- Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page.
Here, we determine which articles are to be featured articles (FAs). FAs exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FA criteria. All editors are welcome to review nominations; please see the review FAQ. Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review and adding the review to the FAC peer review sidebar. Editors considering their first nomination, and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion, are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor, to assist in the preparation and processing of the nomination. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured article candidates (FAC) process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make efforts to address objections promptly. An article should not be on Featured article candidates and Peer review or Good article nominations at the same time. The FAC coordinators—Ian Rose, Gog the Mild, Buidhe and Hog Farm—determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FA status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the coordinators determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the coordinators:
It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support. Do not use graphics or complex templates on FAC nomination pages. Graphics such as An editor is allowed to be the sole nominator of only one article at a time, but two nominations may be allowed if the editor is a co-nominator on at least one of them. If a nomination is archived, the nominator(s) should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating. None of the nominators may nominate or co-nominate any article for two weeks unless given leave to do so by a coordinator; if such an article is nominated without asking for leave, a coordinator will decide whether to remove it. A coordinator may exempt from this restriction an archived nomination that attracted no (or minimal) feedback. Nominations in urgent need of review are listed here. To contact the FAC coordinators, please leave a message on the FAC talk page, or use the {{@FAC}} notification template elsewhere. A bot will update the article talk page after the article is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the Table of Contents – This page: |
Featured article candidates (FAC) Today's featured article (TFA):
Featured article tools:
| ||||||
Nominating
Commenting, etc
|
Nominations
Telephone (song)
Get ready to be dialed into Lady Gaga's world with "Telephone", where she delivers a phone-tastic performance that's sure to ring in your ears long after the song ends. Another FAC on a Gaga song by me, have at it. FrB.TG (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review - pass
- All of the images appear to be appropriately licensed.
- Usage of the non-free music video screenshot is amply justified by the detailed caption.
- File:Beyonce.jpg is in use on several websites so it is hard to establish who took the picture but assuming good faith that it is the uploader's own work as claimed.--NØ 14:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Aoba47
- The source link for File:Lady Gaga Telephone cover.png is dead (at least on my end).
- In the lead's first paragraph, there are two sentences that start with the song's title, i.e. ( "Telephone" metaphorically represents) and (Musically, "Telephone" consists), and I think it would be better to vary one instance to avoid repetition.
- Apologies for being super nitpick-y, but I do not think the word "guests" works in this instance (they go to a diner and poison the guests' breakfast). I would consider people eating at a diner to be more customers than guests. I have not just never seen "guests" applied in this context.
- This is a random suggestion so apologies again. I vaguely remember the Kidz Bop cover of this song having something weird, and after doing some research, I found a few sources (The 25 Most Ridiculous and Confusing Kidz Bop Lyric Changes, 7 song lyrics that were rewritten to avoid the censors, and The 13 Most Awkwardly Altered Lyrics On Kidz Bop 18) that focus on how the cover changes lyrics to be more kid-friendly. It might be notable enough to mention in the "Other versions" section.
- For the captions for the Britney Spears, Beyoncé, and Tyrese Gibson images, I would include the years that they were taken to provide a clearer and fuller context to readers without having them click on the image.
- I have a clarification question about this part (but Spears rejected it). I was curious if we knew for certain if Spears was the one to reject it, as she was under her conservatorship and it seemed like a majority of the creative decisions were handled by others and less by her. Have any sources discussed this? I tried to look it up, but all the sources I found attributed the rejection to Spears so it could just be me speculating, but I still wanted to ask you anyway.
- I believe that all of the song's credits not only need to be listed in a separate section, but also need to be incorporated into the actual prose. I did a spot check to judge this, and I only see Paul Foley and Gene Grimaldi mentioned in the "Credits and personnel" section and not in the prose.
- Quentin Tarantino is linked twice in the article.
I hope this review is helpful so far. My above comments cover the lead and the "Background and release" section, and I will read through the rest of the article later in the week. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 17:07, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Battle of the Great Plains
- Nominator(s): Gog the Mild (talk) 18:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is another from the Second Punic War, as the Carthaginian war effort falls apart. A certain lack of esprit de corps may be detected in this battle. The article shares many features with the immediately preceding battle of Utica. The article was overhauled and went through GAN in January. I hope that it will be favourably received here, if so I hope to shortly be bringing you the battle of Zama. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Unlimitedlead
You know the drill, Gog. Comments to follow over the next few days. Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Marshfield station
- Nominator(s): – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about the most complicated junction on the Chicago "L", and the station that served it. The Metropolitan West Side Elevated Railroad had a trunk line reaching west from downtown to Marshfield, where it split in three to serve all throughout Chicago's west side. It chose Marshfield Avenue, a minor street next to the much more prominent Ashland Avenue, to serve as this junction point, which actually contained two junctions; a crossover east of the station, and a another one west of it. Even more crazily, it served an interurban (essentially a light form of commuter rail) known as the Chicago Aurora and Elgin Railroad (CA&E) for much of its existence. Alas (or, really, fortunately for residents), a new line and subway to go downtown was constructed removing the northern part of the junction and, eventually, the station itself. The western part of the junction has a spiritual successor that still exists, but not the station.
Major thanks to Steelkamp for GA reviewing this article and helping me sort out and arrange the loads of information on the topic; this was not your neighborhood "L" stop. I would like this review to conclude by the end of April for WikiCup purposes, but I am well aware how little control anyone has on that. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
David Bentley Hart
This article is about a living American writer, philosopher, religious studies scholar, critic, and Eastern Orthodox theologian born in 1965 noted for his Baroque prose and provocative rhetoric. He has translated the New Testament for Yale University Press and been criticized by other Christian thinkers who consider him heterodox in a variety of ways. Jjhake (talk) 02:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
First-time nomination
- Hi Jjhake, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you. Is the source to text integrity spot check something that someone else will complete automatically, or is it something that another Wikipedia editor needs to complete as they have time and interest? Three other editors provided reviews recently: two peer reviews and one GA review. I could ask some of them if they would be willing to complete a source to text integrity spot check if that would be helpful. Jjhake (talk) 13:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:David_Bentley_Hart_3_Nov_2022_Interview_cropped.png is described as an interview crop - where is it cropped from?
- File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg: has the permission been verified by VRT? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I recorded this interview with Hart and posted the video content in two places. Most of it is on a video course subscription service where I am the director. A little of it, I posted to my personal YouTube account. Hart shared links to both of these from his Substack newsletter here.
- No, I'm not familiar with VRT, should I send them a copy of the email that Hart sent releasing the David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg image into public domain? Jjhake (talk) 11:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Update: In case helpful here, I've just sent a note to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org that included a full copy of the emails between Hart and myself in which Hart released File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg into the public domain. Jjhake (talk) 13:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Further update regarding Roland image (File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg): Alfred Neumann, a volunteer with with Wikimedia Commons, does not consider my request to David Hart (that he "release this image into the public domain") to be adequate, and I have put David Hart directly in contact with Alfred Neumann in the hopes of getting this verified by VRT. --Jjhake (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
2007 World Cup of Pool
- Nominator(s): Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about the 2007 edition of the World Cup of Pool. This is a doubles event played every year. An exciting event that came down to the very last couple of balls. I've only promoted one previous pool event (2019 WPA World Ten-ball Championship) so I'd appreciate any comments you might have about this article Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Al-Musta'li
- Nominator(s): Constantine ✍ 12:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about the ninth Fatimid caliph, whose rise to the throne in 1094 was due to the machinations of the powerful vizier al-Afdal Shahanshah, and caused a major rift in the Isma'ili branch of Shi'a Islam. Al-Musta'li remained under the thumb of his vizier for the duration of his relatively short caliphate, and his reign is mostly a record of al-Afdal's actions. The article is a pendant to Nizar ibn al-Mustansir, al-Musta'li's elder brother, who was likely the legitimate successor. For the initial sections on the disputed succession and Nizar's revolt, there is considerable overlap between the two. Both articles were heavily rewritten, effectively from scratch, in 2020. Al-Musta'li passed GA in March 2022, while Nizar's article became FA in May 2022. As usual, I am looking forward to any comments and suggestions for further improvement. Constantine ✍ 12:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Done.
- File:Godefroi1099.jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:19, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: Is that not covered by PD-Art? Constantine ✍ 14:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- PD-Art accounts for the fact that reproduction of a 2D work does not garner a new copyright in the US. It doesn't speak to why the original work was PD in the US. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, OK, thanks. US tag added. Constantine ✍ 18:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- PD-Art accounts for the fact that reproduction of a 2D work does not garner a new copyright in the US. It doesn't speak to why the original work was PD in the US. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: Is that not covered by PD-Art? Constantine ✍ 14:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Ernest Roberts (Australian politician)
- Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Ernest Roberts was an up-and-coming South Australian state and federal politician who died young. Not my first soldier/politician, I brought Bill Denny and Arthur Blackburn up to FA a few years back, but some extra non-military eyes would be really helpful, especially anyone with experience of reviewing politician bios. Roberts served twice in the Second Boer War with colonial and then Commonwealth mounted troops. I haven't done many bios of soldiers from that war, and I think the recent GAN by Hog Farm and A-Class review by a few Milhist types have improved the article markedly. Have at it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Drive-by comment on nationality field in infobox
I'm unsure what the convention is for using this field on this infobox, but "English-Australian" seems rather strange to put on here? If it's supposed to represent national status, then "British" or "British subject" would be more appropriate. If nationality means ethnicity in this context, then wouldn't just filling in "English" make more sense? Horserice (talk) 19:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Freedom (concert)
Having previously worked on a Filipino concert article, I've decided to try my hand with another one. This time it is about a 2021 livestreaming concert curated by singer Regine Velasquez at the height of the COVID-19 lockdowns and absence of in-person live events. It finds Velasquez crafting a show with the intention of being given the freedom to sing whatever she wants and to have freedom from her audience's high expectations. Constructive criticism, in any form and from anyone, will be appreciated. Happy to address your comments and thanks to all who take the time to review. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "through four live streaming platforms at 8:00 p.m." Should "at" be 'from'?
- I think "at" is used to describe specific times or a particular numerical time on the clock i.e. it aired on Wednesdays at 9:00 p.m., "from" would probably be used for time ranges/duration i.e. from 8:00 p.m to midnight. Thoughts?
- In which case perhaps 'through four live streaming platforms at 8:00 p.m.'?
- Done as suggested (I think). Let me know if I understood it correctly.
- In which case perhaps 'through four live streaming platforms at 8:00 p.m.'?
- I think "at" is used to describe specific times or a particular numerical time on the clock i.e. it aired on Wednesdays at 9:00 p.m., "from" would probably be used for time ranges/duration i.e. from 8:00 p.m to midnight. Thoughts?
- "she's". The MoS depreciates such contractions. (If it didn't, it would be 'she'd'.)
- "spanning different music eras, such as Elton John, Chris Isaak, George Michael, Sara Bareilles, Dua Lipa, and Billie Eilish". That doesn't really work. Perhaps rephrase?
- "many of whom praised". "whom" → 'which'.
- "₱1 million". Is it known what the equivalent in US dollars was?
More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for doing the review Gog. I have addressed all points, except where I had a comment to clarify. Pseud 14 (talk) 00:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Development of Freedom began ..." → 'The development of Freedom began ...'.
- Done
- "the show would be livestreamed on February 14, 2021". But it wouldn't. Maybe 'the show was scheduled to be livestreamed on February 14, 2021' or similar?
- Done
- "The concert's name and concept was crafted from Velasquez's desire to perform new material from a variety of music genres and step out of her comfort zone." This seems a little promotional. Could we step back from Wikipedia's voice? 'Velasquez stated that the concert's name and concept was crafted from her desire to perform new material from a variety of music genres and step out of her comfort zone.' or similar?
- Revised as suggested
- "In an online press conference with Star Music, Velasquez revealed, "Because of the pandemic that happened, it’s like we all want to be free. Personally, I wanted to do something else and be given that freedom of singing whatever I want ... free of expectations from people". This seems both primary sourcing and marketing tosh. What information is it conveying? Whatever it is, could it not be paraphrased in straight prose? (Per MOS:QUOTE.)
- Paraphrased in prose.
- Does the last sentence of this paragraph not effectively duplicate the first?
- Removed
- "The show was stated to have a total of 20 production numbers and will have a running time of two hours". This mixes tense. One way of resolving t would be 'The show was stated to have a total of 20 production numbers and a running time of two hours'. There are others.
- Revised per suggestion
- "and revealed that". Maybe something a little more NPOV? 'claimed', 'stated', 'asserted', 'said' or even more circumlocutory?
- Done
More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 03:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Gog. Comments/suggestions have been actioned. Let me know if I missed anything.Pseud 14 (talk) 04:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- "female dancers doing a lyrical dance routine." Consider "doing" → 'performing'.
- Done
- Optional: Something at the end of this paragraph to indicate that the first act has ended? Similarly at the end of the following paragraph.
- I was able to use "ended the segment" on the second para. Can't think of any alternative to close the act or end the segment for the first para though. Hopefully that's fine.
- "Freedom closed with a performance of Tears for Fears's "Mad World"." Should it be mentioned that this was an encore?
- Added
- "A music critic from the Manila Standard. Is the name of this critic known?
- Unfortunately, it's not mentioned on the article. In the absence of name(s) in reviews for film/tv/concerts, we usually substitute it with media critic, music critic, a writer for [publication].
Not in my usual area, so feel free to argue with anything. Still, nice to see such a solid article outside of where I usually review. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:29, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Gog, I have addressed the above. Let me know if they are to your satisfaction. I appreciate you taking on this review, a fresh set of eyes is always welcome. Pseud 14 (talk) 23:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "Freedom: The Regine Velasquez Digital Concert" - infobox image seems to suggest the full-length title was actually Freedom: The Regine Velasquez-Alcasid Digital Concert
- Updated the title
- "that she'd never done before" => "that she had never done before" (no contractions!)
- You're right! I should've remembered, I learned this from your reviews :)
- "Velasquez stated that the concert's name and concept was crafted" => "Velasquez stated that the concert's name and concept were crafted" (there are two subjects so the verb should be plural)
- Done
- "by The Philippine Star, who noted it is" => "by The Philippine Star, which noted that it was"
- Done
- "The performance began [...] She then descends [...] The singer continued" - begins in the past tense then switches to present tense then back to past. Use past throughout the synopsis
- Should be consistent in the past tense now
- "including those who have passed away" => "including those who had died"
- Done
- "In a review by the Philippine Entertainment Portal, it considered the show's production" => "A review by the Philippine Entertainment Portal considered the show's production"
- Done
- Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:21, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your review ChrisTheDude. I have actioned your comments, let me know if I missed anything. Pseud 14 (talk) 14:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for reviewing and for your support ChrisTheDude. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Panagiotis Kavvadias
- Nominator(s): UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:46, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about a Greek archaeologist - one of the most significant figures in the discipline in one of its most important periods. Kavvadias led the Greek Archaeological Service between 1885 and 1909, and was responsible for some of its most significant excavations of the 19th century as well as for completely transforming the way that antiquities and the practice of archaeology were handled in Greece. He was also notable for managing to so totally upset the Greek government and most of the rest of its archaeological establishment that he was eventually marched out of the country, with the official label of "dangerous reactionary".
The article has gone through a GA review from User:Modussiccandi, which gave me the first indication that it might have legs for FAC, and subsequently a peer review from Modussiccandi, User:Gerda Arendt and User:Iazyges. In the course of both, it has gone through substantial changes, and I am grateful to them for all their help so far, particularly as this is my first nomination.
It should be said that Kavvadias is not a well-documented subject, particularly given his prominence at the time. I don't think it's too hubristic to say that this article is currently the closest thing to a thorough biography of him that exists in English, and the most detailed Greek sources (largely, the work of Vasileios Petrakos) don't come close to attempting a whole-life portrait. It's difficult to reconstruct a lot of the fine details and chronology of some important parts of his story, particularly his education and his last months as Ephor General, and there are a few key sections where we're really reduced to one or two sources.
Thank you in advance for your time, comments and assistance.
UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:46, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Noting here that I have signed on as the mentor for this FAC. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Coord note -- I gather this would be UndercoverClassicist's first FA if successful, in which case welcome...! As a reminder for reviewers and fellow coords, a spotcheck of sources for accurate use and avoidance of plagiarism or close paraphrasing will be required at some stage. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:23, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gerda
I confirm the support reached in the peer review. Thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:28, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Panagiotis_Kavvadias.png: if this was first published in 1937, why would it be PD-1996? The Greek copyright would have expired after 1996.
- File:The_Euthydikos_Kore_1.jpg needs a tag for the original work. Ditto File:Persian_rider.jpg, File:Tanagra_d'època_hel·lenística,_museu_de_la_Ciutat,_València.jpg
- File:Parthénon_-_Chapiteau_couché_-_Athènes_-_Médiathèque_de_l'architecture_et_du_patrimoine_-_APMH00025669.jpg: where is that licensing coming from?
