Talk:John R. Good

Potential sources

• Appointment to board for state asylum
• Questionable legality of appointment to aslyum board/expiration

-Indy beetle (talk) 01:56, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

• Swearing in to House of Rep

-Indy beetle (talk) 04:00, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

• Bill introduced, December 1874

-Indy beetle (talk) 05:01, 5 February 2026 (UTC)

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:John R. Good/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Indy beetle (talk · contribs)

Reviewer: Joko2468 (talk · contribs) 16:46, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

General comments

Taking this up, great work on the article. It is well written and comprehensive, and all illustrations have the appropriate copyright tags. Joko2468 (talk) 16:46, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

• I have some problems with the opening sentence, MOS:FIRST states: "For topics notable for only one reason, this reason should usually be given in the first sentence." He isn't notable as a barber, nor was he apparently notably successful. This is a very interesting article, but in my view the current first sentence doesn't do the best job of clearly representing this and hooking the reader in. A better one in my opinion would be something like: John R. Good (1815 – April 1878) was an American freedman and politician in North Carolina, who was emancipated by a special state legislative act in 1855 and subsequently became an advocate for the rights of African-Americans and freedmen.
  • I've rephrased along those lines. -IB
• Craven County should be linked, as should antebellum period, AME Zion, reconstruction. fire companies might be an interesting link, as might black suffrage.
  • Done except I linked fire companies to fire company. -IB
• The Political career section could really do with being broken up with subsections but there doesn't seem to be a natural way of doing that. Later life is only one year later, so should probably be appended to the previous paragraph. How about White House delegation starting April 1864 and State-level organization and later career starting August 1865?
  • I've added three subsections, have a look. -IB

Joko2468 (talk) 16:46, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

Randomised spot check of citations

15, 4, 31, 29, 40

• 15, 29: could you provide quotations for these?

Joko2468 (talk) 16:46, 18 May 2026 (UTC)

• Ref 15 (Cecelski 2012, pp. 121–122): "John Good spoke next. He was also intimidated to address a crowd that included so many distinguished ministers, physicians, and writers. He did not talk for very long, but his physical appearance and manner made a lasting impression [...] 'We were remarkably struck with this gentleman's manner,' Hamilton recalled. 'He had dwelt amid the horrors of slavery for so long, and had seen so much of it that he seemed too full for utterance. Tears and action would have suited him better than words.' [...] Unlike Good, Pierson came across as an articulate, sophisticated gentleman [...]" -IB
• Ref 29 (Cecelski 2012, p. 186): "Oddly enough, they selected Galloway, along with James Harris and John Good, to inquire if Governor Holden might address the African American convention and to hand-deliver the open letter to the white convention's leaders [...] Governor Holden declined the invitation." -IB
  • @Joko2468: I've responded to your comments. -Indy beetle (talk) 04:33, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

  Great thank you, I assume Hamilton being with the Anglo-African is supported there as well. Joko2468 (talk) 09:59, 19 May 2026 (UTC)

Checklist

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, grammar, and understandability): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.

   a (reference section): b (inline citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: