Talk:William T. Stearn

message: Project to raise to GA status commenced 20 November 2016. Nominated 5 January 2017.--Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:26, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: For pre-promotion version see here. Note that he never received either of the degrees listed there. That sentence was added by a discredited ISP, without a source, 1 October 2014.--Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:32, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

text: Promoted 7 February 2017 --Michael Goodyear (talk) 13:37, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Nominated for FA 24 February 2017 --Michael Goodyear (talk) 21:38, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

text: Promoted to FA 31 March 2017 --Michael Goodyear (talk) 21:47, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

text: Edits reviewed 25 February 2018, and accepted or corrected. Errors mainly due to bots --Michael Goodyear (talk) 21:47, 25 February 2018 (UTC)

text: Edits reviewed 9 April, queried addition of Peter Raven by Pat D Raven (his wife - Patricia Jane Duncan Raven) on 20 March. --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  15:23, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  GA/FA Log 

message: This is pretty impressive, but I'll treat this as if it were an FAC candidate.
First pass
*There is some overlinking, if you haven't done so, run the script
:: I had, but ran again and took out a couple. I didn't see many, if one excepts the per section principle and also linking images. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 15:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Obviously I do find them useful, in linking text to images, especially in long articles, as I would in published books and articles. In high quality articles I would expect subsequent editors to respect the structure. However I have removed them as requested. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:02, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Done --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:05, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

text:  Agree, done --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:11, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

text:  Actually, while debatable, you can. [Oxford Dictionary] --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:19, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

text:  Agree. With a large number of edits and restructuring together with the requirement to end a paragraph with a citation tends to push them to the end. I have limited them to 3. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:38, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

text:  OK, although numerous commentators made this point both in life and after death. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 16:43, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

text:  That's because MOS says "major", not all. I see Jamaica, Greece, Nepal, Bhutan, Canary Islands. Most of those are because the text refers to an aspect of their geography of flora. Which would you take out? --Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:04, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: My problem is that "major" and "minor" are value-loaded. Jamaica and Greece may be minor from a US or UK perspective, they are not if you live in Kingston or Athens. In my FAs, I never link sovereign states, although I would link the Canaries as a region of a country. Other editors link all countries. I'm not keen on a subjective view of which countries matter and which don't, but in the end it's your choice Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, I realise it could be seen that way, but that was not my guidance. I just pointed out the wording in MOS which is not black and white. My decision was based on whether you want to encourage the reader to go there to make more sense of the text. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 15:12, 22 February 2017 (UTC)

text:  Ok. Of the various sources that refer to his appointments, usage is inconsistent. What I have done is use lc for reference to appointment but UC when used as part of a title. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:09, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

text:  Thanks --Michael Goodyear (talk) 17:09, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for your responses. I'm out all day today, but I'll have a final read through on Thursday while the storms rage, and assuming no unexpected problems emerge, i would think you are ready to nominate at FAC Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:28, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Oh, just realised you were referring to Storm Doris. Hope you came through unscathed --Michael Goodyear (talk) 15:36, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

text: , a very experienced FAC reviewer, has picked up a couple of points I missed, I can't see anything else. I suggest that you nominate at WP:FAC as soon as you are ready, good luck Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:30, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thanks - will do so. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 21:26, 24 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: Excellent review, User:Jimfbleak. I can't find anything wrong with this. Note I didn't run Earwig's or check images.   HalfGig talk 12:20, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: HalfGig, at FAC, you can review as much or as little as you wish. Most editors comment on the text, some prefer to do image or source reviews (earwig isn't compulsory), at least one just reviews and supports on the quality of the prose Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:20, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
replies: text:  Actually I ran earwig - mainly found citations! And all the other GA and FA tools. --Michael Goodyear (talk) 15:36, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments

message: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/William T. Stearn --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:04, 11 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  TFAR 

message: Was he really principally known as William T. Stearn? There are more references to W. T. Stearn in the article and William T. is a rare formulation in BrEng. If the current article name is the preference of an American editor it should be corrected, per MOS:TIES. Spicemix (talk) 19:28, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not American! --Michael Goodyear ✐  ✉  18:12, 24 August 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name 

message: Yes, useless (but with a golden star). It is completely hopeless to try to read the article an find a reference (you have to click around and click around and you won't get back to where you started from). When you finally, if ever, find the reference you have forgotten what you wondered about. This article might be good (regarding the contents) but it really sucks when it comes to availability. So, either fix the references-mess or take away that misplaced golden star. Episcophagus (talk) 19:41, 29 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Useless! 

message: Just a pointer to some questions about the article at the TFA blurb. - Dank (push to talk) 15:30, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WT:Today's featured article/April 2024#william t. stearn]] 

message: the article mentions that stearn "regulary attended RHS flower shows even after he was barely able to walk".  is this accurate?  if he was still attending shows after he was barely able to walk, this would appear to mean that he was attending them even when he could not walk, in which case, it may be more clear to state that instead.  alternatively, it seems possible that what was meant was that stearn was still attending these shows even when he was barely able to walk.  dying (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  flower shows 

message: William Stearn married, in 1940, Ruth Alford; they had a son and two daughters. Clean Arlene (talk) 11:04, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Please add his private life