- File:Stefanos_Koumanoudis.JPG needs a US tag. Ditto File:Achilleas_Postolakas.JPG
- File:Goudi_coup_poster.jpg: when was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 15:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I'm very much not an expert in copyright licences - bear with me for what I'm sure are some fairly amateur questions:
- File:Panagiotis_Kavvadias.png: I uploaded that one, having thoroughly confused myself as to exactly what the applicable rules were. I asked the question on Commons, and got no answer. Looking again, my current understanding is that (assuming 1937 is the first publication, which is not a given, as it's almost certainly a pre-1909 photo) it's probably in copyright until 1937+95=2032. However, it's also certainly Fair Use (once reduced in size), so I think the best thing to do in the short term is to re-upload it to Wikipedia under those terms and use that version: does that sound right? UndercoverClassicist (talk)
- Yes, there would be a potential for a fair-use claim if no free image of the subject could be found. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've re-uploaded the file to Wikipedia as Fair Use, and that's now the version linked in the article (it'll be shrunk down by the bot in the next few days, I imagine). UndercoverClassicist (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, there would be a potential for a fair-use claim if no free image of the subject could be found. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you mean by 'a tag for the original work', could you explain? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- This means the copyright for the object itself, to show that it is in the public domain; as the 3d objects require a PD justification for both image and the object. In this case, as the works are ancient, you use PD-art-70-3d. I have tagged them as such. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Got it: thank you for doing that. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 20:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- This means the copyright for the object itself, to show that it is in the public domain; as the 3d objects require a PD justification for both image and the object. In this case, as the works are ancient, you use PD-art-70-3d. I have tagged them as such. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- File:Parthénon_-_Chapiteau_couché_-_Athènes_-_Médiathèque_de_l'architecture_et_du_patrimoine_-_APMH00025669.jpg: I'm fairly sure that everything on POP (which is called the Open Heritage Platform) is licensed under the License Ouvert: I'm not sure where the CC license comes from, though, and suspect it's not correct. The photographer, Magne (Lucien, not Louis, as on the page), died in 1916, so we're over 100 years PMA if that makes a difference? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- The work is released by the French ministry of culture as CC-by-SA-3.0. I have corrected the tag. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- File:Stefanos_Koumanoudis.JPG
appears in the same publication as File:Panagiotis_Kavvadias.png, though I strongly suspect that's not its first appearance (it's certainly about 30 years older), so I suppose the same applies - and therefore that it probably needs to go unless we can sniff out an older publication? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)- Got it - published for his obit in 1900 (https://kosmopolis.library.upatras.gr/index.php/hmerologio_skokou/article/view/71856/70732). Commons page amended. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:37, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've added {{PD-US-expired}} to File:Achilleas_Postolakas.JPG - and, after a ridiculous amount of sniffing around, managed to track down and verify the source. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- File:Goudi_coup_poster.jpg is 1909 or 1910 (and certainly before 1912): the Commons page says 1909. It's difficult to be 100% about which exact version of the poster/postcard it was, but it's from the immediate aftermath of the coup in August 1909: see here for a similar image. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- File:Panagiotis_Kavvadias.png: I uploaded that one, having thoroughly confused myself as to exactly what the applicable rules were. I asked the question on Commons, and got no answer. Looking again, my current understanding is that (assuming 1937 is the first publication, which is not a given, as it's almost certainly a pre-1909 photo) it's probably in copyright until 1937+95=2032. However, it's also certainly Fair Use (once reduced in size), so I think the best thing to do in the short term is to re-upload it to Wikipedia under those terms and use that version: does that sound right? UndercoverClassicist (talk)
- I'm afraid I'm very much not an expert in copyright licences - bear with me for what I'm sure are some fairly amateur questions:
Kusma
This will be next on my list of things to review. Looks very interesting! —Kusma (talk) 19:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lead: I am a bit concerned that the phrase "ΒΜΧς/2626" has no hits outside Wikipedia on Google, and none on Google Books or Scholar. Are there other more widely used designations for this law?
- This is one I've found very tricky. ΒΜΧς' is a number: in Arabic numerals, it's 2466 (not 2626 as in article; I think that was a misreading or different number quoted in one of the sources.) In Greek, it's universally referred to as νομος ΒΜΧς', sometimes with its subtitle Περι Αρχαιοτήτων (On Antiquities). I've rarely seen it referred to in English by non-Greek scholars: here's one example with the Greek number, the Arabic and the subtitle. With that said, an article published for the Ministry of Culture calls it Law ΒΧΜΣΤ (2646) [I suspect the 'T' is a mistake], and I'm sure I saw 2626 quoted in another source. I wonder whether just 'the Antiquities Law of 1899' might be the way forward? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Cplakidas: I imagine this is something you might know about? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @UndercoverClassicist: ΣΤ is merely the capitalized form of the letter ς when used as a numeral (e.g. Louis XVI is Λουδοβίκος ΙΣΤʹ). Let me have a look whether I can find the law in question. Constantine ✍ 16:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Found it: Law ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ Περὶ ἀρχαιοτήτων, issued on 24 July (O.S.) 1899, published in the government gazette on 27 July (O.S.). Constantine ✍ 17:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying! For the article, I would suggest to use something like "the antiquities law of 1899" in the lead and to add the full name/Greek numerals in the body. —Kusma (talk) 17:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you both: User:Kusma, I agree and will make that change.
- @Cplakidas: as I'm now thoroughly confused with Greek numerals, can I just confirm what the correct Arabic numerals are? As far as I understand - which isn't far - it should be 2466? Also, is there a reason you've used Ϛ (capital ς?) rather than Σ, ς, ΣΤ... is one seen as more correct than the others? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- 'Ϛ' is the form used in the actual document, and the correct contemporary capitalized form of the letter ς. ΣΤ is another way of writing it if you do not have a 19th-century-vintage Greek typewriter at hand, which is why it has become the common modern form (and you found it in modern Greek publications thus). So if you want the original name, it is ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ (with the quotation marks, which are actually part of the numeral). In a modern publication, it would appear as ΒΧΜΣΤʹ, and the Arabic numeral rendering is 2646 (͵Β = 2000, Χ = 600, Μ = 40, Ϛ = 6). Constantine ✍ 18:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you: I'll make those changes. As far as the exact phrasing, I'm leaning towards 'the archaeological law of 1899' in the lead and 'Law 2646/1899 'On Antiquities'' as the full name in the body: there seem to be a million and one ways to refer to these laws in English, but that seems to be the most common (that is, including the year) in HQRS. I'm in two minds about including the Greek transliteration: that would fit the general practice for most Greek things in the article and reflect that the 'real' name is Greek, not English, but I wonder whether appending (Greek: Νόμος ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ Περὶ ἀρχαιοτήτων) to that title is a bit clunky? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- 'Law 2646/1899' would be enough IMO, and is also a valid format that a Greek person would immediately recognize. I would only recommend using the original name if you want to reference the original document somewhere. Constantine ✍ 18:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- OK, let's go with that. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Now done. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 08:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- OK, let's go with that. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- 'Law 2646/1899' would be enough IMO, and is also a valid format that a Greek person would immediately recognize. I would only recommend using the original name if you want to reference the original document somewhere. Constantine ✍ 18:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you: I'll make those changes. As far as the exact phrasing, I'm leaning towards 'the archaeological law of 1899' in the lead and 'Law 2646/1899 'On Antiquities'' as the full name in the body: there seem to be a million and one ways to refer to these laws in English, but that seems to be the most common (that is, including the year) in HQRS. I'm in two minds about including the Greek transliteration: that would fit the general practice for most Greek things in the article and reflect that the 'real' name is Greek, not English, but I wonder whether appending (Greek: Νόμος ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ Περὶ ἀρχαιοτήτων) to that title is a bit clunky? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- 'Ϛ' is the form used in the actual document, and the correct contemporary capitalized form of the letter ς. ΣΤ is another way of writing it if you do not have a 19th-century-vintage Greek typewriter at hand, which is why it has become the common modern form (and you found it in modern Greek publications thus). So if you want the original name, it is ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ (with the quotation marks, which are actually part of the numeral). In a modern publication, it would appear as ΒΧΜΣΤʹ, and the Arabic numeral rendering is 2646 (͵Β = 2000, Χ = 600, Μ = 40, Ϛ = 6). Constantine ✍ 18:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for clarifying! For the article, I would suggest to use something like "the antiquities law of 1899" in the lead and to add the full name/Greek numerals in the body. —Kusma (talk) 17:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- "His career saw significant modernisation" hmm, could you be clearer on whether this is credited to him?
- I was trying to thread that needle: I don't think I found a source explicitly using the word 'modernisation' in respect to K. himself (though you could argue that Petrakos' detailed description of the professionalisation of archaeology through his reforms amounts to the same thing), but at the same time, Greek archaeology during his career goes from 1885, when it's a basically-amateur thing conducted largely by looters, self-trained and untrained 'archaeologists', to 1924, when it's a government-run business with a large, Greek-trained and professional body of people working to do it and regulate it, almost entirely thanks to rules and laws that he introduced. Happy to take a steer here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:30, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Early life: Do you think it is not worth linking via
{{ill}}
to el:Κοθρέας Κεφαλονιάς? I can see arguments either way.- Done in the body; I did put the link into the infobox as well, but the red link there catches the eye in a bad way. Happy to put it in there to be consistent if there's a strong opinion that way. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Did Kavvadias obtain any degrees during his studies?
- This is one of the really tricky ones: the sources are almost completely silent on his education, except for the totality of where it happened. Munich is pretty clearly his 'main' archaeological training, and so almost certainly his doctorate, if he held one (which isn't a given: he's variously referred to as 'Dr. Kavvadias' and 'Mr. Kavvadias' in sources, and either would be plausible for a respected academic with or without a degree), but none of the sources actually come out and say as much. I think it's currently as precise as it can be: it's certainly following closely to the HQRS available. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- From my searches of the LMU Munich library catalogue, I don't think he obtained a doctorate there (absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence though) so there's not much to do here unless you have RS that state explicitly whether he obtained any degrees. —Kusma (talk) 17:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking that: I think we're in the same position, which is that this part of his life is a bit unclear. That's not a total surprise: I'm mindful that most of K's predecessors as E-G have pretty murky early lives before coming into the archaeological service - in the case of his immediate predecessor, we don't even know when he was born! UndercoverClassicist (talk) 18:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Archaeological career: this seems a bit overly detailed in parts. (Do we need the 1908 and 1913 visits to Same?) The Archaeological bulletin could also be simplified to just "he edited the volumes for 1885 to 1892" or similar, dropping the lack of issues in some of these years.
- I'm hesitant on 'overly detailed': one of my big difficulties in researching this article was the lack of precision as to chronology, and exactly what K. did when (particularly on the Acropolis). I'm with you on the lack of issues (that's relevant to the article on the journal, not really here), but I think the archaeological visits to Same are useful to anyone trying to reconstruct his biography and/or career, and I'm reluctant to pass judgement on what a future visitor 'needs' to know, and what they'll 'need' to find elsewhere - as I understand it, an FA is meant to be a one-stop shop. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think it is pretty obvious that anything written in the Greek alphabet is in Greek, and would change some of the
{{lang-el}}
to{{lang|el}}
.- Done except for the first in lead and body, mindful of WP:POPE: it's not a given that everyone will immediately recognise it as Greek. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- "During his period as Ephor General" we don't know yet from the body that he became Ephor General or when.
- I've glossed the term on first mention in the body, and added the dates here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- This section seems to be an overview of his career except for the things that are important enough to be their own section. I'm not convinced that this is organised in the optimal way: it is neither in chronological order nor an overview of what follows. I am wondering whether reducing this to an "Early career" section concentrating on the positions held and articles written and moving all the excavations into an "Excavations" section could work better. (But I could be wrong!) Alternatively, make this a chronological overview of the entire career by adding a few sentences about the Acropolis of Athens and Epidauros.
- Yes, that's an accurate summary of what it is. I think the second approach is better: the problem I had was that an 'Early Career' section leaves some awkwardness (basically, everything after the second paragraph) that doesn't fit nicely around the chronological sections further down.
- I've now added a short summary of Epidaurus and the Acropolis to that section, which means that the "Archaeological Career" covers all the practical archaeological work in which he was involved. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that's an accurate summary of what it is. I think the second approach is better: the problem I had was that an 'Early Career' section leaves some awkwardness (basically, everything after the second paragraph) that doesn't fit nicely around the chronological sections further down.
- Epidauros: Link to the Ancient Theatre of Epidaurus also in the main text, not just in the image caption.
- Done.
- "The building was never fully published" is this archaeologist's jargon/can this be rephrased better?
- A little: it really means something like 'nobody ever wrote a formal article or section of a book outlining what was known from the excavation of this building'. I'm not sure the best way to say that briefly, but will have a think. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've slightly reworked this bit. Different; not sure if better. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 19:49, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Stopping here for now, will continue later. The article brings back very fond memories of visiting Epidauros and Bassae as well as Athens together with my Ancient Greek class back in the 1990s; I had no idea all these excavations were connected to the same person! —Kusma (talk) 10:38, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Epidaurus: "the first major ... apart from minor" a bit redundant.
- Trimmed. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- abaton: you give all the information via footnote and link to Wiktionary, but I'm wondering whether this wouldn't just be simpler to explain in the main text instead. And... is it the abaton or not?
- My concern is that it's quite a lot of information to shove into a pair of brackets - it either ends up so long that it disrupts the text, or so short that it's of no help to someone who doesn't already basically know how a sanctuary of Asclepius worked. The identification was controversial at the time; it seems to be generally accepted today, so we could be bold and just say that it is the abaton, perhaps adding a modern source. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 12:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- " in 1896,[13] In 1896, " something went wrong here
- It's now gone right again. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- "third stele of cures" took me a moment to realise that "cures" here means "reports of healings".
- A little jargonistic; changed UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- " All remaining post-Classical buildings on the site were demolished" and there is no criticism of that action?
- I haven't come across any! You have to remember that, by this point, most of the controversial ones are already demolished: Frankish Tower (in 1878) had attracted some controversy, but largely from the French, who saw it as 'theirs'. Most of what was left on the Acropolis was Ottoman, and there wasn't (and isn't) a lot of love lost between Greece and Turkey: it was just about becoming acceptable to suggest that post-Classical Greek culture was worth preserving (see the comments on 'Hellenism' elsewhere on this page), and nobody in Greece was going out to bat for Turkish culture. If you want a bit of background on how Greeks of the time looked at the Turkish traces on the Acropolis, have a look at the article on Kyriakos Pittakis and this article cited there. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Incidentally, Perserschutt describes Kawerau as an "architect". Is that correct?
- A lot of the people working in Greek archaeology at this time are drawing and rebuilding buildings: a lot of those, including Kawerau, have an academic background in architecture, especially because formal archaeological education is a comparatively rare thing. Kawerau did do some building in Turkey after his time with Kavvadias, but also worked on digs with Schliemann and for the Berlin Museum, and ended up as a curator at the Berlin Museum's outpost in Constantinople. I'll amend to 'archaeologist and architect': he's certainly most famous, both then and now, for his work with old buildings. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done UndercoverClassicist (talk) 08:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ephor General: Most of this section seems to be about the fight for control of the Archaeological Society of Athens; only the subsection "Reorganisation of the Archaeological Service" truly is about his work as Ephor.
- Efforts against antiquities crime: gloss the Aineta aryballos? (I assume it is this aryballos)
- "formally identified the Byzantine period as part of "Hellenism"" can you elaborate on this? (This is none of the "Hellenisms" mentioned at Hellenism). Is this about identifying East Rome as Greek more than Roman?
- It's more about officially saying that Byzantine antiquities were the state's 'problem' - until then, 'Greek' history was taken to mean Classical stuff, so if you wanted to bulldoze a Classical temple to build your house, the state would intervene. However, the government and ephorates didn't have a legal duty or real interest in protecting anything from the Medieval or Ottoman periods until the 1899 law, and didn't employ anyone to look after it. Incidentally, the Ottoman period suffered from the same problem well into the 20th century, and arguably still does. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Then perhaps don't talk about "Hellenism", just say that the protections for antiquities were extended to cover also Byzantine ones instead of just classical ones. —Kusma (talk) 09:22, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's bigger than that, though: the point in the source is that it's the first time the Greek government acknowledges the Byzantine period as part of its national story, rather than having a narrative that Greek culture runs in an unbroken line from Mycenae to Alexander, goes a little fuzzy after that, and reappears in 1821 for the War of Independence in a glorious resurgence of a pristine fifth-century past. That's really why the law is important: the practical effects are of course significant for heritage management, but it's much more important in the context of how the Greek state defines the Greek national identity.
- There's a bigger story here about how Greece comes to reckon with everything between about 323 BCE and 1821: in archaeology, you've got the squabble over the medieval Frankish Tower (demolished in 1874, and variously seen as an extraneous foreign eyesore or as having just as much claim to be there as the Parthenon). You've also got the Greek language question, where people in the 1830s are trying to re-establish fifth-century Attic as the national language (because the language of the Byzantines is 'impure'), then settling on a compromise with katharevousa but then arguing over exactly how archaic it needs to be... UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:48, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- fake terracotta plaques: if they were fake, why bother?
- Forging and selling antiquities was (and is) a crime: there's a good article here about the issue in Greece - nearly 250 people were arrested for it in the 2000s. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Dismissal: Εntitled "Νeed for Ηonesty" why ΕΝΗ instead of standard Latin ENH?
- Sorry, I'm not quite sure what you mean here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- why the Piraeus?
- Perhaps a Classicist-ism: it's standard for the place in Antiquity see here, like 'the Bronx' or 'the Champs-Elysees'. I think 'Piraeus' is more common for the modern place, so I've changed. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- settled in Paris: not for very long it seems. Was he still in Paris when he was elected representative of Kephallonia?
- Presumably, but it's tricky: the chronology here isn't clear at all, and we're usually working from sources which give one or two pieces of the puzzle, but don't set it into much context. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Why could Kavvadias return to Greece and why did he regain all his posts?
- The government set up by the Goudi Coup was no longer in power - this is the point about Venizelos and the National Assembly. Everything post-1909 is a real black hole: until I found Whitling, I had practically nothing on why he was deposed except vague insinuations about discontent among his subordinates; I then found Petrakos, who looks at the issue through the Archaeological Society and Svoronos rather than through nationalism and the foreign schools. Both move on to other subjects once Kavvadias is out, unfortunately. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Administration and legislation: This is more others' view of Kavvadias than the impact of his administration and legislation. Is there a better section title?
- Personal life: Was he married? I assume you don't know.
- Presumably, but I can't find any sources that give that fact, his supposed wife's name, or a mother for either of his children. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 07:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- It is strange that we don't have name(s) for the mother(s) of his two notable children. I have some hope that someone fluent in Greek might be able to dig out more, but I certainly won't hold up this nomination for this. —Kusma (talk) 09:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Pinging @NickKav: (a family member): I wonder if he knows of any documentation here? I've drawn a blank from obituaries of Panagiotis, Alexander and Epameinondas, although I couldn't find many for Epameinondas. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 12:06, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- The Hand in the Deep: seems like trivia
- Agreed; it fitted better when the section was smaller, and more generally about his legacy and impact. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 17:57, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Publications: the "The Excavation of the Acropolis from 1885 to 1890" is in Greek and German, and the name used is "Cavvadias". Full scan here, possibly worth linking to.
