# Talk:Ricky Megee

This review is transcluded from Talk:Ricky Megee/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Catrìona (talk · contribs) 18:58, 18 August 2018 (UTC)

OK, I'll be picking this one up. Please reply individually under each of my posts and mark with  Done,  Fixed,  Added,  Not done,  Doing..., or  Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. Catrìona (talk) 18:58, 18 August 2018 (UTC)


### Lede
You don't need to cite "1971" because it's cited in the text of the article.
 Removed
The precise reasons for his being stranded in the desert crossing the Northern Territory and Western Australia are uncertain, and range from his car breaking down to his being carjacked by an armed gang. The reason that it's unclear is because Magee gave contradictory statements. This could be stated concisely in the lede.
 Done I rewrote the opening couple of lines.
However, the bald facts of his existence for over two months are not. "bald facts" is slightly POV. And all that the doctor said was that his physical condition was consistent with having spent the time in the bush, not that he necessarily did. The newspapers mostly hedge with "he said", etc. While I don't think we need to change the first sentence to ...most notable for allegedly having been stranded..., I think that saying there are no doubts goes too far.
 Fixed (possibly) and  Removed {tq|bald facts}}
Megee existed in extreme temperatures: like most deserts, the Tanami can reach 40 °C (104 °F) during the day but still be very cold at night. Suggest that you remove "Magee" from the sentence and focus on the conditions of the desert.
 Done A standalone sentence now
Although some doubts were subsequently raised as to the exact chain of events as Megee related them, the police never believed any criminal offences to have taken place. Awkward and confusing. Although the newspaper reports are vague, I think we can improve on this. Perhaps "The police did not find evidence that a criminal offense had occurred."
Megee later emigrated to Dubai. Since this is a WP:1E, suggest that this not be in the lede.
 Removed
Are there any free pictures of Magee?
I, do not think so, unfortunately; I remember having a look when I finished it...putting "Ricky Megee &tbs=sur:fmc" into google brings up only this unhelpful selction of things—from Mississippi? Where do we stand on fair use images of living people, do you know?
Fair use images as portraits is only allowed for deceased individuals, unfortunately.


### Early life
Megee took various jobs, including selling carpets, prawn fishing, nightclub doorman, and working as an electrician Awkward mix of nouns and gerunds
H'mmm, I stuck to the nouns for conistency; but it doesn't read particularly gender-neutral friendly; any thoughts?
I don't see anything wrong with the way you have it now.


### Journey to Port Hedland and attack
Suggest you reorganize this section to say at the beginning that Magee gave different stories, and then in chronological order what these stories were—detail proportional to coverage. This is how it's covered in many of the sources and will be less confusing to readers.
Right. Bit tricky, but think I've done it. The chronology basically goes break down / 1 hitchhiker / 3 hitchhikers.
I think there is sufficient doubt about Magee's statements that you can use either "claimed" or "said" for any statement in this section.
 Done
Might be worth mentioning that sources suggest he may have made up the more sensational later versions for a TV interview.
 Not done (temporarilly) H'mmm; I have to say, I'm not overly comfortable with it, as I think the sources are pretty nuanced: They seem to say that he tried to sell the story, but not, explicitly, that he made it up to do so. I was going to say However, some newsoutlets later suggested that Megee sensationalized his story with the intention of selling it (sourced from Aftermath section)
There seem to be multiple perspectives on it: some sources (additional to what you have in the article)[1][2] explicitly question the claims, while others[3] accept them at face value. So, I think both perspectives should be represented, which you have done in the aftermath section.


### Journey across the desert
According to a later witness this is vague, perhaps local man or identify him by name, since he's identified in one of the quote boxes.
 Done


### Later
Bush Tucker Man Les Hiddins—considered an expert on outback survival[5]—acknowledged that Megee's survival was not as surprising as might have been thought, as it was possible, if necessary, to survive in the bush for up to three years, although, he said, "there are some areas where it's difficult to survive, and others where you can" too many commas and clauses
 Done split the sentence at have been tought
Thanks Catriona, I've addressed all your issues, although there's a couple of points where I'd welcome further thoughts, and of course further tweaking may be necessary. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 14:31, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
@Serial Number 54129: Alright, I think this now meets the GA criteria, although improvements could still be made. When this gets promoted, what section should it go it? There's no place for Geographical people, or Miscellaneous articles. Catrìona (talk) 20:07, 20 August 2018 (UTC)
OK, Catriona, many thanks; I'm still happy to improve it. As to the category, I only added it to "Geography" because (per its description)—This includes...geographers and explorers–this category seemed about as close as I could get, although I agree that strictly Megee was neither (whether intentionally or otherwise!). Perhaps ask at WT:GAN? —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 12:53, 21 August 2018 (UTC)
A couple things that you might think about would be adding other newspapers/their criticisms to the aftermath section, right now someone might get the idea that it was only the SMH that questioned Megee's claims. Also, the review of his book (third link above) had more details about how he survived in the desert than are in the article right now, although since they are unverifiable (from the newspaper's point of view) and effectively WP:Primary, how much is appropriate to include is unclear. Catrìona (talk) 19:39, 21 August 2018 (UTC)