John Leamy (merchant) was a History good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 7, 2019 Good article nominee Not listed
	A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on January 13, 2019. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that merchant John Leamy owned the first U.S. ship to enter the Río de la Plata?
	A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on December 4, 2019.

This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles Business Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism Low‑importance John Leamy (merchant) is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.CatholicismWikipedia:WikiProject CatholicismTemplate:WikiProject CatholicismCatholicism articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : see Draft articles Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page) Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles Philadelphia Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philadelphia, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Philadelphia on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhiladelphiaWikipedia:WikiProject PhiladelphiaTemplate:WikiProject PhiladelphiaPhiladelphia articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Spain Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States History Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States History, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history of the United States on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.United States HistoryWikipedia:WikiProject United States HistoryTemplate:WikiProject United States HistoryUnited States History articles Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. WikiProject United States History To-do: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : United States History articles needing attention Infobox : United States History articles needing infoboxes Stubs : Stub-Class United States History articles, Category:United States history stubs Other : Place either of the following WikiProject banners on United States History-related articles and assess: ((WikiProject United States History|class=|importance=)) ((WikiProject United States|class=|importance=|UShistory=Yes|UShistory-importance=))

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

Reviewer: Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs) 23:17, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this. Vanamonde (Talk) 23:17, 22 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The nominator has been inactive, so I am closing this review based on prose clarity issues. The article is not far from GA status; if the nominator or anyone else addresses my comments and renominates this, please feel free to message me for a quick review, so that it does not sit in the queue for many more months. Vanamonde (Talk) 20:17, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   Sources seem solid

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

   Earwig's tool highlights quotes, spotchecks are clear

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   Licensing checks out to the best of my abilities

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• The early life section is very brief; is anything more available?
• This is quite a short article; I don't think the business section needs a further summary paragraph. I would include that content in the lead.
• "In a time where Spanish mercantilist policy was the primary obstacle to trade" This sounds POV even if that isn't the intention. Trade between what parties? The way it's written, it could be global trade.
• Who is Francisco Rendón?
• "ambassador Josef de Jáudenes" One may presume this is the Spanish ambassador to the US, but that's not necessarily a good assumption; being explicit would be helpful.
• If you are quoting, I would recommend saying whose quote it was. Also, the quotation in paragraph two of "methods" is a bit lengthy; try to remove stuff that can be paraphrased easily.
• "As agent he used" What does "agent" mean in this context?
• "In March 1788 an advertisement showed "Leamy and Elliot"" Without further context as to who Elliot was, this doesn't add much.
• I would strongly recommend switching the "expansion" and "methods" subsections; that would be more in keeping with chronology, and would flow better, in my opinion
• "After a temporary lifting of trade restrictions" What restrictions?
• You have rather a lot of short paragraphs; I would prefer combining these, especially the one-sentence one
• Link/explain "pewholder"
• I think a bulleted list, including days of birth, for five children, is excessive. The specific dates aren't very important. I would make that a single sentence, with years of birth in parentheses.
• "according to a Catholic history"; what do you mean by this?
• "and predominance in Spanish rather than American archives" I think I know what you mean here, but I'm uncertain; perhaps "and their presence in Spanish, rather than American archives"?
• I would strongly recommend you use sfn formatting, for accessibility; however, I cannot compel you, per WP:CITEVAR, and this is a recommendation only.
• Sources look alright; a PhD dissertation is not ideal; is there any way you can replace it?
• The lead is really short. Can you beef it up a little? Two or three sentences should be quite easy.