayley

This review is transcluded from Talk:SS James Gayley/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: Akaza (talk · contribs) 13:12, 1 August 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: RoySmith (talk · contribs) 12:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
This review is part of my pledge for the review at Talk:Morris Park Aerodrome/GA1.
To start with, I'm taking a look at the sources, and I'm rather confused.  For example, you've got:

Their hulls exhibited uncharacteristically curved hull sheer in comparison with other freighters of the era.

which links to:

"Ship of the Month No. 168: Saskadoc". Toronto, Ontario: Toronto Marine Historical Society. 1988. Retrieved 22 July 2025 – via maritimehistoryofthegreatlakes.ca.

This makes no sense.  The source you're using is not the Toronto Marine Historical Society; that's just the website hosting the actual document you're citing, which is an article in a newsletter called The Scanner.  So, that's what you should be citing.  But deeper than that, why is The Scanner a WP:RS?  What sort of editorial oversight process is there?  Does somebody review and fact-check articles, or do they just print whatever gets sent in?  Who is the author of this article?  What credentials do they have which would make me trust what they wrote?  RoySmith (talk) 12:44, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

The Scanner is the monthly newsletter of the Toronto Marine Historical Society, hence why they are cited. An alternative solution I can see would be citing John N. "Jay" Bascom, the editor of the periodical since 1969. Bascom was voted 1988's Historian of the Year by the Marine Historical Society of Detroit, and is a regular contributor to the National Museum of the Great Lakes' Inland Seas newsletter ([1][2][3]). Additionally, his work with The Scanner has been cited by the Wisconsin Historical Society in one (that I know of) archaeological report. ❆ 鬼 SALTY 鬼 ❆ 15:16, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
It should certainly cite "The Scanner" as the journal/periodical name.  Also for the particular citation above, the URL points to page 7 and the information is actually on page 8.  Which is more of a problem than it would normally be due to the bizarre way the TMHS exposes this on their web site. RoySmith (talk) 19:23, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
I'll tweak that then. Thinking about it, maybe cite journal would constitute a better ref template here.
The page anomaly is due to me linking the first page of the article. ❆ 鬼 SALTY 鬼 ❆ 19:31, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Cite journal would indeed be a better template. RoySmith (talk) 19:36, 10 November 2025 (UTC)
Done. ❆ 鬼 SALTY 鬼 ❆ 20:12, 10 November 2025 (UTC)


### Review
Digging into WP:GACR6, this is certainly well-written.  I don't see any MOS issues.

You have "yard number" linked to "hull number".  Are those actually the same thing?
Stanchions links to Stanchion which doesn't really talk about what the ship had, nor does Stanchion (nautical).  Maybe just describe what they are and omit the link.
She proceeded to lock down onto Lake Huron I assume that's jargon for "passed through the locks in the downward direction"?  Rephrase to be understandable to a general audience.
restricted visibility to a couple of feet the source says "a few feet", which is probably more than "a couple of feet"
repair costs to Rensselaer amounted to $10,000 (equivalent to $234,542 in 2024[a]) use the digits parameter to control the number of significant digits in the conversion.  These inflation values are typically only good to about 1%, so 2 digits, i.e. 230,000, is probably right.
Article is appropriately broad in its coverage, neutral, and stable.
The photos all appear to be Public Domain with adequate justification and are relevant to the article.  I'll dive into the details of the sourcing next.
No copyright issues detected by Earwig.

Y Done. I redirected yard number to Glossary of nautical terms (M–Z).


### Sourcing
"Butler, Joseph G., Jr". Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green State University. Archived from the original on 7 February 2023. Retrieved 26 July 2025. You should include the name of the website (Historical Collections of the Great Lakes).
"Captain Stewart's Bravery". Buffalo, New York: The Buffalo Times. 1912. Retrieved 22 July 2025 – via Newspapers.com
"Crash in Fog Sinks Steamer off Keweenaw". Detroit, Michigan: Detroit Free Press. 1912. Retrieved 22 July 2025 – via Newspapers.com.
For both of these, no need to include the location when it's part of the newspaper name (and a few other similar examples I won't bother quoting).  Also, for well known cities (Cleaveland, Buffalo, etc) you can generally just use the city name without the state.
As a general rule, citations to newspaper articles need to be complete.  Just giving the URL is handy, but the reader should be able to locate the article from the rest of the citation, so you need the full date and page number.  You have many instances of citations which are missing these.
When you use the via= parameter, it should be the name of the website (i.e. "Maritime HIstory of the Great Lakes") not the URL.
Y Sorted.
Next up, some source-to-text integrity checks.


