# Talk:Statue of Matthias W. Baldwin

This review is transcluded from Talk:Statue of Matthias W. Baldwin/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: JJonahJackalope (talk · contribs) 00:57, 9 September 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Elias Ziade (talk · contribs) 14:00, 19 September 2025 (UTC)

Lede
The article is about a statue, but the lede begins with "Matthias William Baldwin is a monumental statue..."  Consider: "The Statue of Matthias W. Baldwin is a bronze sculpture by Herbert Adams, located outside Philadelphia City Hall in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania"
I have rephrased the first several sentences of the lede, but I feel that the overall structure is in line with that used in GA articles for other statues, such as the Equestrian statue of George B. McClellan and Statue of Abraham Lincoln (District of Columbia City Hall). -JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
It was already established he was an industrialist in the previous paragraph, so this is redudnant: Baldwin was an industrialist who was an early developer of steam locomotives in the United States during the early 19th century.
Removed the redundant section of this sentence. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Wikilink: Baldwin Locomotive Works, Franklin Institute
Added Wikilinks to these two articles. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
nitpick: WP:LEDE requires that all key claims in the lead be supported and explained in the body of the article. Right now, the lede says Baldwin was an industrialist, but the body of the article about the statue itself does not repeat this claim.
The word "industrialist" is not mentioned in the body of the article, but I feel that the information presented in the "Background" section (that he was a manufacturer whose company became one of the largest steam locomotive manufacturers in the world) illustrates the point illustrated in the lede. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Body
Around June 10, 2020,[note 3] during the George Floyd protests in Philadelphia, the statue was defaced with paint, with the words "colonizer" and "murderer" spray painted on its pedestal I think it's important to add here, from Wilson, that this defacement was despite him being an abolitionist and an advocate for voting rights for African Americans. Not doing so would leave out important historical context and could mislead readers about Baldwin's legacy. As it stands, the sentence could imply that the vandalism was a straightforward reaction to his actions, without acknowledging that Baldwin actively supported African American rights and abolitionism. this can also be used as ref.
I've added additional context to that section of the article. I believe that when I first wrote this article, I felt that the historical context given in the "Background" section would suffice, but I agree that it may serve readers better to add that information here as well. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
design section (maybe consider renaming to 'description') the statue is described as "slightly larger than life", but given that it measures 96 inches (8 ft / 240 cm) tall, it’s actually roughly 40% taller than an average adult male.
I have decided to keep the name of the section "Design", in line with the common name used in other articles on public art. Regarding the "slightly larger than life" statement, I have decided to completely omit this section. While it was properly cited, it seems a bit superfluous given that the exact dimensions are given. -JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Overall, the article is well-organized, neutral, and well-sourced, covering the statue's history, design, and context in sufficient detail, with only minor improvements needed for precision, making it strong GA material. Will wait for nominator to address identified issues above. el.ziade (talkallam) 09:58, 22 September 2025 (UTC)
pinging JJonahJackalope el.ziade (talkallam) 11:02, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Elias Ziade, I just wanted to reach out to let you know that I have made some edits to the article to address the points you raised in your review. Thank you for initiating this process, and if you have any further questions, comments, or concerns about the article, please feel free to reach out. Regards, -JJonahJackalope (talk) 16:58, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
@JJonahJackalope Thank you for addressing the points in the GA review. I’m still a bit unsure about the opening sentence, which begins with “Matthias William Baldwin is a monumental statue…”. I still find it weird.  To help me understand the style here, could you point me to other articles about commemorative monuments or statues where the article similarly opens with the person’s name rather than “The statue of…”? I want to make sure I’m consistent with Wikipedia’s GA conventions. el.ziade (talkallam) 20:57, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
Elias Ziade, both of the articles I cited above (Abraham Lincoln and George B. McClellan) employ this style. For additional examples of GA-rated articles, here are several:
Equestrian statue of Philip Sheridan (Washington, D.C.)
Equestrian statue of John A. Logan
Equestrian statue of George Henry Thomas
Statue of Nathan Hale (Chicago)
Statue of Christopher Columbus (Johnston, Rhode Island)
Statue of John Witherspoon
Concerning this last article, the name they employ for the statue (Doctor John Witherspoon) seems to come from the statue's entry in the Smithsonian Institution Research Information System (link here), which is also where the name for the statue I have used in this article comes from (link here). While the style you have recommended above certainly has precedent, it seems as though there is no consistent standard between the two forms (using the "official" name of the work vs. the format of "The statue of [insert person here]) and both have been accepted as valid, based on the Good Article listings. Regards, -JJonahJackalope (talk) 21:12, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
@JJonahJackalope thanks for pointing this out. Nice work on this one. el.ziade (talkallam) 21:35, 23 September 2025 (UTC)
@Elias Ziade:, I just wanted to reach out to check on the current status of this review. I feel that all points have been addressed satisfactorily and was wondering if you had any further qualms about granting this page GA status. Regards, -JJonahJackalope (talk) 06:29, 29 September 2025 (UTC)
@JJonahJackalope this has been completed. el.ziade (talkallam) 08:34, 29 September 2025 (UTC)