Talk:Jeremy Pemberton (priest)/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Eviolite (talk · contribs) 17:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will review this one today or tomorrow. eviolite (talk) 17:25, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Here's my review. The article definitely needs work to get it to GA standard, though I think it's not to the point of a quickfail.

General comments:

Is there any more info available on his early/prior life? I know at the very least sources say he had been a priest for over 30 years, which should be mentioned.
Sourcing is good.
No images, fine as presumably none are available, but if a free one does become available please do add it.
There are close paraphrasing issues. See Earwig. I recommend rewriting the entire "journey to priesthood" section, in addition to the specific phrases used in Buzzfeed, including:
- exempts the church from performing same-sex ceremonies – and canon law, which defines marriage
- after the wedding, Lowson sent Pemberton a written rebuke which arrived during the couple's honeymoon.
- a registrar of the London diocese, a "top London solicitor who was there apparently to take notes for the Archbishop of Canterbury", a legal secretary from the General Synod, and a legal representative of the CofE Pensions Board, as well as barristers and solicitors from both sides. Pemberton was cross-examined for seven hours,
Otherwise I cannot feel comfortable promoting this.

Specifics:

Lead is a bit bare-bones and might want to go into a bit more detail. At the very least, link Church of England and combine the two sentences into one paragraph. Also, is there any reason for the long-winded construction "marriage with a person of the same gender in 2014."
You use the abbreviation "CofE" in the infobox and prose - should be clarified to mean "Church of England" at least on the first occurrence.
Was there some context removed in the Marriage section? Cunnington is first mentioned without a forename which should definitely be fixed - maybe move it into the Background section, with the prose mention of the marriage.
What does canon law being "protected" mean in this context? Please reword/clarify.
Why is "sang" used? As someone who is not really familiar with religious topics I would expect something such as "preached" instead, but there is probably a better verb.
"and he no initial objections;" - you missed a word here.
Link Richard Inwood and Diocese of Southwell and Nottingham.
Note the abbreviation for NHS at first mention (in the lede)
What does "the Lincolnshire trust" refer to?
Link Registrar (Church of England) and Diocese of London (though, again, this part should be completely rewritten due to copyright concerns.)
Link Queen's Counsel
I do not believe the massive quote from Tatchell is necessary, see WP:OQ.

@AFreshStart: See above comments. Placing on standard 7 day hold. eviolite (talk) 02:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the review! I have tried to fix up a lot of the copyvio/close paraphrasing from the BuzzFeed source (my apologies). Added that he had been a priest for over 30 years beforehand into the lead and the prose (was not sure what else to add to the lead), but unfortunately I couldn't find any more information on this that wasn't already included in the article. Also decided to remove the "CofE" acronym from the article as it seems a little unencyclopaedic and done the rest of your edits as requested; hopefully this is an improvement! —AFreshStart (talk) 15:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@AFreshStart: sorry for the confusion/delay but are you done making changes after my initial comments? If so I will take a second pass tomorrow; I hadn't realized since I'm more used to editors addressing comments inline when they are ready (though of course that isn't at all necessary.) eviolite (talk) 07:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Eviolite: Ah sorry, I'm still getting my head around the norms of GA reviews! I've done making changes, thank you. –AFreshStart (talk) 11:47, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Second-round comments:

I made some minor copyedits (mostly minor grammar/formatting things, combining tiny paragraphs.)
Apologies, looking it again, I think the MOS:LEADSENTENCE is a bit weird as "was" implies he has died. I suggest "Jeremy Pemberton is a former Church of England priest who became the first to enter into a same-sex marriage in 2014."
Why is "gay people" mentioned as a "characteristic", with sexual orientation only being in a parenthetical? I'd rewrite this as "The Equality Act 2010 prohibits discrimination based on protected characteristics in the Act, including sexual orientation."
There are a ton of duplinks, though not big of a deal (and not relevant for GA) and can be fixed with scripts later.

@AFreshStart: that's all, just a few wording changes this time as the article has improved significantly. eviolite (talk) 06:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I have made those edits now. —AFreshStart (talk) 09:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to promote now, great work! eviolite (talk) 13:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]