- Cavvadias is just an alternative, now outdated transliteration of Kavvadias (K and C are both Κ in Greek), so I think giving that alternative spelling would create confusion by falsely suggesting that it was a different person. We haven't written his name in Greek for the Greek books, for example. Primary sources use Kavvadias, Cawadias, Cavvadias, Kabbadias, Kavadias and Cavadias in English alone; you see a lot of Cavadie in French, but Kavvadias is by far the most common today and the best fit with modern Greek transliteration norms. Fixed the languages; I didn't realise the template could handle two. I'll add in that link too. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reasonable. I made a suggestion how to handle the title translations (but lazily only did the first two). Revert or extend to the rest. —Kusma (talk) 10:26, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't have a strong opinion here: the current template use is odd (giving the language twice), but I'm mindful that this is an English-language encyclopaedia and we usually give the English title of a work as the 'main' one, and then give the original language as a gloss - e.g. One Thousand and One Nights (Arabic: أَلْفُ لَيْلَةٍ وَلَيْلَةٌ, ʾAlf Laylah wa-Laylah)', not the other way around. One option is simply to swap the language templates so that they don't put the language before and after the title. Does anyone else have a view? UndercoverClassicist (talk) 12:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are you sure all your single and double quotes are in accordance with MOS:"? I think I have never seen an article with so many single quotes.
- The position we reached (that is, User:Modussicandi and I) at GA review was to follow common usage: double-quotes when someone is actually being quoted (that is, those words appear in a source), and single-quotes for glosses or problematised terms (e.g. 'owners' in respect to the 1834 law, where opinions differed sharply on whether one party could meaningfully be considered to own the antiquities: to use the word owners straightforwardly would be to take one side of that argument, and so break WP:NPOV). I think the article is consistent according to that logic, but please do point out anywhere that it isn't. My understanding of MOS:SINGLE is that it doesn't really have much to say on the use of quote marks for things other than true quotations. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:30, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
A very interesting article. The choice not to present the life in chronological order is probably the right call (so the excavations can be kept together) but it muddles a bit the connections between the offices of Ephor/Ephor General and those he held in the Archaeological Society. —Kusma (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think the way around this is to 'promote' the Archaeological Society to its own section, and shift a lot of material from the current Ephor General section into there.
- It should be said that the waters were pretty muddy - all of Greece's Ephors General after the foundation of the Society were Society men, most of them held high office within it, people often moved back and forth between the two, and it often wasn't clear exactly which of the Society (notionally private) and the State (notionally public) was actually responsible for, carrying out or paying for a particular project. Indeed, a large part of the friction between Kavvadias and the Society is that he's seen variously as trying to further blur that divide (by increasing the state's role in the Society and by using the Society's resources for the state's purposes) and as trying to sharpen it (by pushing the Society out of 'official' archaeology). UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:41, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Cplakidas
Congrats to UndercoverClassicist for bringing it this far. I wanted to review this in the peer review, but didn't find the time, so I will reserve a spot here. Constantine ✍ 12:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Modussiccandi
I will write something once I find the time. Modussiccandi (talk) 21:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
1981 World Snooker Championship
- Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about the tournament where Steve Davis, who went on to dominate the sport in the 1980s, won his first world title. The losing finalist, Doug Mountjoy, set a championship record break of 145 in his semi-final match. Thanks in advance for your improvement suggestions. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Henni147
I gave my support in the first nomination round already, and I am happy to support this great article again. Henni147 (talk) 14:23, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Irish nationality law
Seeing as how it's almost St. Patrick's Day, I thought it'd be a good time to put this article forward for FAC. This article is about the history and regulations of Irish citizenship. Given the manner in which independence was achieved, it's interesting to observe how closely tied Ireland and Britain remained after independence and how that is reflected in nationality law. I completely rewrote the article last summer and recently took it through a GA nomination successfully (thank you Morogris). Looking forward to feedback, Horserice (talk) 08:25, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Healy_passport.jpg is mistagged. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
USS Marmora (1862)
If this nomination passes, I believe it will be the first tinclad warship to be a featured article. The best documented of the whole lot, Marmora is probably best known for being present when the ironclad Cairo sent itself to the bottom of the Yazoo River by steaming over a couple naval mines, and then torching a couple settlements in Arkansas in the next year. Hog Farm Talk 05:52, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Valereee
Date context:
- I'm wondering if the lead sentence could use an addition about the dates of service? The ship was built and put into service in 1862 and saw her last service/was declared surplus in 1865, is that worth mentioning in the lead sentence?
- I've added the 1862-1865 dates into the first sentence
- New sections/subsections (such as Yazoo City and later service) probably need a year listed in the first date mentioned; I found myself scrolling up to the section above to see what year we were talking about with On February 2, Marmora began a movement up the Yazoo River.
- I've done this for all but two sections - "Late 1863" has the year in the name, so I don't think it's necessary to duplicate the date there, and I've left it off of the Chickasaw Bluff and Fort Hindman one because the prior section about the Cairo takes up less than two weeks of time, so the time context should still be pretty fresh
Comments by Wehwalt
- "USS Marmora was a sternwheel steamer that served in the Union Navy during the American Civil War from 1862 to 1865." maybe "USS Marmora was a sternwheel steamer that served in the Union Navy from 1862 to 1865, during the American Civil War. This stops the dates from hanging off the end of the sentence and also you drop the 1862 date again right afterwards.
- Do 12-pounder and similar require conversion or footnoting for metric equivalent?
- "in junction" maybe "in conjunction"?
- "In early 1863, Grant and Porter made a plan known as the Yazoo Pass expedition" This reads a bit oddly. Perhaps this is what the action has come to be called, but did Grant and Porter called their plan this?
Edgar, King of England
- Nominator(s): Dudley Miles (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
This is the latest in my articles about Anglo-Saxon kings. Edgar was an important and fascinating figure, but not an attractive one. The article has received a helpful peer review from Unlimitedlead. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Unlimitedlead
It's about time! Review to follow over the next week or so. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:12, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- May the gods have mercy on whoever is performing the source review... Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "succeeded by his younger brother Eadred, who died in 955. Edgar's older brother, Eadwig then became king and in 957" This narrative of events does not flow smoothly.
- I do not see how to improve this. Do you have a suggestion? Dudley Miles (talk) 09:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Maybe try: "succeeded by his younger brother Eadred, who ruled until his own death in 955. Edgar's older brother, Eadwig then became king; in 957..." Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have changed the first part to "who ruled until his death in 955". Does that work? I do not like the semicolon in the next sentence. It is easy to miss it and read "Eadwig then became king in 957". Dudley Miles (talk) 12:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- That is okay. Unlimitedlead (talk) 14:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Maybe try: "succeeded by his younger brother Eadred, who ruled until his own death in 955. Edgar's older brother, Eadwig then became king; in 957..." Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Edgar mainly followed the political policies of his predecessors, whereas there were major changes in the religious sphere and the English Benedictine Reform, which he strongly supported, became a dominant religious and social force" The grammar in this sentence is messy; I suggest splitting it to say: Edgar mainly followed the political policies of his predecessors, but there were major changes in the religious sphere. The English Benedictine Reform, which he strongly supported, became a dominant religious and social force.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Some give him high praise" is not necessary in my mind because the previous sentence already discussed the reasons why modern historians praise him. The last sentence of the lede could probably be combined with the penultimate one somehow.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Edgar is described by the historian Ann Williams as "an enigmatic figure" due to the very limited information available on him,[2] while Barbara Yorke describes his personality as "elusive": "While" suggests differing opinions, but Williams and Yorke seem to be saying similar things.
- Changed to "and". Dudley Miles (talk) 09:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- "By 883, Æthelred, Lord of the Mercians, had accepted Alfred's overlordship..." Why is there a comma after "Mercians"?
- It seems to me correct. It could be "Æthelred had accepted Alfred's overlordship" and there should be a comma at the beginning and end of an inserted descriptive phrase. What does master grammarian Tim riley think?
- I concur with Dudley. This is what is technically known as a non-restrictive (i.e. a describing) phrase, as opposed to a restrictive (defining one). The former need to be hedged in by commas so that an accurate restrictive phrase or clause does not become a gratuitously insulting non-restrictive one. The classic illustration is "Pilots who are reckless may not live long" as opposed to "Pilots, who are reckless, may not live long". Tim riley talk 12:29, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ah. I interpreted the entire name and title as a singular proper noun. Apologies. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Your first take was thoroughly reasonable, and indeed I'm not at all sure whether I would put a second comma after a mention of, say, Alfred, Lord Tennyson, but though, as Dudley says, you could call Æthelred just Æthelred, you couldn't call the poet just Alfred, so I'm sure Dudley's punctuation is right. Tim riley talk 16:15, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ah. I interpreted the entire name and title as a singular proper noun. Apologies. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:33, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- "but the rest of England was under Viking rule." Would "remained" be an appropriate word to substitute "was"?
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- "and Æthelstan, ealdorman[a] of East Anglia; who was known as the Half-King..." This semicolon could be a comma.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:30, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Edgar gave her a ten-hide estate at Old Weston in Huntingdonshire as thanks": "in gratitude" could work here.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- "too little is known about the background to be sure": change "sure" to "certain"? Sounds more professional to me.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- she later alleged that she had been "despoiled of all her property" during his reign: Is this quote a statement from Eadgifu herself, or is it from a source describing the situation? If it was not Eadgifu who said this, then I believe some quote attribution is in order.
- Yes is was by her in a statement explaining the background of an estate she was granting to Canterbury. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- "In 957 the kingdom was divided" Which kingdom? It does not hurt to specify here.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- "a decision to divide the kingdom between the brothers" A decision made by whom? Leading government officials, powerfuk nobles, or the brothers themselves?
- That is vague and better left vague. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Edgar's third marriage may have had political repercussions" What kind of repercussions? Negative ones? And repercussions on what/whom?
- Yes negative but the context makes that clear and I am not sure it is necessary to spell it out. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Link Ælfthryth (wife of Edgar) at first mention in the body.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Edgar was able to keep them under control, but this collapsed into open hostilities after his death": "this" is a little vague; perhaps "the conflict" or some other direct reference would be better.
- It is vague because I could not think of the right word. "conflict" is too strong and "rivalries" would be repetitious. Any suggestions? Dudley Miles (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- (talk page watcher)@Dudley Miles: How about "...these tensions..."? SN54129 19:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that sounds good to me if Dudley agrees. Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Serial Number 54129. Also "collapsed into" does not seem right in "these tensions collapsed into open hostilities after his death". How about "led to"? Any better ideas? Dudley Miles (talk) 20:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Devolved into? Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I cannot find that meaning for devolved in dictionaries. I thought of "evolved" but that implies a gradual process. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Merriam Webster says "to degenerate through a gradual change or evolution"; example: "The scene devolved into chaos." Unlimitedlead (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Although if you're looking for a similar word that does not have an implication of graudality, maybe degenerate would work. Unlimitedlead (talk) 21:20, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, but I think both are too strong for what I am trying to say. (There is no evidence of actual fighting.) I prefer "led to". Dudley Miles (talk) 21:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fine by me. Unlimitedlead (talk) 21:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
More to follow. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
SN54129
Not sure I can match Unlimitedlead's enthusiasm ;) but count me in for a front-row seat! Cheers, SN54129 19:36, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- !possible to write a chronological account " - perhaps "reconstruct chronologically", but up to ye.
- A map showing the political constituencies of ASE on the eve of Edgar's accession. We have plenty, and I could tweak any for precision if you think it's needed. It would fit the background section nicely.
- Since you say that Edgar died in 955, it seems superfluous to point out that 980 is "after Edgar's death".
- Repetition of 944, also unnecessary to emphasise his infancy. How about, "and he was born in 943 or 944, the year his mother died".
- Styenes' quote needs an inline citation rather than just a footnote; useful though that is.
- Not sure that we should be attesting to the "correct"ness of the charters' dating in Wikivoice. You explain that there's a difference in dates, but not why the preference?
- "but some question whether he married the first one and others the second" - shorten/tighten to "some question the others' legitimacy"?
- Malmsebury quote needs referencing; in fact, at 39 words, it should probably be blockquoted per MOS:BLOCKQUOTE.
- Ditto citing the "priapic" quote, and clarify who it is you are quoting: Yorke or the Concordia itself (I assume the former?).
- "competent but formulaic and derivative Latin" - absolutely, so sure you can link to Carolingian minuscule among the other detail...
- I certainly wouldn't oppose over it, but the charters section does seem to drift away from Edgar occasionally.
- "but if we are disposed" - Wikivoice! Or is this all part of the same Keynes quote?
- Consistency between e.g. bishop/Bishop required) I think the MOS
instructsrecommends the latter. - Per MOS:BLOCKQUOTE, I think the reference should go at the introductory sentence rather than the quote itself.
- Also, consistency as to whether you capitalise the initial of the quote itself?
- Wilson, immediate cite.
- "Peter Rex observes in his biography of Edgar that his reign" - suggest "the reign" due to repetition of "his".
- annus mirabilis?
- Cite "ill-deed" quote.
- "several battles fought by ealdormen and neighbouring kings" does intimate some external opposition, surely, since the earldormen were in locum for the King?
- "although [was] presumably weakened by" - the tense is asking for a tweak, I think?
- In the interest of a gorefest, how was Edward murdered?
- "view of Martin Ryan: "By the end of..."" or "Edgar was personally responsible: "this period, far more""? Think there are a few others earlier on too.
- Ref ""singularly devoid of recorded incident"".
- Ben Snook can lose the Ben second time around
- That's me DM. Nice article, casting further light on the 'dark ages' :) Thanks! SN54129 17:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Iazyges
- Claiming a spot. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Historians disagree whether this was the result of a revolt by Edgar's supporters against Eadwig's incompetent rule or a previously agreed division. suggest Historians disagree whether this division was the result of a revolt by Edgar's supporters against Eadwig's incompetent rule or was previously agreed upon.
- and as his sons Eadwig and Edgar were young children the phrase young children actually seems less specific than the lede's infants? Suggest changing the body to infants.
- Like Edmund, Eadred inherited the kingship of the whole of England and soon lost it when York (southern Northumbria) accepted a Viking king, but he recovered it when the York magnates expelled Erik Bloodaxe in 954 assuming Erik Bloodaxe was the aforementioned Viking king, as he seems to be suggest Like Edmund, Eadred inherited the kingship of the whole of England and soon lost it when York (southern Northumbria) accepted a Viking king, Erik Bloodaxe, but he recovered it when the York magnates expelled them in 954
- who was known as the Half-King because it was believed that kings depended on his advice. should the Half-King be in quotes as "the Half-King"
- ten-hide estate at Old Weston in Huntingdonshire in gratitude suggest a short gloss for ten-hide
Image review
Licensing fixed on one of the images. Please ensure that you don't accidentally pick a different license for works that you didn't create. Otherwise, the licensing looks ok. (t · c) buidhe 06:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Tim riley
Joining the queue to review, but will wait my turn till the two ahead of me have had their say. I'm looking forward to this. Tim riley talk 14:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
CommentsSupport by Borsoka
..., who may have been king only of Mercia at first, but ruled the whole of his father's realm by the next year" Is this relevant in the article's context?
- It is relevant to the argument put forward by some historians that the unity of England was so new that the division between Eadwig ruling Wessex and Edgar ruling Mercia would not have been seen by contemporaries as shocking, and may have been agreed rather than a result of a rebellion againt Eadwig. Dudley Miles (talk)
...the ætheling (prince eligible for the throne) was profoundly influenced by his upbringing I am not sure that it is clear for everybody that Edgar is the ætheling.
- Changed to "Edgar Ætheling" Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
...secular minster... I would delete "secular" and link "minster". Alternatively, I would say "the minster controlled by secular clergy".
- Neither suggestion quite works. Deleting secular loses the point that royal patronage was not exclusively to monks, and "controlled by" might wrongly imply that there were also less powerful monks there. I have changed to "[[Secular clergy|secular]] (non-monastic) [[Minster (church)|minster]]. Does that work? Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Another influence on Edgar was his grandmother, Eadgifu. Quite uninformative and possibly misleading: there must have been dozens of people who had influence on Edgar.
- This is an awkward one. Looking again, the source says in his childhood. I do not think there is any evidence for it, but as historians emphasise Eadgifu's influence, I thought I should put it in. I have now deleted it. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Eadwig and Edgar are not recorded in contemporary sources until 955, when they first attested charters, suggesting that they did not regularly attend court when they were young.[20] King Eadred never married, and his attitude towards the claims of his nephews is uncertain. Eadwig attested Eadred's charters as ætheling or cliton (Latin for prince), and while some give Edgar the same title, others show him as Eadwig's brother, which may imply a lower status. 1. I think some restructuring is needed: in the previous paragraph Eadwig is mentioned as a king. 2. In the section's first paragraph Edgar is referred to as ætheling while this paragraph implies that he did not bear this title.
- This is another awkward one. The comment about Eadred's attitude does seem valid, but it is not quite what the source says, so I have deleted it. This leaves the comment about the princes not being mentioned in contemporary sources awkwardly at the end of the previous paragraph, but I do not see where else to put it. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Perhaps the sentence could be the first sentence of the paragraph.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Oda forced Eadwig to divorce his wife Ælfgifu on the ground that they were too closely related, but Edgar was on good terms with her when he became king. Is this relevant in the article's context?
- It is marginal, but I would rather keep it in as an indication that the division between Eadwig and Edgar may have been exaggerated. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Why is "b" a note, instead of a direct reference to Keynes' work?
- A direct reference would appear also to cover the first part of the sentence which it is not relevant to. If I added it to the list of references at the end of the sentence, it would not be clear which was the source for the quote. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
...against the opposition of the church Why not Church?
- Changed. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
She had two sons... Why not "They had two sons..."?
- Changed. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
...but it is uncertain whether this was on the king's instruction, which would indicate that he wished to cut Edward out of the succession, or was ordered by Bishop Æthelwold, who was a friend and ally of Ælfthryth Is this necessary? For me, it looks like a not too relevant PoV.
- It is a sourced comment by a historian, which seems to me valid and relevant. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Borsoka (talk) 03:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your review Borsoka. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
After Edgar became king of the whole of England when Eadwig died on 1 October 959, his former tutor Æthelwold became one of the most powerful figures at court. Could you rephrase it, perhaps by splitting the sentence into two? It contains too many information.
- Revised. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- ...following the expulsion of the Viking king of York, Erik Bloodaxe The information about the expulsion of Erik comes out of the blue. Some context could be added?
- The context is in the background section. "Like Edmund, Eadred inherited the kingship of the whole of England and soon lost it when York (southern Northumbria) accepted a Viking king, but he had recovered it by the end of his reign."