### Spot checks
Picking 10 8 (which is 10% of the total) citations at random: [3, 32, 33, 35, 41, 44, 46, 66] from Special:Permalink/1321479918


#### 3
By the mid–1840s, Canadian companies had begun to import iron vessels prefabricated in the United Kingdom.[3] 

I can't find this in the source.  It would probably help if the citation included a page number.
This particular sentence relates to On Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence River, the British built several armed vessels from frames and plates fabricated in Great Britain. Of similar origin were some of the iron vessels which Canadian entrepreneurs built far merchant service upon those waters. The Kingston-built PASSPORT of 1846 later became CASPIAN and was dismantled at Sorel only in 1922. The longest career of all went to the Montreal-built RICHELIEU of 1845 [...]. Changed sentence structure for the sake of clarity.


#### 32
The measurements of her register tonnage were calculated as 4,777 gross register tons and 3,359 net register tons, respectively.[32]

Verified


#### 33
James Gayley was powered by a 1,480 ihp (1,100 kW) 90 rpm triple-expansion steam engine; the cylinders of the engine were 22 inches (55.9 cm), 35 inches (88.9 cm) and 58 inches (147.3 cm) in diameter, and had a stroke of 40 inches (101.6 cm).[33] 

Verified


#### 35
Her home port was Fairport, Ohio.[35]

Verified, but wouldn't it be simpler to just us [33] here as well, since that's in both sources.
Y Done.


#### 41
On 15 May 1902, James Gayley cleared Cleveland, without cargo, bound for Two Harbors, Minnesota.[f][41] 

Maybe I just don't know how to read this report, but I'm not seeing this.
This was likely a minor mistake. It's been addressed.


#### 44
She cleared the port by 23 May.[44] 

Verified.


#### 46
She arrived in Conneaut harbour on 26 May.[46]

I think you've got [46] and [41] mixed up?
See above. Added detail about James Gayley clearing Conneaut the same day she arrived, supported by The Plain Dealer (1902d), p. 8.


#### 66
The damage sustained was located aft of the deck house on her bow, presumably behind her collision bulkhead.[i][66]

The source says "abaft. of the forward house" I'm fine with abaft vs aft, but I'm not sure that "forward house" and "deck house" are interchangeable.  Also, who is doing the presuming here?  I don't see anything about a collision bulkhead in the source, so I'm guessing that's WP:OR?
It was supposed to say "forward deck house"; an oversight on my part. Same for the bizarre wording, which should be "reportedly".
@RoySmith I have addressed your concerns surrounding the spot checks. I'll tackle the rest a bit later today, once I have a bit more time on my hands. ❆ 鬼 SALTY 鬼 ❆ 09:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)

This is supposed to be a statistical sampling as a quick probabilistic test of the overall state of the sourcing.  I know these were all minor problems, but the bottom line is only about half of the ones I looked at verified, which means there's likely to be more problems.  What I'd like you to do is take some time to review all of the rest of the citations to ensure accuracy then ping me and I'll look at another sample.  Please don't feel rushed.  I'm going to put this on hold for a week, and if that's not long enough, please let me know and I'll be happy to give you more time.  I'd rather this be done right than done quickly. RoySmith (talk) 12:01, 11 November 2025 (UTC)
Will do. Thanks.
On the plus side, I reviewed [41] again, and see that it was initially correct. The info is located in the third and fourth lines of the clipping, which indicates that James Gayley, and two other vessels, entered Conneaut with ore from Two Harbors. Those older passage reports can be quite hard to read at the best of times. ❆ 鬼 SALTY 鬼 ❆ 12:43, 11 November 2025 (UTC)


### Citation checklist
Background: Y
Design and construction: Y
Service history: Y
Final voyage: Y
Aftermath and wreck: Y
This checklist is more for me, to keep track of the sections I have comprehensively reviewed. ❆ AKAZA ❆ 08:34, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

RoySmith I have reviewed the citations within the article. I found a few small mistakes and a misplaced citation or two, which have now been rectified. ❆ AKAZA ❆ 17:13, 13 November 2025 (UTC)


### Spot checks, round 2
Looking at Special:Permalink/1321964728

>>> sorted(choices(list(range(1, 83)), k=8))
[11, 15, 22, 23, 39, 41, 50, 74]


#### 11
This, combined with the rapidly decreasing steel prices, contributed to the rapid increase in the size of lake freighters in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.[11]
Sources unavailable.


