# Talk:Pickawillany

Should this really belong to the France portal?  It was a purely Miami village, on land contested by two European imperial powers.  If anything, Pickawillany was an affront to supposed France superiority because the Miami dared to trade with someone else. Mingusboodle 22:05, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I mention Pierre Joseph Céloron de Blainville's visit to Pickawillany:

Talk:Pierre Joseph Céloron de Blainville#Pickawillany
I think the mention of should go in that article and this article as well.  A number of resources mention it.  --David Tornheim (talk) 09:40, 3 November 2019 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Pickawillany/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: GhostRiver (talk · contribs) 16:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

I will be taking a look at this! — GhostRiver 16:39, 16 October 2021 (UTC)


### Infobox and lede
Per MOS:LEADCITE, information cited in the body does not also need to be cited in the lede
See below about Memeskia's nicknames
Comma after "June 21, 1752" per MOS:DATECOMMA
Do not bold "Raid on Pickawillany" or "Battle of Pickawillany" per MOS:BOLDLEAD
Comma after "Piqua, Ohio" per MOS:GEOCOMMA


### Etymology
"The English term Pickawillany derives from the Shawnee word for the Miamis – pkiiwileni 'foreigner'." → "The English term Pickawillany derives from pkiiwileni, the Sawnee word for the Miami people – literally, "foreigner"."
"Shawnee pekowiiøa 'ash people'." → "Shawnee pekowiiøa, or "ash people"." per MOS:DOUBLE


### Establishment and early history
"to abandon Junundat in 1747" → "to abandon Junundat that year"
The two sentences given to Memeskia's name seem to have too much WP:DETAIL
Use the conversion template on figures like "100 miles"
I would cut the "unfortunately" as too POV, especially because it asks the question, "Unfortunate for whom?"
Also, that sentence about it being too deep in Ohio Country for military assistance needs to be cited


### Visit by Celoron de Blainville, 1749
"In response to these new English alliances,"
Per MOS:SEASON, "summer of" should be avoided and replaced with a more specific time frame (if possible), or with "mid-1749"
Quotation marks should be outside the wikilink for "lead plate expedition"
"Immediately upon arriving" → "Immediately upon his arrival"
The information in parentheses would be better served as a footnote. Instructions can be found at Help:Shortened footnotes#Explanatory notes.
""had not much objection."" → ""had not much objection"." per MOS:LQ
The third paragraph requires more citations after the direct quote, per WP:INTEGRITY
"Chief Cold Foot and told him" → "Chief Cold Food, telling him"


### Fort and trading post, 1749-1750
Spaces before and after a set of ellipses, per MOS:ELLIPSIS
See the note on MOS:SEASON above


### Visit by John Patten, 1750
See above with parentheticals becoming footnotes
Comma after "invited to Fort St. Philippe"
"and returned to Pennsylvania" → "whereupon he returned to Pennsylvania"


### Visit by Christopher Gist, 1751
Comma after "the speaker of the Miamis replied"
Same MOS:ELLIPSIS comments as above
Delink George Croghan, linked above


### French plans to attack Pickawillany
Same MOS:SEASON comments as above
Comma after "Jacques-Pierre de Taffanel de la Jonquière"


### Raid on Pickawillany, 1752
Same MOS:SEASON comments as above
No comma needed after coureur de bois
"thirty" → "30" per MOS:NUM
"Langlade with 240 Indians and one other unidentified Frenchman arrived at the village" → "Langlade arrived at the village with 240 Indians and one other unidentified Frenchman"
"had no water (the fort's well had apparently gone dry)" → "had no water, the fort's well having gone dry,"
"a gunshot wound "in the belly."" → "a gunshot wound to his abdomen."
"to the eater" → "to whoever consumed it"


#### Contemporary accounts of the raid
Good


#### English accounts
"November, 1752" → "November 1752" per MOS:BADDATE


#### French accounts
Good


### Aftermath
"June, 1753" → "June 1753" per MOS:BADDATE
The short paragraphs start to read like proseline. I believe that the paras can be combined into the following:
"The five English traders", "Andrew McBryer," and "In 1756 George Croghan", as these all discuss the specific outcomes of individuals not detailed below
"Memeskia's wife" and "Langade garnered"; both paras mention Langlade
"A month after the raid" and "Following the attack"; both describe what happened to the site
The Burney paragraph can stay as is
As for an order, go with whatever you feel is right.


### Later history
Comma after "Vincennes, Indiana," per MOS:GEOCOMMA
Comma after "however, until 1769,"
""Loramie's Station."" → ""Loramie's Station"." per MOS:LQ


### Archaeological investigations
Use the conversion template on all of the acres and meters in this section
Comma after "over 1500 artifacts have been recovered"
Comma after "Between 2009 and 2011"


### References
Only the title of the work should be linked, whereas the extra information (author, journal/publisher, date, access date) should not be.
Additionally, all online sources require an access date ("Retrieved x day")


### General comments
Images are properly licensed and relevant. Many of them are, however, quite large: per MOS:IMGSIZE, images should not be set to a fixed width larger than 220px without very good reason. Most of the maps are at 350px, which is technically allowable but creates some viewing difficulties even on my laptop screen, to say nothing of mobile readers.
No stability concerns present in the revision history
Copyvio score looks good at 23.7% from attributed direct quotes
Putting on hold for now. Please feel free to ping me with any questions or comments. — GhostRiver 16:49, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Dear GhostRiver, thank you very much for this thorough review. I have made corrections and changes following your recommendations. I hope this satisfies GA criteria. Please let me know if you would like to see any additional changes. Cmacauley (talk) 21:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
I have made one more edit, just to turn a parenthetical into a foot/endnote as suggested, and to show you how to do such a thing if you would like to learn. I must say the article was very well-written; most of my comments were on Manual of Style quirks that are not necessarily intuitive unless you have been writing or reviewing GAs for a while. With all those changes made, though, I'll be happy to pass this article! — GhostRiver 16:49, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Thanks again, GhostRiver for your work on this article, and for your many other significant contributions to Wikipedia. Cmacauley (talk) 21:32, 18 October 2021 (UTC)