- I would repeat that Erik was expelled by Eadred.
- Changed to " Like Edmund, Eadred inherited the kingship of the whole of England and soon lost it when York (southern Northumbria) accepted a Viking king, but he recovered it when the York magnates expelled Erik Bloodaxe in 954." Dudley Miles (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Osulf did not owe his power to southern English suppport... I would prefer a positive statement: "Osulf owed his power to ... and his power did not depend on southern English support."
- That would be too specific. Little or nothing is known about the basis of Osulf's support. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
..., and when he died in the 960s... I would begin a new sentence.
- I think it works better as one sentence. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Edgar tried to keep them under control... I understand he kept them under control.
- Changed to "Edgar was able to keep them under control, but this collapsed into open hostilities after his death." Still a bit awkward. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
..., but this collapsed into open hostilities after his death I would mention this info in section "Death and aftermath".
- I think it is easier for readers to understand the aftermath in each area when it is in the relevant section, and I have confined the aftermath to the immediate events. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
... this may be because Edgar chose to govern these areas through royal officials of lower status. Reeves may have been entrusted with duties which were previously carried out by ealdormen. I would shorten the text: "this may be because Edgar chose to govern these areas through royal officials of lower status such as reeves."
- That would conflate two points, governing through lower officials, and the posssible higher status of reeves. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
The gap was filled after his death by the appointment of three new southern ealdormen. I would mention this info in section "Death and aftermath".
- As above. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Kingship was peripatetic. Was kingship peripatetic or the royal court itinerant? I would delete the sentence.
- Both were peripatetic. I mention it as there is a widespread myth that Winchester was then the capital. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
...standard grants to religious houses or individuals, with a few unusual ones... What is the difference between a standard and an unusual grant? Perhaps grants of property could be described as standard grants?
- Changed to "They are mainly standard grants of land to religious houses or individuals, with a few more complex ones such as the one granting privileges to the New Minster" Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Edgar used the titles king of the English and king of Britain in his charters... Did he always use both titles?
- He never used both. Changed to "Edgar used the title king of the English in some charters and king of Britain in other ones," Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- I would have changed "and" to "or".
- I considered that but some people are confused whether "or" includes "and", so I think my version is less open to misunderstanding. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Delink and italicize "Hundred Ordinance", italicize "I Edgar", "II and III Edgar", "Andover Code", "IV Edgar".
- Sources differ on italicization, but the most authoritative, Wormald italicizes Hundred Ordinance but not II Edgar etc, so I have gone with that. I think it is best to link the first usage of hundred. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
"Andover code" or "Andover Code"?
- Code. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Link "hundreds".
- See above. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Introduce Lantfred of Winchester.
- Done. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
A code of Cnut specifies similar punishments, and its author, Archbishop Wulfstan of York, stated that Cnut's legislation was based on the laws of Edgar. Wormald describes the punishments as "ghastly", and Keynes observes that it is no wonder that Edgar was hailed as "the strongest of all kings", but if we are disposed to admire the peace he brought then we should bear in mind the measures he took to enforce it. Cnut held up Edgar's legislation as the precedent to be followed, and declared in a proclamation of 1020 that everyone should "steadfastly observe the law of Edgar." ASC D states that in 1018 the Danes and the English reached an agreement "according to Edgar's law". In a letter from Cnut to his subjects in 1019/20 he referred to a law code agreed at Oxford, which he described as Edgar's law, and urged people to keep to it. In Wormald's view, Cnut considered that his regime was based on the Oxford agreement to keep to Edgar's law. However, the code bears little resemblance to Edgar's legislation, and the reference to him was probably symbolic as a revered lawmaker, rather than practical as a source. Edgar's legislation continued to be held in high regard after the Norman Conquest, and the twelfth-century historian Eadmer referred to the "holy laws" of "the most glorious king Edgar", although there is no evidence that he knew the codes. I think these sentences fit nicely to section "Death and aftermath".
- As above. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
...nine are known for Edgar... Is this grammatical?
- It looks OK to me. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
A penny was worth around half of what it had been a hundred years earlier. Is this necessary? If yes, some explanation is needed. Perhaps this info could be mentioned after the reference to the "gradual decline in the standard of coinage" in the same section.
- Hmm. It seems interesting but not specifically relevant. Deleted. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
... it caused momentous changes in the church Why not "Church"?
- Changed. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- He was a strong critic of secular clergy (canons)... Secular clergy in general or specifically canons? If the latter, link canons.
- Putting canons in brackets is intended to convey that canon was the contemporary word for clerics who were not monks. Can you suggest a better way of conveying this? Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is new for me. Canons were the clergy of the cathedral churches, according to my studies. Borsoka (talk) 01:42, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Æthelwold is clearly using "canons" in a broader sense in the quotation below. How about "secular clergy (sometimes called canons)"? Dudley Miles (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
...secular clergy had their place in the church Why not Church?
- Changed. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Italicize "King Edgar's Establishment of Monasteries" and delete the quotation marks.
- This is an editor's description of an untitled document. Sources vary on the exact title and whether to italicize it, and I think it is probably better not to. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- ...unlike in England this was not a matter of political principle Are we sure? For me, the article does not suggest that the introduction of the Rule of St Benedict was a political principle in England. On the other hand, The introduction of the the Rule of St Benedict was ordered at a legislative assembly in the Carolingian Empire.
- I think that political principle in England is supported, particularly in the fourth paragraph of the section. The comment is based on Patrick Wormald, who argues that the motive was religious on the Continent. That is beyond my knowlege, but the fact that the rule was ordered by a Carolingian legislative assembly does not mean that the motive was not religious. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, but for me nothing suggests that the introduction of the Rule of St Benedict was a political principle in England.
- Looking again, my wording is not quite right. Wormald says that it was the uniformity of practice rather than the Rule itself which was politically motivated. It may be better to make the comment a quote. "The reform was the English branch of a European movement,[169] with monasteries which universally followed the Regula S. Benedicti, but Wormald comments that "England was the only place in post-Carolingian Europe where monastic uniformity was a matter of political principle". What do you think? Dudley Miles (talk) 10:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
He is listed as a saint in some modern Catholic sources with a feast day of 8 July. Is catholicsaints.info a reliable source. If yes, also mention that he is venerated as Saint Edgar the Peaceful.
- I think it is an RS for "some modern Catholic sources". Changed to "He is listed as Saint Edgar the Peaceful in some modern Catholic sources". Dudley Miles (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Borsoka (talk) 02:58, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Ken "Snakehips" Johnson
"Snakehips" was an intriguing figure. A swing band leader who had an early influence in British swing music who promised to have a bigger impact on the style, but his life was unfortunately cut short by a German bomb on the Café de Paris at the age of just 26. This underwent a rewrite some time ago and has matured nicely since then. It's had a good PR from Ceoil, Serial Number 54129 and Tim riley and welcomes further comments. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Tim riley
After a further rereading just now I have nothing to add to my comments at the peer review, with the exception that although the text in Impact and legacy has been changed, the caption of the picture of Al Bowlly in that section still says that he accompanied the orchestra, rather than vice versa. "Performed with" would be preferable in my view, both there and in the text of the Recordings section.
I am envious of SchroCat for overhauling this article, which in more ways than one is more in my domain than his, but we waive that point, we do not press it, and the article seems to me to meet all the FA criteria. Clear, balanced, a cracking read, well and widely referenced and as well illustrated as I imagine is possible given the period to which the article refers. I look forward to seeing it on the front page in due course. – Tim riley talk 15:43, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks Tim. I'd caught the other 'performed with' previously, but forgot the caption. Now done. (Speaking of which, I need to do the alt texts, before Nikkimaria gets on my case about it again!) Thanks again - SchroCat (talk) 16:04, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- I am getting on your case again about alt text ;-)
- File:Ken-Snakehips-Johnson.jpg should instead use non-free biog-pic, and who is believed to be the copyright holder? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Accessibility review
Comments by Wehwalt
- I think the intro paragraph should make it clearer that he died as a result of the Blitz, not merely during it.
- "Surinam". More usually "Suriname"?
- "African-American dancers" vs. "African American dancer" Check similar usages for consistency.
- "On saxophone the band comprised three Jamaicans (Bertie King, Louis Stephenson and Joe Appleton) and Robert Mumford-Taylor who was of Sierra Leonean descent." At least one comma might be useful.
- "The band continued performing at the Old Florida Club and taking day-time stage work," This implies a previous mention of taking day-time stage work, which doesn't seem to be the case.
- "BBC" is linked on other than the first usage.
- "His impact on both London clubland, and social changes brought about from the war led to the emergence of later racially-mixed bands." This reads a bit oddly to my eyes, you're saying that he impacted a) clubland and b) the social changes brought about from the war? Or is the "both" a stray word?
- "Johnson both appeared with his band on BBC Radio and acted as a disc jockey, presenting programmes such as Calypso and other west Indian Music;" Should west be capped?
- "test match" should test be capped? I note that our article on same does.
- Thanks Wehwalt. All sorted (I hope) in these edits. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 19:58, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- Any reason why there's one random ref in the lead? The same fact is cited in the body so I don't think it also needs citing in the lead
- "Johnson studied law at London University" => "Johnson studied law at the University of London" (correct name)
- Wikilink Jimmie Lunceford
- "On saxophone the band comprised" - comprised isn't really the right word here. Maybe "included"?
- "both of whom were white, but would wear" => "both of whom were white but would wear"
- "the move to music for dancing was advantageous for the band "their music..." => "the move to music for dancing was advantageous for the band as "their music..."
- "The Café de Paris capitalised on the situation; with the club underground, beneath the Rialto cinema; the" - one of those semi-colons should definitely be something else, probably a comma
- I'd move the one-sentence paragraph about Johnson's funeral onto the end of the previous one
- Al Bowlly caption needs a full stop
- "although many bands, including those led by Hutchinson still faced" => "although many bands, including those led by Hutchinson, still faced"
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks ChrisTheDude. All done, except the first, which we have to have for the quote. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Have to say I was not aware that direct quotes needed citing in the lead even if they were also cited in the body but I will AGF on that :-) Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi ChrisTheDude, yeah, it's at MOS:LEADCITE - quotes and anything likely to be challenged. - SchroCat (talk) 16:32, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Have to say I was not aware that direct quotes needed citing in the lead even if they were also cited in the body but I will AGF on that :-) Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks ChrisTheDude. All done, except the first, which we have to have for the quote. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:09, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Comment I'm an inexperienced reviewer here, so maybe I'm misunderstanding what a FA bio is expected to be like, but much of this article seems to be about the band and other people he admired or was close to rather than about him. Valereee (talk) 16:27, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, no man is an island, so anyone who operates as a bandleader is going to have their professional career fairly prominent. The people referred to are not necessarily people he admired, but people who influenced him, his style and his music. - SchroCat (talk) 16:36, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okeydoke. Like I said, inexperienced here. Valereee (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oh, I think it's a fair question to ask, regardless of FAC experience but, in this instance, I think the balance between him and his wider professional circle is one we get more or less right. It's difficult to deal with him and his impact without explaining the milieu in which he worked and moved. - SchroCat (talk) 17:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okeydoke. Like I said, inexperienced here. Valereee (talk) 17:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Ceoil
Reading through. Looks good; struggling for quibbles.
- Lead: causing Thompson and several musicians to leave - "causing" or "forcing"
- Lead: The fourth para is slightly out-of-sync timeline wise and says "after Johnson's death" twice. Maybe move the sentence "Johnson was tall, elegant, and modelled himself professionally on Cab Calloway" somewhere near to "Increasingly popular, they were employed as".
- Early life: Through Bradley's influence Johnson was recorded in 1934 for the film Oh, Daddy!, . What does influence mean in this context (we use the word in a different meaning in the sentence before). I'd drop "released in 1935" Ceoil (talk) 22:14, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Career: Changed the sect title as all careers are professional
- Career: The paragraph beginning "In April 1939" is followed by a para leading with "towards the end of 1938"
- Career: In general these later paras seems slightly stubby and veering towards prose-line, would do some merging.
- More later. Ceoil (talk) 22:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support. Any remaining issues are small and deal with myself without itemising here. Ceoil (talk) 23:23, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Cheers Ceoil - That's great, thanks very much. I've dealt with these, except the "influence" point, which I'll have think on. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:58, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Support and comments from Jim
Not much to pick at here, but a few queries
- nearly all-black—mainly black?
- As leader of an all-black orchestra—does this contradict "nearly all-black"?
- Through Bradley's influence Johnson was recorded in 1934—comma after "influence"
- 50-kg high-explosive bomb—conversion?
- Deniz and Bromley both had a broken leg—each had a broken leg
- Johnson was tall—6 feet 4 inches (1.93 m)—elegant and handsome—Do we need his height again?
- That's all, interesting article Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:09, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Mike Christie
I heard of Johnson only recently; he's a peripheral figure in the plot of Ben Aaronovitch's Moon Over Soho, in his excellent Rivers of London series. I thought he was an interesting figure then and am glad to have a chance to read more about him.
Any reason not to link Ellington?- I think the lead and body are a bit out of sync in how they describe the two bands Johnson formed in Britain. The lead says "He returned to Britain and set up the West Indian Dance Orchestra, a nearly all-black swing band, with Leslie Thompson, a Jamaican musician." The body says "In 1936 he teamed up with the Jamaican trumpeter Leslie Thompson to form an all-black jazz band, the Aristocrats (or Emperors) of Jazz, sometimes the "Jamaican Emperors", who made their debut that April", then "As Thompson could not find suitable black trombonists, he employed Reg Amore and Freddie Greenslade, both of whom were white but would wear blackface to ensure the band were seen as an all-black ensemble.", which seems to be about the same version of the band, and then "Johnson and the West Indian Dance Orchestra appeared in an early television broadcast on the BBC in either 1938 or 1939", which is the first mention of that name for the band in the body. If the "West Indian Dance Orchestra" is the "almost all-black" version then the lead has it wrong. If they're the same band with a name change and a couple of personnel changes I think that should be clearer in the body.
"Culturally the orchestra made an impact in society: the all-black outfit was the only one in the country." Perhaps "apparently all-black"?"Fraser wrote that Johnson became...": can we introduce Fraser?"the Henderson Twins on vocal": "vocals"? Or is this a usage I'm not aware of?
I had a look in the British Newspaper Archive and found lots of coverage of Johnson's radio performances, but nothing that I think is worth adding. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Mike, Moon Over Soho - that was the jazz vampires one, wasn't it? Many thanks for your comments. All dealt with, bar one - the description of the bands.The sources are rather garbled on this point – and patchy when it comes to the full make-up of the band in places. And it doesn't help that the name of the band was a little fluid at times too. We know that there were two white in the band, who wore blackface much of the time. It's less clear whether they left the band at any point, or—if they did—when and under what name the band was operating. Despite the two white members in there, the sources refer to the band as the first all-black jazz or swing band – even during the time Amore and Greenslade were among the players. According to this, the trombone player for the recording session in Feb 1938 was Lad Busby, but whether that was a one-off I'd not like to say – I think we may be going into OR territory if we draw too much inference from that one listing. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 10:28, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, the jazz vampires one! I think what's bothering me about the band names is that the lead doesn't seem to agree with the body. If the sources are garbled, I can see we need to leave some points unsettled, but the lead says the band was formed as the West Indian Dance Orchestra, whereas in the body it says it was formed as the Aristocrats of Jazz. I don't think the lead has to reflect all the uncertainties in the body, but it reads as a direct contradiction at the moment, so I think some change is needed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Mike. I've tweaked the lead a little, and it now follows the correct naming chronology - hopefully it reads OK too. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. One more tweak I would suggest is that since "Johnson and the West Indian Dance Orchestra appeared in an early television broadcast on the BBC in either 1938 or 1939" is the first mention in the body of that name for the band, perhaps make it "Johnson and the West Indian Dance Orchestra, as the band were now known, appeared in an early television broadcast on the BBC in either 1938 or 1939"? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Mike. I've tweaked the lead a little, and it now follows the correct naming chronology - hopefully it reads OK too. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 19:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, the jazz vampires one! I think what's bothering me about the band names is that the lead doesn't seem to agree with the body. If the sources are garbled, I can see we need to leave some points unsettled, but the lead says the band was formed as the West Indian Dance Orchestra, whereas in the body it says it was formed as the Aristocrats of Jazz. I don't think the lead has to reflect all the uncertainties in the body, but it reads as a direct contradiction at the moment, so I think some change is needed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Serial#
All my concerns were resolved at the PR, and the article has only improved since then. I meant to look in here, but I've been beaten to it. Still, at least that means I'm available for the
SN54129 16:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review—pass
- Fraser's entry in the Ox. Comp. Bl. Music requires pagination.
- Ditto, Simons in Aural History
- Need a section with one entry be called, generally, 'Other' rather than specifically Television'? I could understand multiple entries, but.
- At first glance, there's a helluva reliance on the Radio Times, but I note it's primarily for the bald statements re. Johnson's broadcasts.
- The literature used otherwise appears to be a broad coverage of reliable authors, presses and publishers; nothing jumps out as irrelevant, while, conversely, a courage of the databases, etc., leaves me assured that nothing of any particular import has been committed that would not lead the article into WP:UNDUE territory.
- Nice selection of both primary and secondary materials.
A History of British Fishes
- Nominator(s): Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Somewhat to my surprise, there doesn't appear to be any article on Wikipedia about a fish book, so to remedy that I bring you William Yarrell's landmark publication that was the standard in its field for much of the 19th century Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:William_Yarrell._Photograph_by_Maull_%26_Polyblank._Wellcome_V0027361.jpg: license provided doesn't match source
- File:Jonathan_Couch.jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:10, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Of course, these are the two images I didn't upload myself... Thanks for review, uploaded different image of Yarrell and replaced Couch with seahorses Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:43, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Gone back to original image, fixed licence as PD-old Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Tim riley
A pleasure to read and review this article. I share the nominator's surprise that this is our first article on a book about fish, and am glad that the first is so good. A handful of quibbles, none of which affect my support:
- Lead
- "describing every type of fish known to occur in Britain" – does "Britain" here mean the UK, including Ireland, as it did then? And also, does it include offshore territorial waters? Or even the UK continental shelf (if the legal distinction was made in Yarrell's day, that is)?