#### 15
John Mitchell was a Canadian-American businessman and licensed vessel master primarily active in the Great Lakes shipping industry.[15]

Verified


#### 22
Customary to launching traditions on the Great Lakes, James Gayley was launched on a Saturday, shortly after 11:00, on 29 March 1902.[22]

Verified


#### 23
She was christened by her namesake's daughter, Mary Gayley.[23] ...  The Cleveland Leader described her as possessing some of the finest furnishings on the lakes.[23] ... The moulded depth, roughly speaking, the vertical height of James Gayley's hull, was 28 feet (8.5 m).[23]

Verified


#### 39
Her hatches were enlarged, her hold stanchions were repositioned and the tween deck present on earlier vessels was eliminated to allow the unloading machinery better access to the cargo hold.[e][39]

Verified, but I do have to say I find this style of referencing very confusing.  39 is "The Marine Record (1902), p. 5; The Marine Review (1912b), p. 312.", and the second half of that (The Marine Review 1912b) in turn includes two different articles from the same publication.  And to make it all even more confusing, these article repositories are using a bizarre system of one physical scanned page per HTML page, which isn't even searchable unless you ask for the PDF version of that one page.  I know you don't have any control over how stupid websites work, but it sure is painful working through this.  It's also not clear to me what value The Marine Review is adding; as far as I can see, all the information in that sentence is verified by The Marine Record.
The Marine Review (1912b) includes details of the 'tween deck, something The Marine Record (1902) omits.


#### 41
On 15 May 1902, James Gayley cleared Cleveland, without cargo, bound for Two Harbors, Minnesota.[f][41] 

If I'm following the citation style correctly, this links to https://www.newspapers.com/article/the-plain-dealer-lake-erie/176979606/, which is a report of ship movements for May 26.
@RoySmith I need a bit of advice here. Most sources describe her first port of call as Two Harbors, while the the only one which lists her departure date claims Duluth. I am unsure what standard procedure here would be.
Unfortunately, conflicting sources is a fact of life when researching historical topics.  Newspapers sometimes print stuff that's wrong.  I would just report what you believe to be the best information and have a footnote which explains the discrepancy or confusion.  RoySmith (talk) 20:20, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
Bearing that in mind, I have fixed it. I normally try (emphasis on "try") to stay as close to the sources as possible, doing so without appearing to do original research can be challenging. ❆ AKAZA ❆ 20:24, 13 November 2025 (UTC)


#### 50
On the morning of 26 October 1907, while travelling upbound on the St. Clair River laden with coal, James Gayley collided with the unladen, similarly upbound freighter Joseph G. Butler Jr. off Harsens Island.[g][50]

Mostly verified; Neither source mentions that she was laden with coal.  Also, I think the Plain Dealer has all the information (modulo the coal) and The Marine Review doesn't add anything.
The final line of the first paragraph in The Plain Dealer (1907), p. 8. reads "the Gayley is loaded with coal".


#### 74
Despite the damage to her bow, her bulkhead held, allowing her to reach Marquette, Michigan, under her own power, where she received temporary repairs.[74]

