Talk:Barbara Baynton/GA1

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: MCE89 (talk · contribs) 12:53, 22 February 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Dizzycheekchewer (talk · contribs) 18:02, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Hi there, I'll review this article. Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 18:02, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

• Well-written
  • Lead, Layout, and Words to Watch have no issues. The prose is clear and understandable to a general audience as well.
• Verifiable with no copyvio and NOR
  • Properly cited, with all controversial claims, quotes and/or paragraphs properly cited
    • Spotcheck: All dozen or so cites to Lawson 2001 line up. Ditto for the 1979/2006 cite to the Naim source. Moore 2014 definitely calls her a dissident figure, but it's used to cite the comp with Banjo Patterson and Henry Lawson, but that's not explicitly stated (it's in the Lawson 2001, no doubt)—I fixed it by moving the cite one sentence earlier. All other Moore 2014 cites line up.
  • Claims hew toward those in reliable secondary sources, fitting with NOR requirement
  • Earwig is very low, around 6 percent and no concerns with plagiarism otherwise
• Balance
  • I dithered a bit about this, but I think that it does meet the scope for an article like this, touching on all the aspects of her life and work. I do think that the usage of encyclopedia entries, rather than the large base of information from her biography probably leaves a lot of valuable information out of the article. While it's written by her granddaughter, Lawson 2001 uses it as an authority, noting that it's "meticulously researched and documented."
  • Even without referring to the biography, there are available and relevant details left on the table. Lawson attributes her death to a fall, that led to the specific diagnosis used in the page. It includes her burial site, which is a normal thing to have in a biographical page. It includes greater detail about her politics, her relationship with peers (Lawson 2001 identifies her as an inspiration to a couple Martin Boyd characters), and details to various life events (Lawson 2001 indicates that her first job as governess was a horrid affair where she was expected to be sexually pleasing to the host, which inspired one of her stories; her husband "abandoning" her for her niece is not wrong per se, but Lawson 2001 puts it as her confronting them while he was cheating on him with her, then her leaving Sydney with the children; her attending the King's coronation (which is trivial, but interesting demo of her connection in UK)).
  • I think I'm okay giving it a GA check, as many of these are not themselves exclusions that hurt the scope, but I'd strongly recommend building out using the Hackforth biog + existing sourcing either now or in the future.
• Neutral
  • No concerns throughout with NPOV
• Stable
  • No controversies or edit wars that I see.
• Illustrated
  • There are a lot more options for public domain photos (the Lawson 2001 has a few, including another portrait, a picture of her children, and one of her marked-up writing), but suffices for a short article on a writer to just have the one photo.

I left it open without approving to give you a chance to comment on the Balance ? mark, but otherwise will approve. Lmk what you think. Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 19:42, 22 June 2026 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the review @Dizzycheekchewer! It's a fair point on breadth, I think you're right that I didn't mine the sources quite as much as I could have. I've done some expansion based on Lawson 2001 to fill in some of the details that you pointed out. Drawing on the Hackforth biography is definitely something I'd like to do in future if I decide to take this to FA, but hopefully this now more clearly covers all of the major aspects of her life. Let me know what you think. MCE89 (talk) 11:50, 24 June 2026 (UTC)

Sounds good to me! I'll mark this all set to go. Nice work! Dizzycheekchewer (talk) 05:39, 26 June 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.