- Yarrell says British Isles, so I've changed to that, obviously includes marine species but doesn't specify limits Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "commemorated in a number of species" – a bit woolly: if the actual number of species is known it would be good to mention it. Even "in at least x species" would be an improvement.
- Eight, although not all still recognised, the fish are though Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Format
- "he naturally followed the older man's format" – the adverb looks a wee bit editorial.
- Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- The blockquote – we don't, I think, usually put blockquotes in italics.
- Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Production and publication
- "to shoot and fish around London" – this would, I think, benefit from a little expansion. In Yarrell's day London technically meant just the City: all the rest was in Middx, Surrey and Kent. I don't know where the nobs used to shoot or fish in the areas of those counties nearest the urban bits, but something on the lines of "on estates near London", or even actual place names, might be beneficial here. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reception
- "There was a generally appreciative reception from Yarrell's fellow naturalists, too" – a very minor stylistic point, but to my mind the "too" doesn't add anything useful and is redundant.
- Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
That's my lot. I am glad to support the elevation of this article, which seems to me to meet all the FA criteria. Tim riley talk 14:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Tim riley, many thanks for review and comments, that was painless! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "Interest in natural history was growing rapidly in the early nineteenth century". Would it be worth putting a geographical restriction on this?
- Probably not, although Fishes was British, amended to British Isles per Tim's comments above, there was similar activity in Europe, and John James Audubon visited Yarrell and other when visiting Europe to get material for his great American bird book Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Is it known how many copies were printed for any of the editions?
- I wondered that, but Jackson, who is very thorough on his publications, doesn't say and I can't find it elsewhere Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:57, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Bewick had himself planned to ..." I'm not sure about "himself". Who else could he be?
- Removed reflexive Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
That's all. Great work. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Gog the Mild, many thanks for review and comments Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Gog the Mild, many thanks for support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 19:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Kusma
Adding this to my list of things to review. —Kusma (talk) 14:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- You may be wrong about this being the first article on a book about fish: see Histoire naturelle des poissons and Category:Ichthyological literature. But yours definitely seems to be the best article about a fish book.
- Yes, especially as I've linked to the Histoire Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lead: for an ignoramus like me with no idea who Thomas Bewick is, it is a bit hard to understand how the book follows his lead. Just making it "the example of Thomas Bewick's natural history books" would be enough to clarify.
- Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Format (or "Format and content"?): Were any of the species previously unknown/unpublished? Is Bewick's swan seems the only species named by Yarrell? (It is the only one on Wikispecies, for whatever it's worth) Are there other particularly interesting species (anything extinct, for example) worth commenting on?
- As far as I can see there were no fish species identified by Yarrell, there were a couple of other birds, now only subspecies, beyond the scope of this fish article I think. Similarly, he had a Great Auk egg and some books on fossils, but appears to have had no significant collection extinct species. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- OK.
- As far as I can see there were no fish species identified by Yarrell, there were a couple of other birds, now only subspecies, beyond the scope of this fish article I think. Similarly, he had a Great Auk egg and some books on fossils, but appears to have had no significant collection extinct species. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Other resources: "in the major London's important Leadenhall Market" sounds a bit garbled
- Yes tweaked Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Production and publication: are we sure they were "the best wood engravers in London"? (Says who?)
- Yes, also see the Gentleman's Magazine quote. But I've removed the claim and mentioned his médaille d'or instead Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reception: I wonder if it is worth tracking down the contemporary reviews and citing from them directly. I found the Gentleman's Magazine one, which says among other things "the work before us is, perhaps, the most perfect of its kind", which is perhaps a nice quote. Here is an insanely long article in the Quarterly Review from 1837.
- Thanks for links, quoted from both Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Do we know who named the fish species after Yarrell and why? It would be good to know whether these names were related to the present book.
- Checking this, I found a genus named for him too. As always with taxa, the names and date of the people who named the species are known, but all are obscure and the accessible documentation amounts at most to saying that they were named in honour of him. Adding the names, with nothing substantial to justify doing so, seems unnecessary clutter Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Notes: I do not particularly like the inline external links to MeasuringWorth; any reason why you prefer this over our in-house {{Inflation}}?
- I wasn't aware of that template, changed Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Bibliography: The A History of British Fishes section is a bit inconsistent about commas and whether to write volume with a v or a V.
- Done Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Images: The seahorses are great, but I'm not convinced they belong here.
- I think his discovery of their unusual reproductive strategy justifies using the image from his book. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:48, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Mentioned in text, with some salmon thrown in too Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)<
An enjoyable article, and most of my points are quite minor. —Kusma (talk) 21:29, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Kusma All done I think, thanks for reviewing Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Ludwig Ferdinand Huber
This article is about "either a very minor or a relatively minor character in the constellation of 18th century German events", as Goethe scholar Thomas P. Saine put it. Minor or not, he did have some influence and interacted with many great writers of his era: close friend of Friedrich Schiller and Isabelle de Charrière, reviewer of works by Johann Wolfgang Goethe and Marquis de Sade, lover and eventual husband of Georg Forster's wife Therese Huber, and overall I found him a fascinating character. —Kusma (talk) 23:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- This is just a drive-by comment, but do you think some of the paragraphs could be split? The "French occupation of Mainz and resignation from service" section is one paragraph with 17 sentences and I think that can be a bit overwhelming to readers. It kind of looks like a wall of text, especially with the new display. Heartfox (talk) 02:16, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Done (but I am sure the alt texts can be improved, I am terrible at describing pictures).
- File:Dora_Stock_-_Christian_Gottfried_Körner.jpg: when and where was this first published, and what is its status in its country of origin? Ditto File:Dora_Stock_-_Minna_Stock.jpg, File:Dora_Stock_-_Dora_Stock.jpg, File:Dora_Stock_-_Ludwig_Ferdinand_Huber.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Jim
I'm very busy in RL at the moments so comments will appear sporadically. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:03, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for taking a look, no worries at all about being slow! Some responses below. —Kusma (talk) 14:22, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
What immediately struck me was the swathes of yellow produced by the Headbomb/unreliable script. Some were links to Google text, but others were links to Google pages with no text or, worse, to WorldCat. I don't see the point of linking with pages that have no text, especially when they are repositories, not even the original documents. Since you don't need to prove the existence of any publication (except, I suppose, in the unlikely event that's challenged), these links seem pointless distractions.- I have removed the WorldCat links that are duplicated by OCLC but kept the Google Books links that help with verification by providing full text or snippets.
In the journalist section, you have repeated earlier main text links to August Wilhelm Schlegel and Therese Forster- These are deliberate; I think it is difficult to find the earlier (piped) Therese Forster link, and Schlegel is very important here and the link is reasonably far away. It could be removed, but I don't think it helps.
- about six of their children died in infancy before Huber's birth— About six looks odd was it six, or from five to seven, or what?
- You are right that it sounds odd. Jordan (you can find this on Google Books by searching for "seven children" in her book) says "six or seven previous children". The Allgemeine Deutsche Biographie has six children including LF Huber. I can't prove this conclusively, but looking through what the works cite for this information, the original source for this seems to be a biography of LF Huber written by Therese, and that has six children followed by Huber, so seven in total. For some reason this was mangled into either "six including LFH" or "seven plus LFH" by other authors. So yes, the sources support "five to seven" or "six or seven", depending whether we drop the ADB or not. The exact number is rather immaterial here; perhaps "several" is best, what do you think?
- Several looks better
- '
'and he had no religious education and no interest in religious questions.— and he had no religious education nor any interest in religious questions. perhaps?- Done.
link "engraver" —- Done.
agreeing to marry her once he would have the means—...once he had the means- Done.
Saxon minister—Saxony minister?- Saxony minister for precision.
- '
'Also in 1790, his superior left Mainz—I may have lost track, but who was his superior?Will find out.My sources don't say, but I tried to clarify that he became the most senior diplomate of the Electorate of Saxony in Mainz (whoever was the senior member of the legation was recalled to Dresden, so Huber was in charge).
Huber was reprimanded for his return to Mainz and ordered back to Frankfurt, which also was taken by Custine for a short time, arriving there on 22 or 23 October.—dodgy grammar Huber was reprimanded for his return to Mainz and ordered back to Frankfurt, which also was taken by Custine, who arrived there on 22 or 23 October, for a short time.- Sorry, it is Huber who arives in Frankfurt 22 or 23 October, and I could not tell exactly when Custine took Frankfurt. Must have been shortly after he took Mainz (this quick advance is unsurprising; Mainz was the only major fortress in the area). Clarified a bit.
Huber did not merely regard the book as pornographic, but considered its underlying principles.—???- Amended, let me know what you think.
Forster, who had become a French citizen, could not legally go there... and so Forster crossed the border instead, and they all met in Travers in Switzerland''—so did he cross illegally? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)- Clarified. Neuchatel was reasonably neutral, but Forster as a French citizen could not join his family there (I think he would not have received a residence permit). He did cross legally, but the whole cloak-and-dagger conspiracy business was necessary to avoid looking like a spy for the other side.
Thank you for the helpful comments so far! I think I've answered everything. —Kusma (talk) 23:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm happy with the changes above, and I'll Support now, but just a couple of minor things for your further consideration
- Friedrich Schlegel ridiculed Huber in one of his sonnets.— presumably we know which?
- It was next to a sonnet, and the epigram has the boring title "An denselben" ("to the man himself"). I've cited it now also to the edition of Schlegel's letters, which mentions the publication. The two-liner reads
- Huber mein Freund sey billig und laß Dich in Spiritus setzen
- Gönn' es der Nachwelt auch, daß sie den Kritiker schaut.
- or in my own quick English translation
- Huber my friend be reasonable and have yourself preserved in alcohol
- Allow posterity to see what a critic looks like.
- But adding it probably goes too much into detail. —Kusma (talk) 15:51, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- It was next to a sonnet, and the epigram has the boring title "An denselben" ("to the man himself"). I've cited it now also to the edition of Schlegel's letters, which mentions the publication. The two-liner reads
- link tuberculosis, pneumonia, necrosis and particularly vehmic court, which I think few readers will know
- Links added (vehmic court is now a duplink, but a very rare word)
- That's all, good stuff Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
State of Grace (song)
- Nominator(s): Ippantekina (talk) 14:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about a 2012 song by America's queen of heartbreak songs, Taylor Swift. This song finds Ms. Swift embracing stadium rock shamelessly. Though it was never released as a single, it has earned a reputation among critics for being one of her best songs. I think this article is comprehensive, well-written, and well-sourced to satisfy FA criteria. Would appreciate any and all comments on how to improve it further. Best, Ippantekina (talk) 14:40, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "evoked by the first sights of love." seems odd wording to me. What are "sights of love"? Should it be "first signs of love"? (in both lead and body)
- ""State of Grace" peaked within the top-50" - no reason for hyphen
- ""State of Grace (Taylor's Version)" peaked within the top-10" - same here
- "and top-25 in Australia" - and here :-)
- "Speak Now continues the country pop sound on Swift's last records" => "Speak Now continued the country pop sound of Swift's previous records"
- "Chapman remained a key personnel" - "a personnel" isn't really a thing. I would suggest "a key collaborator"
- "Hank Williams mastered the track" - good to see her getting a country music legend involved (only joking :-))
- "She later performed the song at Z100 Jingle Ball" => "She later performed the song at the Z100 Jingle Ball"
- "On the July 10, 2018, concert at" => "At the July 10, 2018, concert in"
- Does everything in the Music and lyrics section cover both the 2012 and 2021 versions? Is there anything notably different about the 2021 version?
- "and the conflicting emotions ensued" => "and the conflicting emotions which ensue"
- "Jason Lipshutz from Billboard lauded" - you just used the verb "laud" in the previous sentence, suggest picking a different word here
- "Upon its initial 2012 release, "State of Grace" charted on in" - "on in"?
- "peaking within the top-50 in Australia" - as before
- "denoting of 500,000 track-equivalent units" => "denoting 500,000 track-equivalent units"
- "peaking within the top-25 of Ireland" - guess :-)
- None of the notes need full stops as they are not complete sentences
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:54, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick review, ChrisTheDude. I've addressed your comments accordingly :) Ippantekina (talk) 04:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:38, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:06, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review (pass)
- Suggest replacing CNET with a different source (which seems quite possible given the material cited) as there is no consensus regarding its reliability post-October 2020 per WP:CNET.
- Done. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- CTV News ref is a republished version of a CNN article; suggest citing the original CNN article instead
- Done. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- ProQuest page numbers – can remove the period between the letter and number; it's ProQuest formatting, not the original (E3 not E.3)
- Done. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- suggest removing URL to ProQuest document as it is duplicative of the identifier Template:ProQuest.
- I tried to look into {{ProQuest}} but apparently it is only supported by the parameter
|id=
. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)- Sorry, what do you mean here? Both the URL and id= link to the same place. It is not necessary to have a URL when the id= exists. Heartfox (talk) 17:26, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Then
|access-date=
and|url-access=
will become null. I've made amendments to the Clayton-Lea ref for you to see what I mean. I wouldn't prefer this option as it leaves out the two said parameters which I think are important; specifically the latter that tells readers to expect the URL requires registration. But if the consensus is to remove the|url=
parameter then I have no problems. Ippantekina (talk) 02:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)- Template:Cite web says that "It is not necessary to specify a URL to a link identical to a link also produced by an identifier." I would either chose to have
|url=
,|url-access=
,|access-date=
, plus via=ProQuest, or just the identifier. I don't see it as necessary, but you could also add {{Subscription required}} following|id=
. Heartfox (talk) 04:15, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Template:Cite web says that "It is not necessary to specify a URL to a link identical to a link also produced by an identifier." I would either chose to have
- Then
- Sorry, what do you mean here? Both the URL and id= link to the same place. It is not necessary to have a URL when the id= exists. Heartfox (talk) 17:26, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I tried to look into {{ProQuest}} but apparently it is only supported by the parameter
- "final promotional single" → final not supported by refs cited
- Changed to "fourth" which is explicitly mentiomed. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Several critics highlighted the maturity of Swift's songwriting" → several implies more than two critics, but only two are given
- Done. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Spencer seems to be citing page 124 not a8. It doesn't say that Swift/Chapman produced the acoustic version.
- Done. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- not sure Clayton-Lea supports the sentence. It appears to be Clayton-Lea not Clayton-Tea
- Done. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Heartfox (talk) 23:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Heartfox, I've addressed your comments accordingly. Ippantekina (talk) 09:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- ref 5 publisher should be ABC News not American Broadcasting Company. Heartfox (talk) 17:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- All done including the ProQuest ref formatting, Ippantekina (talk) 04:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
This passess the source review. Thanks for your cooperation and good luck with the nom! If you have time, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/I Don't Wanna Cry/archive1 could use some more eyes :) Heartfox (talk) 18:38, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Aoba47
- I think it would be beneficial to add an audio sample to the article. Was there a reason why File:Taylor Swift - State of Grace song sample.ogg was removed? I think a sample would helpful to illustrate the arena rock aspect in particular, especially since that gets a substantial amount of focus in the article and some readers may be less than familiar with that genre.
- I felt the descriptions of the track can be conveyed through words, but "feedback-drenched guitars" might be hard to conceptualize so I added back the sample. Hopefully its usage is justified. Ippantekina (talk) 05:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Two sentences in a row, (Swift performed "State of Grace" live) and (She later performed the song), use "performed", and I would recommend varying the word choice to avoid unnecessary repetition.
- Tweaked. Ippantekina (talk) 05:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- For this part, (Sean Daly of the Tampa Bay Times agreed, but remarked that it was "bold regardless".), I would avoid using "agreed" in this context as it could give off the impression that Daly is explicitly agreeing with the previous critic (in this case Jonathan Keefe) in his review. I get that it is intended as a transition, but I would avoid it in this kind of context.
- Tweaked. Ippantekina (talk) 05:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- For the "100 Best Deep Cuts by 21st Century Pop Stars" list, the author for the "State of Grace" entry is known (i.e. Andrew Unterberger) so he should be attributed in the prose.
- Tweaked. Ippantekina (talk) 05:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
This is everything that I have noticed so far. I will do a few more read-throughs over the weekend, but I do not imagine that I will find anything major. I hope that my comments above are helpful, and best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 18:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Aoba47 I'll get back to you asap. Have a nice weekend! Ippantekina (talk) 09:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the response and take as much time as you need. I hope you have a great weekend as well! Aoba47 (talk) 16:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Aoba47, I have addressed your first round of comments. Let me know if there's anything left to address. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 05:03, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the response and take as much time as you need. I hope you have a great weekend as well! Aoba47 (talk) 16:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Everything looks good to me. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Best of luck with this nomination! Aoba47 (talk) 21:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Wilfred Arthur
This article has been around a long time: I took it to MilHist A-Class 10 years ago but was never really happy with it. I've now given it a complete overhaul, expanding by more than a third and correcting several errors, and feel it's ready for the bronze star.
Fellow ace of the recently nominated Alan Rawlinson, Wilf Arthur had an even more eventful air force career, becoming at 24 the RAAF's youngest group captain (equivalent of full colonel in the army), barely escaping with his life in a runway collision, and playing a key role in the "Morotai Mutiny" of 1945. Oh yes, the RAAF in World War II had it all: aces, Victoria Crosses, petty squabbling at the highest levels, and mutiny! Dive in and let me know what you think... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 19:13, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Support by Unlimitedlead
@Ian Rose: It is wonderful to see a FA nomination from you, and I will give comments over the next few days. Unlimitedlead (talk) 21:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Citations generally should not go in the lede, and seeing as the same information is repeated in the body, I would remove the lede citations.
- There's a slight difference in that the lead mentions/cites his most common nickname and in the main body I list/cite all of them, but I might be able to effectively combine them in the main body -- let me see...
- "after Australia declared war in September 1939" A little vague: I recommend mentioning which specific war this was.
- I mention World War II in the preceding paragraph.
- I still think the phrasing is odd. "Declared" implies that Australia specifically declared war against one or more nations, and while this may be true, I think something like "joined the war" would be more appropriate. Unlimitedlead (talk) 14:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "son of stock inspector Stanley Oswald Darley Arthur" Is this an instance of false title?
- It fits the definition but it's pretty standard usage in Australian English (whereas I know it ends to be frowned upon in BritEng).
More to follow shortly. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Helena Elizabeth Chaffers-Welsh, who was born on the Isle of Wight" Is this relevant/necessary?
- I think it's common to give parents' background in bios. I could simplify to "English" or "English-born" if you prefer.