Verified, but as above, it's not clear that both sources are needed.  I think everything is supported by The Duluth News Tribune and Detroit Free Press doesn't add anything.  Also, the Detroit Free Press citation is a bit weird; this is an article that starts on page 1 and is continued inside.  The URL points to the 2nd part of the article.  Not a huge deal.
The only substantial issue here is #41, but I'll assume that's easy to fix.  I'll call this a pass.  Nice article, even if you used brain-dead web sites for your research :-)  RoySmith (talk) 20:17, 13 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you @RoySmith. Unfortunately, I am all too aware of MHGL's (at times) nonsensical nature. One of my best editorial decisions was eschewing their archived clippings in favour of Newspapers.com.
This review has been a genuinely enlightening experience, since it has managed to lay bare several of my mistakes which have become somewhat ingrained in my editing behaviour.
In your opinion, would this article make for a decent FA candidate? ❆ AKAZA ❆ 20:44, 13 November 2025 (UTC)
Maybe.  I'm sure the writing can use some tightening up, it always can.  To be honest, I didn't pay too much attention to the prose quality, as that's not a WP:GACR.  I didn't see any gross problems, but FAC reviewers are picky (and opinionated) by nature.
The biggest question up front will be the quality of the sourcing.  Some of the sources you used (The Scanner, for example) were a little questionable.  At the GA level, I thought it was reasonable to accept it.  At FAC, people are going to push harder on the sourcing.  You may be able to make a WP:EXPERT argument which convinces people, but I'd expect at least some pushback so be prepared for that.  People will also be picky about the reference formatting (much more so than I was), so be prepared for that.
I would certainly bring this to WP:PR first, specifically mentioning that you're doing a pre-FAC review and want people to pay particular attention to the sourcing, both to make sure you've got WP:HQRS (with emphasis on the HQ part) and the formatting nailed down.  List it on {{FAC peer review sidebar}}.  I'd also look through the reviews for WP:FA#Maritime transport, to see what sorts of things reviewers were worked up about.  I'd focus especially on the most recent FAs, which will be the most representative of current practice.  You might also ping the authors of those recent FAs to your PR listing, as they will be the most qualified to evaluate your work. RoySmith (talk) 20:53, 13 November 2025 (UTC)


### SS James Gayley
I've listed this article for peer review because because I would like to take it to FA. It underwent a comprehensive GA review earlier this month, where several improvements were suggested and implemented. I would like feedback regarding the prose, if any is needed, and most importantly, possible improvements regarding the source formatting.
Thanks. ❆ AKAZA ❆ 15:06, 16 November 2025 (UTC)


#### PhoenixCaelestis
I've read through the article and have a few thoughts.

Why is everything under one heading labeled "History"? Granted, this is more of my personal choice - I've seen other editors do it differently - but I'd have "Background" and "Design and construction" as headers, then have "Final voyage" as a subheader under the header "Service history", then "Aftermath" under "Final Voyage", and "Wreck" as a header.
Maybe use the photograph from "Design and construction" in the infobox? It gives a better look at the ship and is consistent with what I usually see for ship infoboxes. You could move the current infobox photo to her service history.
The photo in the infobox is clearer, and does not include the partially cropped signature of the photographer. The Pesha photo also illustrates the Gayley's unusual features in the section discussing them. I have changed the description accordingly.
Mention the official number in the same paragraph as her owner and homeport.
Is her homeport also her port of registry?
It is. I've used the latter term in the body to avoid confusion.
I would make a separate design header (or subheader under construction), but again that's just personal preference.
You mention three voyages: her maiden, and two where she collided with other ships. Do those particular two collisions hold major significance?
Vessels operating on the Great Lakes tend to have rather monotonous careers, frequently spending their entire lives travelling back and forth between the same ports. Unlike ocean-going vessels, accidents are about the only notable events which can occur during their service lives.
After arriving in Two harbors, on 21 May.. Did you forget to capitalize "Harbors"?
..at 13:30 (EST) that same day. You don't need the timezone in parentheses. "13:30 EST" would work fine.
The final voyage segment reads a bit.. story-like? This might just be a few phrases like "Stewart hurried below decks to rouse his passengers, who were asleep in their staterooms, in imminent danger.
Maybe give a bit more in the caption of the image of Rensselaer.
What's the reason for monetary conversions being listed? I haven't seen that on other ship articles before.
I've seen this used in significant articles (e. g. SS Edmund Fitzgerald), and have used it in FAs I have worked on in the past.
That's all for me. An interesting read, good to see a merchant ship (or at least something other than a German WWI warship..) PhoenixCaelestis (Talk · Contributions) 13:14, 17 November 2025 (UTC)

Thank you. Doing the necessary research for articles about merchant ships, particularly older, relatively obscure vessels, can be quite taxing. I'm just glad my work is appreciated. ❆ AKAZA ❆ 22:16, 17 November 2025 (UTC)