Wikipedia:Peer review/Standing Liberty quarter/archive1

Standing Liberty quarter

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I intend to nominate it at FAC in due course. This is the seventh in a nine article series on the Great Recoinage of 1907-1921, when all ten denominations of US coins were redesigned in 14 years (the Indian Head half eagle and quarter eagle will be a single article, currently in sandbox). As usual, the Mint and the designer get into all sort of difficulties.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 22:09, 18 August 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Niagara

• $3,250, $20 → Seeing as how the article already dollars and cents written out for denominations, perhaps these should be as well.
• There a couple instance where horizontal images use the "upright" tag.
• "...aged 75..., "...age 88", "...aged 92" → Are the ages relevant?

Less sexist than saying how old they were in 1916, perhaps. And in Barber's case, I think it is important to establish his character, and part of that is his age.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

• Some times a single letter is in quotes, like " 'L' for 'Liberty' ", but not for the others like "U in 'Trust' ".

Intro

• Not a fan of the multiple coin designs in the infobox. Reasons include making the infobox really long, it doesn't indicate what the changes in the design were and I've understood infoboxes to have general info and not be extensive. Those are personal opinions so they be can be ignored if you so choose ;-)

I think we have to show both sides of both major varieties. We are handicapped enough by the dolphin design being copyrighted until 2018. The infobox lets us do it in an organized fashion.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

• Is there any reason why it shouldn't be mentioned that the Standing Liberty quarter is a quarter dollar, rather than just its value in cents?
• "...by the United States Mint issued from 1916 to 1930." → "...by the United States Mint and was issued from 1916 to 1930."
• "...in 1916, the Mint moved to replace the Barber coinage, including the quarter dollar." → "...the Mint moved to replace the Barber coinage, including the quarter dollar, in 1916."
• The first instance of the goddess Liberty in the lead isn't linked, rather the second instance at the end of the second paragraph is.
• "The coin suffered repeated delays, and MacNeil submitted a revised version, including dolphins to represent the oceans" → "Production of the coin suffered repeated delays, which prompted MacNeil to submit a revised version that included dolphins to represent the oceans."
• "When he objected, the Mint allowed him to redesign the coin, obtaining special legislation for the purpose." → "When MacNeil object, the Mint obtained special legislation to allow him to the redesign the coin.

Literally true, but as the legislation followed several months and one Mint Director later, I think there would be an implication of simultaneity there.

• "One change made..." → "One alteration made..."; Also was this change done by the Mint or MacNeil.

Design

• "...the December 2003 The Numismatist," → "...the December 2003 edition of The Numismatist,"

Preparation

• the quote "...duplicated design versions already rejected by MacNeil... ...and flagrantly bastardized artistic creativity" should be an inline quote as it doesn't take up four lines.

I think given the importance of what Burdette is saying here, it needs to be highlighted. Otherwise it could easily be lost.

• "...to pay for his journey, and he did not come." → "...to pay for MacNeil's journey, who opted not to come."

Revision

• "...five dollar money order..." → "5five-dollar money order"

I'm not sure that helps. Perhaps $5 money order?--Wehwalt (talk) 16:06, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

That could work, if you decide not to write out "dollars" (first item I mentioned), though I suspect I may have meant "five-dollar" and was only indicating the need for a hypen. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 16:34, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm sorry to have been so slow to act on your comments, but I have not gotten much work done here the last two week, I'm afraid. I'll finish up by the end of today.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:24, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

• "he wrote again...", "he pointed out..." → actions by MacNeil, right?
• "MacNeal visited..." → should be MacNeil?
• Is the "(Democrat-Ohio)" needed?

I feel it is expected. I don't have strong views on the subject, but I fear if I took it out someone would ask for their return.

Production and collecting

• "(it catalogs for $3,250 even in worn Good-4 condition, the 1921 and the 1923 struck at San Francisco (1923-S) are also expensive, with costs in the hundreds of dollars even for a circulated specimen." → Open parentheses (if a closing parentheses is added then (1923-S) should have square brackets instead), "Good-4 condition" should probably be linked to coin grading.

Another one of your well-done, numismatic articles; it's always interesting to read them. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 16:44, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you and thanks for the review. I am glad people enjoy them. I have left some comments, or perhaps explanation, and will work through the others in the next few days FAC seems pretty jammed up right now.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:36, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

I think that's everything either changed or commented on. Thank you. I sometimes altered the suggested wording. If I have missed anything or you have additional issues (or would like to discuss things further), let me know please. I will not rush to close this PR as I am not in a hurry to list this at FAC with things so slow there.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:24, 9 September 2011 (UTC)