- "His early education was by correspondence" With whom?
- That's a fair question, the source doesn't specify. I'm not averse to just taking it out if you think best.
- "he also excelled in sports" Do we know which sports specifically?
- I think I could expand on that, yes.
- "Arthur was promoted to flying officer on 3 September" Do we know why?
- No specific reason is given; it was standard for a new recruit to be raised to that rank after 12–18 months as a pilot officer.
- "No. 3 Squadron eventually re-located to Sidi Haneish in Egypt on 12 April, having retreated 500 miles (800 km) and operated from nine airfields in ten days" Is there supposed to be a comma before "and"?
- I'm not sure about that, I think it works better without...
- Link Anglican?
- Fair enough.
- "not released until a ransom was paid—reportedly an Olivetti typewriter" What does this mean? Was he released in exchange for this typewriter?
- This is how the newspaper source puts it. There is another news report that states the ransom was medical supplies, I could add that.
The article looks like a fine one to me; I will allow someone else more proficient in millitary terminology to give it a more thorough run-through. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:54, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments, Unlimitedlead! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Everything looks fine; I have given one response. Unlimitedlead (talk) 14:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:00, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- Possibly inform readers which country the Isle of Wight is/was in?
- Can do, or per my reply to Unlimitedlead above, maybe simply refer to her as "English" or "English-born"?
- "Luftwaffe" is these days considered a normal English word. If you wish to treat it as a German word, it needs to be in a lang template.
- You know I think had it without italics when I took to ACR back in the day and then I changed it when re-visiting the article lately -- happy to drop the italics again.
- "the Germans launched their offensive in March". Perhaps "their" → 'an'?
- Okay.
- "the Allied aircraft encountered twenty Messerschmitts". Is it known how many were 109s and how many 110s?
- I'll double-check one or two other sources but the current one just uses the generic.
- "Stuka" needs a lang template.
- Okay.
And that is all I have. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
SC
- IB
- Shouldn't it be "Group captain", rather than "Group Captain"?
- Yeah, a bit iffy this one. Sentence case would prevail in the main body but in an infobox I see it as more like a service record statement, and then it's usually proper case.
- Early life
- "swimming, athletics and shooting.[3][5] Known by his father's forename in youth, Arthur later gained an array of appellations including "Bandy", "Wilf", "Wolf",[5] and "Wulf",[8]": no serial comma followed in the next list by the presence of one: I won't point out the subsequent ones, but it should, of course, be consistent throughout.
- Fair enough, I'll go through and try to keep consistent one way or t'other.
- Middle East
- "re-located" is shown as one word in the OED, although AusEng use may differ
- Ditto for "re-joined"
- I'm pretty sure AusEng is okay with hyphenating.
- South-West Pacific
- "advancing on the Philippiness" typo, I presume?
- Bloody hell, I presume too...!
That's it – all rather small little quibbles. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:22, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
CBS Building
- Nominator(s): Epicgenius (talk) 17:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about the only skyscraper designed by Eero Saarinen before his untimely death in 1961. As the name may suggest, the building was constructed for CBS, which owned it until two years ago. Saarinen wanted to make it the "simplest skyscraper statement in New York"; the building's nickname, Black Rock, comes from the fact that its dark-gray granite facade resembles a solid wall from a certain angle. Nonetheless, the CBS Building had innovative features for its time, including a reinforced-concrete frame (the first in a post-war skyscraper in NYC) and a sunken plaza surrounding it.
This page was promoted as a Good Article nearly two years ago, and the page received a GOCE copyedit just recently, for which I am grateful. I think it's up to FA quality now, and I look forward to all comments and feedback. Epicgenius (talk) 17:31, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks @Nikkimaria, I've gone ahead and done that. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:27, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Science Fiction Adventures (1956 magazine)
- Nominator(s): Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about a minor science fiction magazine from the 1950s. It was never prominent, but it did publish material by some well-known writers, such as Harlan Ellison and Robert Silverberg. It's short, but I've included everything I can find about it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 17:25, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "to say "My confusion is hopeless! Go monthly!"." - as the quote ends in an exclamation mark, I don't believe the full stop is also required
- "He had decided instead to launch two magazines, Monster Parade and Monsters and Things to take advantage" => "He had decided instead to launch two magazines, Monster Parade and Monsters and Things, to take advantage"
- Think that's it - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:41, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Both done. Thanks for the review! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:09, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:58, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:52, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review - pass
- All sources are suitable, and although there aren't many of them, seem adequate for the article based on my attempts to find more.
- Optionally, use IABot (if it's working) or add an archive url for The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction source manually. (If you choose not to, then you could remove "url-status=live" from the citation.)
- Optionally, author-link Brian Stableford, Mike Ashley (writer), Larry Shaw (editor), Donald H. Tuck and Robert Weinberg (author)
- Spot checks to follow.
- Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:54, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- All done; I only added the first instance for the author-links in the reference list as I don't see any reason to repeat the link when they're alphabetical. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:02, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:54, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- The Shaw source isn't used in the footnotes. (Seems to me that it should be be added after "...be an antidote for that situation'"). The Shaw quote is indeed in that source.
- Spot check on Cook (1983) - no issue.
- Spot check on The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction
Six of Silverberg's early novels first saw print in SF Adventures
- no issues. - Spot checks on Ashley (2005) (
Silverberg was by far the most prolific contributor, providing over a quarter of the contents of the magazine
, andAshley considers that Shaw intended to attract younger readers than Infinity was aimed at
) - no issues. - Not a source issue, but Mike Ashley (writer) could be linked in the article body.
- Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:21, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks for the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:58, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Pass for source review. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks for the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:58, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:21, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Epicgenius
I expect to get to this later. Given the size of the article, though, I may be able to complete this review relatively quickly. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lead:
- "which had been launched the previous year" - Launched the year before Science Fiction Adventures launched, I assume?
- Yes; I made this "in 1955", to be clearer. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Other well-known writers occasionally appeared" - Given that the magazine only had 12 issues in total, I wonder whether "occasionally" means "one or two issues", or whether it means "sporadically throughout the magazine's run".
- In some cases I think these writers had only one story in the magazine -- I don't think the timing is as relevant to a reader as the fact that Shaw was at times able to acquire material from good writers. The article is so short that I didn't feel it was necessary to summarize Ashley's comments about quality (in the second paragraph of the contents section), but I could add a little if you think this is opaque. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, a clarification to that extent would be much appreciated. Epicgenius (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- In some cases I think these writers had only one story in the magazine -- I don't think the timing is as relevant to a reader as the fact that Shaw was at times able to acquire material from good writers. The article is so short that I didn't feel it was necessary to summarize Ashley's comments about quality (in the second paragraph of the contents section), but I could add a little if you think this is opaque. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Speaking of which, I didn't realize that the magazine only had 12 total issues until the end of the first paragraph. Perhaps this fact could be made more prominent.
- Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "and the sister magazine, Infinity" - Doesn't the article already mention that Infinity was the sister magazine to Science Fiction Adventures?
- Yes; cut. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "which had been launched the previous year" - Launched the year before Science Fiction Adventures launched, I assume?
- Publication history and contents
- "In 1955, Irwin Stein, the owner of Royal Publications, decided to launch two magazines: Infinity Science Fiction and Suspect Detective Stories. ... he simply retitled Suspect to Science Fiction Adventures" - I'm a little confused. Was Science Fiction Adventures the continuation of Suspect, or was Science Fiction Adventures just reusing Suspect's volume numbering scheme?
- It is confusing. Suspect was really nothing to do with Science Fiction Adventures, but when Stein gave up on Suspect after five issues and decided to launch SFA he didn't want to spend the time or money to get a new second-class mailing permit. The Post Office didn't mind if a magazine's title changed -- see Saturn for example, which changed several times and ended up nothing like the original magazine. But in that case the changes were fairly gradual. Here Stein kept the old volume numbering but changed everything else about the magazine, so evidently the USPS decided that Stein was just starting a completely new magazine and told him he had to get a new mailing permit. When he did, he gave up the façade of the old numbering and just made the second one volume 1 number 2. I didn't want to go into a long digression about this in the article, and some parts of the explanation I can't really source anyway. Do you think it needs to be clearer? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Actually, after rereading the article, I find that the situation isn't as confusing as I thought. It seems to me that the USPS didn't require a new second-class mailing permit for magazines that were merely renamed, but that the USPS did require a new second-class mailing permit for completely new magazines, which is understandable. Epicgenius (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- It is confusing. Suspect was really nothing to do with Science Fiction Adventures, but when Stein gave up on Suspect after five issues and decided to launch SFA he didn't want to spend the time or money to get a new second-class mailing permit. The Post Office didn't mind if a magazine's title changed -- see Saturn for example, which changed several times and ended up nothing like the original magazine. But in that case the changes were fairly gradual. Here Stein kept the old volume numbering but changed everything else about the magazine, so evidently the USPS decided that Stein was just starting a completely new magazine and told him he had to get a new mailing permit. When he did, he gave up the façade of the old numbering and just made the second one volume 1 number 2. I didn't want to go into a long digression about this in the article, and some parts of the explanation I can't really source anyway. Do you think it needs to be clearer? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "9 issues between 1952 and 1954" - I would spell this out as "nine issues" per MOS:NUMERAL
- Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "The US Post Office" - Could this be linked to the United States Postal Service?
- Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "the stories rarely exceeded 20,000 words" - Is the 20,000-word figure referring to the typical length of novels at the time?
- No, even a short novel would have been 40,000 or more words; I think a typical paperback of the day would have been around 55,000 words. I think all he's saying is that these were clearly not really novels. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Oh I see. Epicgenius (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- No, even a short novel would have been 40,000 or more words; I think a typical paperback of the day would have been around 55,000 words. I think all he's saying is that these were clearly not really novels. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- " so in 1957, when he decided to increase the magazines' frequency" - Judging by the Bibliographical details section, I assume this change occurred in the middle of that year (between June and August)?
- In fact the gap between April and June was the first shortened gap. I could put the details in a footnote? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, that would make sense. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- In fact the gap between April and June was the first shortened gap. I could put the details in a footnote? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Towards the end of the magazine's run" - I'd clarify that this is towards the end of the American magazine's run. This sentence comes right after the British magazine is mentioned, so the phrase "the magazine" has no clear referent.
- Clarified. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- The text never explicitly says when the last issue was printed, but the Bibliographical details section indicates that the magazine ceased publication in June 1958.
- Clarified in the bibliographic section. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "In 1955, Irwin Stein, the owner of Royal Publications, decided to launch two magazines: Infinity Science Fiction and Suspect Detective Stories. ... he simply retitled Suspect to Science Fiction Adventures" - I'm a little confused. Was Science Fiction Adventures the continuation of Suspect, or was Science Fiction Adventures just reusing Suspect's volume numbering scheme?
- Bibliographical details
- " the numbering was completely regular" - This could potentially be confusing, since "completely regular" could mean that the second issue was 1/7, the third issue was 1/8, etc. But, since there's a table on the right, there's nothing wrong with this per se.
- OK -- I did put in the "thereafter" to make that clear. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library)
- " the numbering was completely regular" - This could potentially be confusing, since "completely regular" could mean that the second issue was 1/7, the third issue was 1/8, etc. But, since there's a table on the right, there's nothing wrong with this per se.
- That's really all that I have. It's a short article, but a nice one. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! I've responded to everything above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick responses. There are only a few things that need to be addressed, but otherwise I think this is good enough for the bronze star. Epicgenius (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Looks like two things left? I think this takes care of them. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:55, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support - these changes look good. – Epicgenius (talk) 02:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Looks like two things left? I think this takes care of them. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:55, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick responses. There are only a few things that need to be addressed, but otherwise I think this is good enough for the bronze star. Epicgenius (talk) 02:24, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! I've responded to everything above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Kusma
Will review this soon. —Kusma (talk) 16:17, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- [[digest-size]] [[science fiction magazine]] is a bit MOS:SEAOFBLUE.
- Removed the first link. I usually put those in because sometimes people ask about it, but you're right. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Sf historian" looks a bit funny. I realise that you are using uppercase and lowercase "sf", "SF", "Sf" just as the word "science fiction" would be written. Is this standard practice or your personal style?
- "sf" is the standard abbreviation used by nearly all the standard references; "SF" occurs too but is less common. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- You mention Suspect Detective Stories. As it is a red link, can you tell us a little bit about its content in addition to the editorial history? (Did it indeed feature detective stories?)
- There are a couple of quotes about it, from Ashley and Cook; do you think we need more? I do have a source that covers it (Cook) but he only has a page on it and if/when I do create that article it's going to be very short. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Assuming that it indeed covered exclusively mystery detective stories, it is probably sufficient.
- I reread Cook and he says "fast-action, contemporary, crime adventures", so I added ""action-adventure crime fiction" to the description. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Assuming that it indeed covered exclusively mystery detective stories, it is probably sufficient.
- There are a couple of quotes about it, from Ashley and Cook; do you think we need more? I do have a source that covers it (Cook) but he only has a page on it and if/when I do create that article it's going to be very short. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Why did the US Post Office care about the numbering scheme?
- See my answer to Epicgenius above. Since you're asking too, I think I probably do have to expand this, but let me know what you think after reading the explanation above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, please explain the issue with the new second-class mailing permit so we understand the context of "deceived".
- Expanded this a bit. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, please explain the issue with the new second-class mailing permit so we understand the context of "deceived".
- See my answer to Epicgenius above. Since you're asking too, I think I probably do have to expand this, but let me know what you think after reading the explanation above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm wondering whether the long "publication history and content" section could be split up (by moving the "In Shaw's first editorial" paragraph to a new section).
- For longer articles I usually have a "Publication history" section and a "Contents" section, since the two narratives (one about the business, one about the writing) really don't overlap much. I didn't think I had enough material to do that here, but I've tried it as you suggest: see what you think. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think it is better, although "Editorial policy and contents" or "Content and editorial attitude" or something would describe the new section more precisely.
- I usually title these sections either "Contents" or "Contents and reception"; here there's not much reception information. I think editorial approaches are naturally discussed as part of magazine content, since after all the editor is the reason the content is the way it is, so I'd like to leave it with the shorter title. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think it is better, although "Editorial policy and contents" or "Content and editorial attitude" or something would describe the new section more precisely.
- For longer articles I usually have a "Publication history" section and a "Contents" section, since the two narratives (one about the business, one about the writing) really don't overlap much. I didn't think I had enough material to do that here, but I've tried it as you suggest: see what you think. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Six of Silverberg's early novels": a glance at Robert Silverberg bibliography suggests we might have articles about some of them, so they could be mentioned?
- The source doesn't name them, and a look at a couple of references doesn't make it obvious which ones they were, so I'm reluctant to do more original research. Stableford (the source) is probably referring to Lest We Forget Thee, Earth as one of them, but he doesn't say so. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Link Lest We Forget Thee, Earth
- Done. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Is it worth adjusting the 35 cents for inflation?
- I don't think so -- it's easy to do if you think I should, but the reader can tell it's a small amount and wouldn't be surprised by the inflated equivalent. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library)
- Sure, makes sense. Indeed more interesting context would be the price of other magazines at the time.
- It was a typical price, but unfortunately I don't really have a source that talks about the prices across the market -- I know it's typical because I can look up the price of all the competing magazines in the various sources. If I run across something like that I'll add it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sure, makes sense. Indeed more interesting context would be the price of other magazines at the time.
- I don't think so -- it's easy to do if you think I should, but the reader can tell it's a small amount and wouldn't be surprised by the inflated equivalent. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library)
A nice little article. I hope you find something useful in these comments. —Kusma (talk) 21:32, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Very much so; thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:10, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Some responses interspersed above (the ones I don't respond to again are all fine); the main remaining issue from my side is the "deception" of the post office. —Kusma (talk) 08:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- A couple of additions made and responses above. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Some responses interspersed above (the ones I don't respond to again are all fine); the main remaining issue from my side is the "deception" of the post office. —Kusma (talk) 08:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Drive-by comments by TompaDompa
- I added links to The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy
- Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Any particular reason to cite The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction in a different way than the other sources?
- Just that I cited the Tuck from my physical copy, and the other from the web page. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Rereading I see I misunderstood the question, but the answer isn't much different -- I put the physical books in the sources and the websites in the footnotes directly. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Just that I cited the Tuck from my physical copy, and the other from the web page. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Stableford isn't the only author of the entry in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction. Ashley is also credited.
- Fixed; thanks for spotting that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- The entry in The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction has been updated in January. The date in the reference could be updated to reflect this.
- Done. I left the archive date and link alone; I read through the entry and as far as I can see only the image has been changed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
TompaDompa (talk) 20:45, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:18, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
1995 Aigio earthquake
- Nominator(s): SamBroGaming (talk) 05:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
A destructive earthquake took place in Greece in 1995. It occurred in a zone where the maximum expected shaking over half a millenia was less than this event. It caused the strongest ground motion ever recorded in the country. Luckily, despite this, it only killed 26 people due to two buildings collapsing, and a further 200 were injured. SamBroGaming (talk) 05:00, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you to @Ceranthor: for helping me with the article. SamBroGaming (talk) 05:03, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
First-time nomination
- Hi SamBroGaming, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:52, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Few More Comments from Ceranthor
- I provided a lot of comments at the peer review. A few more things that are mostly minor concerns. I feel like the third and fourth paragraphs of Tectonic setting can be combined.
- "(Mw 5.6[note 2])" - move note 2 to outside parentheses
- Could we add a little more to the caption than "USGS ShakeMap for the event"?
- Really nitpicky, but this is FAC after all... I notice some inconsistency in directional notation. Such as WNW in tectonic setting but then east–west in impact. Should really be consistent style throughout.
- "Recorded 5.4 on the mb and Ms scales" - add a period to be consistent with note 1
- For sources, should ideally have either all full names or all initials for authors for consistency.
Otherwise, support. ceranthor 19:51, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have addressed all issues you pointed out, except I am unsure how to combine the third and fourth paragraphs of the tectonic setting. SamBroGaming (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- @SamBroGaming: The third and fourth paragraphs just need to be rewritten in such a way that they flow together as one short paragraph rather than two super short paragraphs. All the information should be retained, just rewritten in a way that they flow together. ceranthor 01:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Ceranthor: I have merged those two paragraphs. SamBroGaming (talk) 07:25, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- @SamBroGaming: The third and fourth paragraphs just need to be rewritten in such a way that they flow together as one short paragraph rather than two super short paragraphs. All the information should be retained, just rewritten in a way that they flow together. ceranthor 01:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Prose comments from Airship
- The lead could be improved significantly. At the moment, I'm not sure it meets FA criteria 1a—engaging and professional prose. The sentences are all short and staccato, it's a single paragraph which reads like a list in prose form, and there is no discernible flow or connection between sentences.
