Talk:Unknown French boy/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: ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk · contribs) 16:01, 2 March 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Arconning (talk · contribs) 10:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

Shall review! Arconning (talk) 10:10, 6 March 2026 (UTC)

@ArtemisiaGentileschiFan Here'll be my comments. :) Arconning (talk) 03:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)

Prose and MoS

Lead and infobox

• "as the coxswain", could be worded better as "as the replacement coxswain" as it may connote that they have chosen the unknown French boy as the original coxswain.

1900 Summer Olympics

• "The Dutch coxed pair rowing team initially participated with an adult coxswain named Hermanus Brockmann, but realized that having three adults in the boat made it too heavy.", based on reading I believe it was the heats? Specify.
• "The boy was so light that they had to add a weight to the boat for it to maintain balance.", could this be reworded for conciseness? Whereas the boat is the main talking point, possibly omitting the mention of the rowers adding the weight themselves.
• "researchers such as Ton Bijkerk", based on the article supplied it's "Tony Bijkerk" though I see other sources using "Ton". Up to you if you want to make the change. + mention of "Dutch historian Ton Bijkerk" should be moved here

Identity

• "a memorial photo book that belonged to François Brandt.", shouldn't it just be "Brandt" as he was mentioned previously? Same with mentions of Bijkerk and Klein.
• "In the Olympic archives of Lausanne", specifically the "IOC Historical Archives" at the Olympic Studies Centre
• "Hilary Evans speculated", "Evans speculated"

Media

• The image used within the infobox is in the public domain and has proper captioning. All good here.

References

• Earwig seems to check out. All good here.
• Reference checks: 3, 5, 7, 8. All good here.

Miscellaneous

• No ongoing edit war, broad enough information regarding the topic, neutral.

@Arconning: Hi, thanks so much for the review! I believe I have addressed the issues you've brought up. If there are any other issues, let me know! Thanks again. ArtemisiaGentileschiFan (talk) 14:07, 9 March 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.