Talk:Claire Coutinho/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: BennyOnTheLoose (talk · contribs) 23:35, 22 April 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Edwininlondon (talk · contribs) 07:13, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

Hi @BennyOnTheLoose:. I'm happy to review your nomination. I noticed on Women in Green you have quite a few GA nominations, so I thought I'd better have a look and see if I can some of them passed. Edwininlondon (talk) 07:13, 26 August 2024 (UTC)

@Edwininlondon: Many thanks. I've addressed your points; I've added couple of comments below. Please let me know about anything else that is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:07, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@BennyOnTheLoose: Splendid. All seems GA worthy now. Just a few nitpicks below: Edwininlondon (talk) 14:39, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@Edwininlondon: Hopefully those are now addressed too, but let me know if more is needed. Thanks again. Regards. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

@BennyOnTheLoose: All good. Spotchecks passed as well. Will promote now. Edwininlondon (talk) 11:22, 4 September 2024 (UTC)

Overall I believe this one nearly meets the criteria for GA. I found the following issue with sources, which seem easy to fix:

• Reference 15 (LinkedIn) --> remove as per WP:SOCIALMEDIA
• Reference 26 (Twitter) --> remove as per WP:TWITTER
• Reference 33 (clairecoutinho.com) --> remove as per WP:ABOUTSELF and find alternative

In addition to that I have a few comments (but feel free to ignore):

• Structure: I don't think having the one sub-section Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero is right. I would recommend making another section describing events prior to Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero, and another one for events post. What we have now is jumping back in time.

• I added a "Public image" subheading, but this may not address your point fully.

• It doesn't but it is just a matter of taste and does not stop me from passing for GA.

• There are a few single sentence paragraphs. Ideally content is grouped better.

• Grouped some, but let me know if there are still instances to be addressed.

• the opening paragraph has 3 instances of "has served". Rewording would be good.
• later became a programme director for the industry group Housing and Finance Institute created by Natalie Elphicke between 2015 and 2017 --> 2 issues: 1) is the between 2015 and 2017 about "created" or "became"? 2) between x and y to me suggests some uncertainty about when she became or about when it was created, hence the timeframe. If alternative you meant she worked there from 2015 to 2017, it should probably say something like "subsequently worked until 2017 as a programme director for the industry group Housing and Finance Institute created by Natalie Elphicke"

• Reworded, as the sources don't actually support all the dates that were in the text.

• All good, except for "As at 2016" --> is that grammatically correct?

• Seems like "As at" is used more in accounting in British English that outside of that context. Changed to "As of". (Please feel free to amend, if you have a better wording.) BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

• In the former role, she --> I would put this right away with the CSJ bit
• selected as the Conservative candidate --> I would add here that it was for the upcoming election
• the July–September 2022 Conservative Party leadership election --> perhaps this is better: the following Conservative Party leadership election
• the infobox says Majority (15.2%), but the text says vote share of 35.6%. Which one is it?

• Majority is calculated as a proprtion of votes cast - see East Surrey (UK Parliament constituency).

• Ah. But that does mean we need a source for the 15.2% in the infobox.

• Added a ref, and amended to 15.1% per that source. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:20, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

• On 8 July 2024, Coutinho --> the reader should first be told the Conservatives lost the election.
• Heather Stewart of The Guardian remarked that Coutinho while appeared to show --> grammar?