- Agree with above—the third and fourth paragraphs of tectonic setting can be joined together.
- "a north dipping, west-northwest trending" what does this mean? are there any helpful wikilinks?
- I think I know what a slip rate is, but I have "strike" means. On a related note, you define "dip angle" on the second appearance.
- "The fault reactivated during this earthquake. It showed surface rupturing and produced its largest aftershock." Which fault? Offshore? Onshore? The whole thing? What does "its" refer to—the earthquake or the fault?
- "where the sea moved 2–3 m (6 ft 7 in – 9 ft 10 in) closer to land." can the sea move closer to the land?
- I'm not sure about the relevance of the entirety of the Future hazard section. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:32, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
I Don't Wanna Cry
This article is about Mariah Carey's fourth number one single on the Billboard Hot 100. It is notable for the rift it caused between Carey and its producer Narada Michael Walden, who never collaborated on another album after 1990. Carey's future/former husband Tommy Mottola cites her lack of creative control during the production process as a reason for the eventual dissolution of their marriage! Heartfox (talk) 04:54, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "reached the top ten on music charts in Canada" - multiple charts in Canada?
- Yes, at the time there was one for sales-only (The Record, which was republished in Billboard's Hits of the World section) and another was airplay-only (RPM). It reached the top ten on both charts.
- Thanks for clarifying - in that case I would suggest rewording slightly to "reached the top ten on both sales and airplay charts in Canada" -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:56, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, at the time there was one for sales-only (The Record, which was republished in Billboard's Hits of the World section) and another was airplay-only (RPM). It reached the top ten on both charts.
- "her 1993 marriage with Mottola ended due to his controlling nature" - this is the first mention of her marriage to Mottola, I suggest you mention earlier the fact that they had got married
- Rephrased.
- "The song has a similar" => "The latter song has a similar" for clarity?
- Clarified.
- "The First Vision (1991) presents" - clarify what this is
- Clarified.
- "due to the appearance of her dress and the model" - what model?
- Clarified.
- Notes which are not complete sentences (which is most of them) do not need full stops
- Removed.
- Think that's it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:21, 5 March 2023 (UTC
- Thanks so much for your comments, ChrisTheDude. I believe I have addressed them all. Heartfox (talk) 22:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi ChrisTheDude, does everything look okay? Heartfox (talk) 17:55, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:31, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Question from ResPM
I noticed the article the other day after I saw a bunch of hidden single-chart categories had been removed. Although I already have an idea about why you did this, can you explain why you replaced the templates with manual citations? On most FAs I've seen—even recent ones—I haven't seen charts formatted this way. I'm just curious. ResPM (T🔈🎵C) 12:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think the templates are fine for regular articles, especially newer ones where it is much easier to update chart peaks by copy and pasting the same template between articles. But they are simply malformatted. Many use the chart name in what is supposed to be the publisher parameter. In my opinion this is just not proper for a featured article. This issue has been brought up by non-subject matter editors on other FACs, but nothing much ever happens. Heartfox (talk) 13:27, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Prose review
Putting this as a placeholder. One immediate comment I have: I'm not sure if the table for the Critical reviews helpful as it only contains 2? Ippantekina (talk) 03:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Paint Drying
- Nominator(s): ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 00:33, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
An independent filmmaker forced the British Board of Film Classification to watch paint dry for ten hours. I have exhausted all available sources I could find, including scraping TWL, and comparing this to other shorter film FAs (via Petscan) it looks suitable. This article became a GA on 6 January and has since been expanded nearly 3,000 bytes so hoping it qualifies :) ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 00:33, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Image review—pass
(t · c) buidhe 08:01, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- "the BBFC rated it 'U' for 'Universal,'" - comma should be outside the quote marks
- " indicating "no material likely to offend or harm."" - same here
- "Charlie Shackleton (then known as Charlie Lyne)" - when is "then"?
- "because Charlie Manson used Helter Skelter to justify murder?" - song title should be in quote marks
- "According to Shackleton, his debut self-distributed film, Beyond Clueless, cost £867.60" - the film didn't cost this, the submission to the BBFC did
- BBFC image caption needs a full stop
- "It raised £961—worth 2 hours and 1 minute of footage—by 18 November" => "It had raised £961—worth 2 hours and 1 minute of footage—by 18 November"
- "It was rated 15 for "very strong language."" - again, full stop should be outside quote marks
- In fact, do a sweep for that generally - I see loads of cases where the punctuation should be outside the quotes
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:07, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: All done I believe; appreciate the comments! As for your third point, it was at the film's release… I am not sure when he changed his name, but thought it was worth noting for the reader as all sources refer to him as Lyne. How would you word it? ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 15:06, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- One outstanding comment is that the production section still starts off with "Charlie Shackleton (then known as Charlie Lyne)". As there's been no mention of any dates prior to this in the body, "then" is essentially meaningless. It would be better to say "Charlie Shackleton (known as Charlie Lyne from [whenever] to [whenever])". Hope that makes sense.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, it makes sense. How does it look now? ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 17:52, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- One outstanding comment is that the production section still starts off with "Charlie Shackleton (then known as Charlie Lyne)". As there's been no mention of any dates prior to this in the body, "then" is essentially meaningless. It would be better to say "Charlie Shackleton (known as Charlie Lyne from [whenever] to [whenever])". Hope that makes sense.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Valereee
- He had expected to see conflict between the BBFC examiners and the visiting filmmakers, however was surprised that there was no such resolution; Shackleton added that, on the contrary, many of the attending filmmakers seemed to be supportive of the BBFC. Maybe some clarification -- were these other independent filmmakers, or primarily large commercial ones (whose budgets wouldn't be meaninfully affected) who were supportive?
- Although Shackleton had no plans for a wide theatrical release, he stated that he was in talks with a cinema in London about possibly showing the film Date context?
- Valereee (talk) 14:29, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments! I believe I have addressed your second point; as for your first, the sources unfortunately do not say. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 15:39, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Z1720
Non-expert prose review. I saw this in the FAC list, decided to read it, and then thought "since I've read the whole thing, I might as well review it".
- Thank you so much for reading it! I hope you enjoyed it. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 18:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Why is the interview in "Further reading" not included as a source in the article?
- It is not an interview but rather an article written by Shackleton himself. His motivations and Paint Drying's filmmaking process were all covered well enough in other RS sources instead, which seemed like a better alternative to me than citing Shackleton directly to avoid possible bias. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 18:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Some of the websites used in the references are not archived. I suggest running IABot and archiving them.
- Thanks; done. Ref 36 does not allow web crawlers unfortunately. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 18:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- The film's release date in the infobox is 26 January, but the article only mentions that it was rated as U on that date. Is there a source for the release date that can be placed in the article?
- Ooo so the film itself was never publicly released (none of the sources explicitly mention this). Perhaps I should remove the release date to reflect this? ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 18:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- If the film has never been released, than it shouldn't be in the infobox. I do not know when a film is considered "released" and might be a question for WP:FILMS. Z1720 (talk) 01:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Removed. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 16:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- The lede says it was "produced, written, directed and shot by Charlie Shackleton." There's no credits section (it would probably be too short) but where in the lede does it say that he had all of these roles? (We know that it was shot and directed by Shackleton, and I think the reader can assume that he produced it, but the body doesn't have any information about him writing the work, and since it is a silent film about paint drying, is there actually a writer?)
- Good point—removed 'written'. Do you reckon it is safe to say he edited it (as stated in the infobox) as well? ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 18:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- You can I guess, but I think it's more impressive that he produced and directed it. I'll leave that up to you. Z1720 (talk) 01:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Eh, I removed 'edited' as sounding out of place IMO. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 16:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "indicating "no material likely to offend or harm"." Since you are quoting the BBFC, I think this needs a citation.
- I see what you mean but I tend to avoid citations in the lead. Do you know if we have a policy on this anywhere? ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 18:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- WP:V policy says, "All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material." MOS:LEDECITE, a guideline, says "The verifiability policy advises that material that is challenged or likely to be challenged, and direct quotations, should be supported by an inline citation." Even though this is in the lede, I would still highly support a citation for the direct quote. Z1720 (talk) 01:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- You're right—added. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 16:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Those are my thoughts. Z1720 (talk) 18:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Responses above. Z1720 (talk) 01:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for the wait. Replies above. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 16:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- SC
- Lead & IB
- Technically the Country field isn't supported by the text – you could add
- Could you elaborate on what you mean by this? ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry - forgot to finish the sentence there! I was going to say that you could add a reference to that one field to ensure it's compliant. - SchroCat (talk) 11:00, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- @SchroCat: Does that look alright? Also, I spent 48 hours thinking of a joke but I ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 14:28, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- The film is listed by the BBFC and the BFI as being directed by Charlie Lyne, not Charlie Shackleton. The guidance at Template:Infobox film says "
Credits in the infobox should not be retrospectively altered to accommodate name changes at a later date. A person should be credited by the name they were using professionally at the time the film was made
"
- Interesting policy! Do you reckon I should use an efn note of sorts so as to not confuse readers? ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- I would go with the policy and use Lyne, then deal with it in the lead and body (ie. The lead can read produced and directed by Charlie Shackleton (under his former name Charlie Lyne), and have more or less the same explanation in the body. - SchroCat (talk) 11:00, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. The body already says "Charlie Shackleton (known as Charlie Lyne until 2019)" which IMO is sufficient. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 23:07, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- The BBFC listing states the genre as "Documentary", which could be added
- Could do. "Documentary" on Wikipedia seems to generally be used to mean something educational/informative, whilst websites like IMDb and the BBFC use it denote any non-fiction film (like an actuality film). Looking at other absurdly long non-fiction films like Modern Times Forever and Logistics (film) do not seem to have it mentioned. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- "hours worth" should be "hours' worth" (I see the same phrase is repeated elsewhere in the article)
- Fixed both instances. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Synopsis
- "actually dries at the end of Paint Drying": you can replace the name with "the film" to stop it repeating. You can start the next sentence as "It".
- Done. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Background and conception
- "Shackleton has written": "He", rather than renaming
- Nice catch! Done. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- "censorship in the United Kingdom": shortened to UK
- Done. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Filming, editing
- Three more examples of United Kingdom that should be shortened to UK
- Done. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reception
- "he stated on 25 January that": probably best to add the year as this is at the beginning of a section
- Good idea. Done. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Post-release
- "a magazine published by Delhi Press": do we need to know this? I wouldn't expect to see the publisher shown in the sources, let alone the body
- Fixed. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- "dubbed": that's slang and should be replaced
- Done. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
I hope these are useful. All that, and I bet the BBFC watched it on fast forward... – SchroCat (talk) 10:48, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @SchroCat: They are very useful! Replies above. ツ LunaEatsTuna (💬)— 10:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. All good. Short for a film article, but there's not anything more I thing could or should be added - it's probably going to be the only film FA without a plot section and cast list! Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 22:09, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Bennerley Viaduct
- Nominator(s): Harry Mitchell (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Something a little bit different for me. Here we have a long-disused railway bridge in the English East Midlands, an area that was once a hive of industrial activity but there is little left to suggest it these days. The bridge was built as part of an attempt by a railway company to break its rival's monopoly on the area and carried trains for 90 years before it fell victim to the infamous Beeching Axe. After sitting neglected until last year, it is now in use again for pedestrians and cyclists. It has a certain significance to me as my grandmother lives a few miles away. I owe huge thanks to Dumelow for his help with the technical description, Peter I. Vardy for consulting Pevsner, and Wikimedia UK, who funded several of the books in the bibliography. I've largely rewritten the article, which at one point was as poorly maintained as its subject, and I think it meets the criteria but as always I'm grateful for any feedback. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:41, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Ilkeston_(Bennerley)_viaduct.png: on what basis is this CC licensed?
- File:1916.05.03_L20_3_jpl.jpg needs a US tag and author date of death. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- None whatsoever for the first; it's clearly PD. Unable to find a DOD on the second and it's not that important anyway so I've removed it. Thanks Nikki. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- SC
- Background
- "Dee Bridge disaster": you could probably use a comma after disaster, but I'll leave it to your discretion
- Done.
- "Among several branches, one left the main line just east of Awsworth": I'm not 100 per cent sure what you're saying here. Is it that "one of the company's many branches left the main line just east of Awsworth"?
- Yes, I've reworded slightly. See what you think.
- "Awsworth ... Erewash Valley ... Bennerley Ironworks ... Bennerley Viaduct ... Nottingham and Derby" Some form of map would be useful here, although the new skin means that (on my screen at least) the infobox is running past this section and only ends alongside the images from The Engineer. Not too much you can do about it really – the IB contains everything I would expect it too with nothing superfluous in there, so any more images in this part would just be clutter.
- I found quite a helpful diagram but I'm not sure where I could put it.
- That would work, but I agree that it's a bit difficult to know where to put it without causing too many other problems, sandwiching opposite the IB or cluttering the article elsewhere. The only section without an image is the History one, but it's the wrong image to put in there, so best leave out unless you get a brainwave! - SchroCat (talk) 09:50, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'll add it to the see also for now. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 10:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- That would work, but I agree that it's a bit difficult to know where to put it without causing too many other problems, sandwiching opposite the IB or cluttering the article elsewhere. The only section without an image is the History one, but it's the wrong image to put in there, so best leave out unless you get a brainwave! - SchroCat (talk) 09:50, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- I found quite a helpful diagram but I'm not sure where I could put it.
- "Samuel Abbott": Should it also be red-linked in the lead if you're doing so here? (I don't know about the guidelines on the matter, but consistency is something to bear in mind.
- Probably.
- Appreciation
- Bennerly "more attractive" than Meldon? Tish and pish – they know nothing, this Biddle and Nock!
- You want to tell that to one of the most famous railway historians ever? ;) Personally I think Meldon has a more dramatic setting but Bennerley is easier to appreciate from the valley floor
- Just wondering whether the Appreciation section would be better after the History—or even Restoration—section? Worth a thought and I leave it entirely to your discretion.
- Might see what anyone else thinks of this. The style is adapted from some of my war memorial articles and I think it fits nicely with the description so we know what's being appreciated, but I can see an argument for moving it further down.
That's my lot – an interesting article that I enjoyed very much. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 20:31, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks very much, SchroCat! Glad you liked it. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:10, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support on prose. Happy with the changes - nice article. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:50, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Kusma
Looks interesting, and the viaduct is in bicycling distance for me, so I'll have to check this out in real life. Will review soonish. —Kusma (talk) 09:23, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lead: The word ashlar was new to me, which is probably because I am a foreigner. Worth linking? It is linked in the body.
- Second paragraph with lots of short sentences starting with "Its" or "It" reads a bit choppy
- Background: "keen to expand westwards to exploit the coal fields" this sounds almost as if the railway company wanted to do coal mining; do you mean "to take advantage of"?
- "The Midland already occupied" is it normal to shorten the Midland Railway to just "Midland"? It is mildly confusing for something happening in the Midlands.
- Description: "The design was apparently based on the Viaduc de Busseau" who finds this apparent? (I'm curious how the 1877 source describes this).
- Appreciation: This section (which might work better at the end of the article) also has comparisons to similar viaducts in England. Do you need the {{clear}} at the end? (In my personal settings it would look better without).
- Restoration: do we know why British Rail wanted to demolish it even after it became listed?
- "rivetted" usually with one t?
Just some minor points, overall it reads fine. Interesting that instead of trying to figure out more about the ground, they just built a special type of bridge. —Kusma (talk) 11:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Kusma, I really appreciate your input. I hope you manage to ride to it soon, it's well worth a look. I believe I've addressed everything you mentioned, except that "Midland" is the almost universal abbreviation for the Midland Railway. I've also moved the appreciation section down (courtesy ping for SchroCat, who also suggested it). Let me know if anything else stands out to you. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:14, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good changes, I think there is only the question of the connection to the French viaduct left. And one of the photos (File:Bennerley Viaduct from below 04.jpg) makes me slightly nauseous: is it possible to rotate it a bit? Or do I have to go there myself to see if I can do a straight version? —Kusma (talk) 21:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Kusma: I've attributed that now. There's no reason to doubt it, it's just only mentioned in one source, which doesn't specify where the information came from. Feel free to edit the photo if you can, or to take a better one (though try standing where I was stood and you'll see the height and length of the viaduct make it difficult not to rotate the camera!). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:10, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks, that is better. Interestingly enough, the French article mentions that the Crumlin Viaduct was the first of this type, but five minutes of skim-reading what I think is the source for that statement did not show a strong connection there either. I tried some crop&rotate with GIMP, but I'm not yet satisfied enough to upload them; maybe I'll check with someone more capable in these matters and try again. Anyway, happy to support on prose/content. —Kusma (talk) 22:28, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Kusma: I've attributed that now. There's no reason to doubt it, it's just only mentioned in one source, which doesn't specify where the information came from. Feel free to edit the photo if you can, or to take a better one (though try standing where I was stood and you'll see the height and length of the viaduct make it difficult not to rotate the camera!). HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:10, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good changes, I think there is only the question of the connection to the French viaduct left. And one of the photos (File:Bennerley Viaduct from below 04.jpg) makes me slightly nauseous: is it possible to rotate it a bit? Or do I have to go there myself to see if I can do a straight version? —Kusma (talk) 21:48, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
1867 United States Senate election in Pennsylvania
This article is about... one of the more important Senate elections in 19th century Pennsylvania, not so much the election itself, but the maneuvering to gain the Republican endorsement, which was tantamount to election then. Enjoy.Wehwalt (talk) 14:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Don't use fixed px size
- File:Smn_Cameron-SecofWar.jpg is tagged as lacking author info, and when and where was this first published?
- File:Edgar_Cowan_-_Brady-Handy.jpg needs a US tag. ditto File:John_W._Geary_-_Brady-Handy.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
HF - support Will review in a day or two. Hog Farm Talk 23:36, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Should the Civil War be mentioned at some point in the background, especially given Cameron's post as Secretary of War and Curtin's position as an influential wartime governor?
- Was Curtin term-limited in 1866?
- I wouldn't call the stuff in Note [a] to be common knowledge, so recommend citing it directly
- Spot-checked the refs to Stewart 1972 and didn't see any issues
I think that's all from me. Hog Farm Talk 04:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Constantine (son of Theophilos)
- Nominator(s): Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Well, this is just embarrassing. I've made my home at FA and have been here for almost half a year now, and I only learned today that the two-week wait period does not apply to successful promotions. One of my nominations was close recently, and as I do not wish to created a huge backlog at FA, here is a short article about a Byzantine prince. I've returned to my roots and have decided to nominate an article about a dead child. Have fun reviewing! Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @HistoryofIran: as the GA reviewer, would you care to follow this nomination and offer your thoughts? Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:18, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- FYI: if this nomination passes, it'll be the shortest FA in terms of both prose size and word count, beating Si Ronda in both. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 03:35, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- How interesting. Well, I guess it’s time to break some records! Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I am not sure if I am the right person for that, as I've no FAs nor have I ever followed how the process looks like. --HistoryofIran (talk) 08:57, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, that is quite alright. Thank you for your GA review, and I'll see you around. Unlimitedlead (talk) 10:54, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry, but I am not sure if I am the right person for that, as I've no FAs nor have I ever followed how the process looks like. --HistoryofIran (talk) 08:57, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 It turns out that over the course of the FA process, this article has gained some more words, meaning Si Ronda will still be the shortest FA by 9 words! Unlimitedlead (talk) 10:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- If it is known that he was born sometime in the 830s, then there's no need to be as vague as "c.830s" for his reign
- What do you suggest instead?
- If we know he was born in the 830s, then just replace both instances of "c.830s" in the lead with "830s". To me, "c.830s" implies a broad range which could fall outside the decade, which clearly isn't the case here -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:06, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I understand now. Fixed.
- Side note: I only changed that for Constantine's reign. As with his birth, technically it could fall outside the 330s depending on which source you use.
- I understand now. Fixed.
- If we know he was born in the 830s, then just replace both instances of "c.830s" in the lead with "830s". To me, "c.830s" implies a broad range which could fall outside the decade, which clearly isn't the case here -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:06, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- What do you suggest instead?
- "Unusually, Constantine was not named after Michael II" - need more context to explain why this was unusual
- Done.
- "As Theophilos succeeded Michael II on 2 October 829" => "As Theophilos had succeeded Michael II on 2 October 829"
- Done.
- "suggesting a birth date of 831 at earliest" => "suggesting a birth date of 831 at the earliest"
- Done.
- Think that's it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: all done, except for the first one, which I have a query about. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Another thing I hadn't spotted before - the link on the name Theophilos in the lead points to a DAB page..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good catch. Fixed.
- @ChrisTheDude: Okay, now I think everything is done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good catch. Fixed.
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Solidus_of_Theophilos_sb1653_(reverse).jpg needs a tag for the original work. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:07, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria Is {{PD-Art|PD-old-100-1923}} accaptable for these purposes? Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:28, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- No, coins are considered 3D. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:34, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: {{PD-old-100-1923}}, then? Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that should work. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:07, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:20, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, that should work. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:07, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: {{PD-old-100-1923}}, then? Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- No, coins are considered 3D. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:34, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Support Comments from Iazyges
Claiming a spot. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:59, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Constantine was born to Emperor Theophilos and Empress Theodora." Suggest "Constantine was born to Byzantine Emperor Theophilos and Empress Theodora." and moving link to Byzantine Empire to "Byzantine Emperor"
- "In the Prosopographie der mittelbyzantinischen Zeit," Translation gloss (Prosopography of the Middle Byzantine Period) might be useful here.
- @Unlimitedlead: That is all of my suggestions; well done! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks @Iazyges for the review. Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- No problem! Happy to support. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 01:54, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Thanks @Iazyges for the review. Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:05, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "Most information about Constantine's short life and titular reign remains unclear". I'm not sure about "remains", why not 'is'?
- Done.
- "it is known that he was born sometime in the 830s". If this is "known", then you don't need the "c." at the start of the lead.
- While he was probably born in the 830s, some, like Ralph-Johannes Lilie give a possible date of the 820s.
- In which case it is not "known that he was born sometime in the 830s".
- While he was probably born in the 830s, some, like Ralph-Johannes Lilie give a possible date of the 820s.
- "would continue the iconoclastic policies". Optional: insert 'religious' after "iconoclastic", to give a reader a handle on what, broadly, is being referred to without having to chase the link.
- Done.
- "still not a formal title". Delete "still".
- Done.
- "Herrin agrees with this birth date as well." As well as whom?
- With Lynda Garland, as stated in the previous sentence.
- Er, Herrin agrees with Garland - fine. "as well" indicates that they agree as well as someone else - ie, that at least two people agree with Garland.
- With Lynda Garland, as stated in the previous sentence.
- "though this could mean he was only raised to co-emperor in 833." I am unsure why you use "though".
- Removed.
A little gem. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:12, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- All done or replied to. Thanks for reviewing, Gog! Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- A couple of come backs. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- All fixed. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- A couple of come backs. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- All done or replied to. Thanks for reviewing, Gog! Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Interstate 40 in Tennessee
This article is about arguably the most important highway in the State of Tennessee by a long shot, and the eighth longest Interstate Highway segment within a single state (second east of the Mississippi River). This highway serves the three largest cities in Tennessee and traverses a wide diversity of landscapes and terrain. In addition, this particular stretch of highway is nationally significant in that it is connected to a landmark U.S. Supreme Court ruling and passes through one of the most important regions instrumental in the development of popular music, hence its nickname of "Music Highway". This article was promoted to GA status a little over a year ago, and recently underwent peer review. If promoted, this would be the first article about a highway in Tennessee to become a featured article. Bneu2013 (talk) 02:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Coord note -- Hi Bneu2013 and welcome to to FAC. Just a note that, as this appears to be your first nomination, we'll be requiring a reviewer to undertake a spot-check of sources for accurate use and avoidance of plagiarism or close paraphrasing. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- File:Hernando_de_Soto_Bridge_Memphis.jpg: source link is dead
- Fixed.
- File:I-40-Nashville-1962.jpg: when and where was this first published? Ditto File:Malfunction_junction_knoxville_1970s.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:06, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- The first was published in a pamphlet by the Tennessee Department of Highways, predecessor to TDOT, in 1962, similar to the one from 1966 that is cited. The latter was used in a 1976 engineering study for the redesign of the interchange. A black-and-white version also was published in The Knoxville Journal that year. Bneu2013 (talk) 20:26, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Leonard W. Murray
- Nominator(s): Friendofleonard (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about a significant Canadian military figure, Rear-Admiral Leonard W. Murray, Commander-in-Chief of the Northwest Atlantic, architect of the Battle of the Atlantic, and the only Canadian to have commanded a Theatre of War in WW1 or WW2. It is proposed for featuring on the anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic on 8 May 2023. Friendofleonard (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
First-time nomination
- Hi Friendofleonard, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Gog the Mild. As you can see the article is very substantially referenced, and has benefited from the detailed (and much appreciated) review by Hawkeye, who recommended additional sources be identified for several statements. I think that the tagging follows the text-source integrity guidelines - but that would of course be good to check. Some of the references are to documents in National or Navy archives and not to other published work - but I do not think they are "original research" in that they simply provide evidence for statements (like the dates when medals were awarded) or quotes. I obtained peer review by three Canadian naval historians, and I have done a lot of work tidying up the article (SchroCat, Hawkeye) for format, links, bibliography etc. The only thing left to do is to review the copyright links recommended by Nikkimaria. I will let you know when that has been done. Friendofleonard (talk) 15:13, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- All of the recommended edits have been completed, copyrights checked, and the page has been added to the FA queue for recommended publication on 8 May. Please let me know if there is anything missing or out of place. Friendofleonard (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Passing comment. I’ve closed the PR properly and made the correction on the article talk page too. My oppose comment last time stated the lead was too short. It still is. It doesn’t summarise the article, which it should. I don’t fully grasp all the differences between British and Canadian English, but I would have thought one served on a ship, not in one. - SchroCat (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the suggestion regarding the intro section, and for properly removing the PR. On the "in" vs "on", I did initially put "on" but a Canadian naval historian suggested that I change them all to "in" which is what they say in the navy - apparently. Friendofleonard (talk) 04:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- If you want to see a good and complete lead, have a look at William D. Leahy, another article at FAC on a naval officer. It gives the reader a potted summary of the whole article, not just one aspect and is one you should look at before expanding Murray's lead. - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks SchroCat. It was useful to look at Leahy and the lead has now been further built up. I must admit I thought the lead was supposed to be more of a two-sentence header than a full summary. Friendofleonard (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- If you want to see a good and complete lead, have a look at William D. Leahy, another article at FAC on a naval officer. It gives the reader a potted summary of the whole article, not just one aspect and is one you should look at before expanding Murray's lead. - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Don't use fixed px size
- Suggest adding alt text
- File:Murry,_Admiral_L.W..jpg needs a US tag and a publication date. Ditto File:Midshipmen-royal-naval-college-halifax.jpg
- File:HMS_Iron_Duke_(1912).jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published?
- File:Commodore_Leonard_Murray_c_1942.jpg: who is believed to be the copyright holder? Ditto File:Murray_and_Muselier_c_1942.jpg, File:Murray_Building_S-15_CFB_Halifax.jpg
- File:Photo_of_the_Admiral_Murray_memorial_in_Nova_Scotia.jpg: what's the copyright status of the plaque?
- File:Order_of_the_Bath_UK_ribbon.svg is too simple to warrant copyright protection. Ditto File:Order_of_the_British_Empire_(Military)_Ribbon.png, File:Ribbon_-_1914_Star.png, File:Ribbon_-_British_War_Medal.png, File:Ribbon_-_War_Medal.png, File:Canadian_Volunteer_Service_Medal_BAR_2.svg, File:UK_King_George_VI_Coronation_Medal_ribbon.svg, File:UK_King_George_V_Silver_Jubilee_Medal_ribbon.svg, File:Legion_Honneur_Commandeur_ribbon.svg
- File:Croix_de_guerre_1939-1945_with_palm_France_-_ribbon_bar.svg: what's the copyright status of the original work? Ditto File:Haakon_VIIs_frihetskors_stripe.svg. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for all the review suggestions. I will get onto it over the weekend. I might come back to you for some advice although I will try to figure it out for myself. One of the complications is that many of the historical photos were in my family's possession and then handed over by my family to the Canadian government, which "owns" them now. Their original authors are not known (and the historical pix are over 70 years old). As for the medals, these were added by a different editor and I know nothing at all about their origins. But I will see what I can do for sure. Friendofleonard (talk) 04:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fixed pix sizes removed, alt text added, and all the copyrights have been reviewed and cleaned up. Except the medals. All the medal images are from existing wikicommons records that I do not manage. Thanks Nikkimaria Friendofleonard (talk) 12:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- If the images are to be used in this article, they do need to be tagged correctly, even if you weren't the original uploader.
- A bunch of the other images are still missing publication dates. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Hawkeye7
Lead
- "playing a key role in negotiations with the USA" See MOS:NOTUSA
- Lead is too short. Suggest adding:
- His graduation from the RNC, RNSC and IDC
- Something about his interwar service
- The Saint Pierre and Miquelon and the Halifax incidents
- All done, although the St Pierre and Miquelon incident is not really a central part of the career, it is more of a human interest anecdote Friendofleonard (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Early years to the end of World War I
- "on the Hector in 1773" Italicize Hector (MOS:NAMESANDTITLES)
- done
- Consider making the quote a regular quotation. ie without quotation marks or the final attribution.
- I think I prefer to leave it as a quote to match the style of 3 or 4 other quotes in the text, not all of which are quotes by Murray himself. Willing to reconsider if this is not good practice Friendofleonard (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Immediately after graduating in January 1913,[4] Murray first served as a Midshipman in the Royal Navy vessel HMS Berwick" Delete "first" as a tautology; decapitalise "midshipman"; link "Royal Navy"; comma after "Berwick"
- done
- Can we say what type of ships these were?
- added, and added also to all the other ships in the artricle. Willing to revert if this over-encumbers the text
- "the newly elected Government of Sir Robert Borden" This is unclear; wasn't he elected in 1911? Was he knighted at the time referred to? He wasn't knighted until June 1914. (Aside: I never knew Canadian PMs were knighted.)
- done
- Suggest splitting paragraph at "On 14 August 1914". Consider creating a World War I section.
- done - good idea thanks
- "Midshipman Murray" Just "Murray"
- done
- "HMCS Niobe" Only link and add the "HMCS" on first appearance.
- done (if I understand correctly, only linking on first appearance and elsewhere just appearing as the ship name in italics without HMCS or link)
- " Acting Sub-Lieutenant" De-capitalise but link "acting sub-lieutenant"
- done
- "Lieutenant" Same.
- done
- "as Lieutenant" Wasn't he already?
- fixed - he was actually promoted in Jan 1917, earlier he was a full sub-lieutenant
- Suggest splitting the paragraph at "After HMCS Niobe"
- done
- "set up troop convoys across the Atlantic to outwit German U-boats." I don't think that is how the convoy system worked. Rewrite this.
- indeed, rephrased
- Link "Scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow"
- done
- Rear admiral or rear-admiral?
- changed to Rear Admiral when it is a person's title (caps) and rear admiral when the generic position is described
Between the wars
- Again, for each ship, state what time of ship it was
- done
- Link "Captain", "Master of the Fleet"
- done
- Split paragraph at "Thus it was that,"
-done
- fn 15: Don't use "arguably" (WP:WEASEL)
-done
- " In January 1925, Murray was promoted to lieutenant-commander ... In 1927, Murray returned to the UK" Avoid starting consecutive sentences with the same words. Suggest "He returned to the UK in 1927"
-done
-done
- " In August 1938, in the middle of a final year at the Imperial Defence College," Wait, you haven't said he entered the IDC. You could say more about this. There were two representatives from Canada each year.
- edited - it seems that this was a one-year course since we he was aboard Iron Duke until Jan 1938
- " as a Captain" lowercase. Sigh.
-done, sorry
World War II and the Battle of the Atlantic
- "1939-42" -> "1939-1942" "1942–45" -> "1942–1945" (MOS:RANGES)
- How large was the RCN in 1939?
- info added
- Unlink "Royal Navy"
- done
- "strategy that was eventually so successful" Footnote required here
- added
- "negotiations with the USA" See MOS:NOTUSA
- done
- " Joint Chiefs of Staff meetings" What Joint Chiefs of Staff are we talking about here?
- good catch: clarified it was a meeting of the two chiefs of staff
- Split the paragraph after "until the spring of 1944"
- done
- Link "Canadian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom"
- done
- State who Lester B. Pearson was
- done
- Lowercase "Commodore"
- done
- "to serve convoy duty" -> "to serve on convoy duty"
- done
- done
- "planning of an Atlantic strategy" Footnote required
- added
- " American Admiral Arthur L. Bristol" "Rear Admiral"
- done
- "in order to retain seniority in relation to Admiral Bristol" This does not make sense. How does promoting him to the same rank "retain seniority"? (Also delete "Admiral")
- clarified
- "the Free French Admiral Muselier" -> "Free French Vice Admiral Émile Muselier"
- done
- Suggest adding a main article template for Capture of Saint Pierre and Miquelon
- done
- "pushing the Vichy government into an openly pro-German stance." Reference required for this paragraph!
- reference added
- Muselier's claim to have nothing to do with it is extraordinary (ie utterly unbelievable) and will require a better source
- another good catch. The text was ambiguous and now clarified. Muselier always admitted he did it, what he said was that Murray had nothing to do with it
- Don't use scary quotes (MOS:SCAREQUOTES)
- removed
- Move the Atlantic Convoy image to the right to avoid sandwiching
- done
- Murray was made Commander-in-Chief Canadian Northwest Atlantic." You need to repeat the claim in the Lead that he was "the only Canadian to command an Allied theatre of operations during World War II". With a reference.
- bith added
- Link " First Sea Lord"
- done
- "167 merchant ships (1,500,000 long tons (1,500,000 t))." I don't think this is correct. I think this was Deadweight tonnage
- reference to tonnage not verified and removed
- "VE Day and early retirement" Suggest indenting to place under the Second World War section
- done
- "Naval Board of Inquiry under Admiral Brodeur" "Rear-Admiral Victor Brodeur"
- Consider adding his CBE citation
- Considered, but I think it is a bit long and would not really fit here in the text (since it was awarded much earlier in his career). Also, if I add one then why not all?
Later years
- "to care for his ailing wife, who died in 1962" Did they have any children?
- added references to his two sons - who were both Royal Navy officers
- His Croix de guerre (France) is in the infobox but not the article. Sources required for some of his other decorations. But note that this medal bar is the only source for some of the decorations. I would remove the medal bar, which adds nothing, leaving only the table.
- I have cleaned up all the medal citations and award dates (where known) based on his service records. I prefer to keep the medal arrangement as it matches the uniform in the War Museum, which is kind of cool I think Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:45, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Many thanks Hawkeye, I will get onto it early this coming week. Friendofleonard (talk) 22:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review
Notes
- fn 21, 30, 31, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63 Publisher?
- fn 22, 50, 59, 66, 67, 68 Source?
- fn 27 Page number?
- fn 30, 38, 60 Access date?
- fn 32. Should be "pp. 9-10"
- fn 48. Remove the book details - they are down below. But we do need the page number.
- fn 64, 65 Move this into the text.
References
- Barnett, Correlli, "The Partnership Between Canada and Britain in Winning the Battle of the Atlantic". Add URL to the article (https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1365&context=cmh). Link Correlli Barnett. Add pages (pp. 5-18) Put article name in quotes and Italicize the journal name instead.
- Fry, Major D.G., MURRAY, The Sentinel, Volume 8, Issue 4, April 1972. Not used in the article - remove
- German, Tony, The sea is at our gates: The History of the Canadian Navy Title case.
- Glover, William, "Royal Colonial or Royal Canadian Navy?" Chapter name in quotes.
- Lund is not used. Remove or move to a "Further reading" section.
- Milner. Chapter name in quotes. Use title case.
- Sarty is not used. Remove or move to a "Further reading" section.
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- All done. Many many thanks for your diligent review - I have learned a lot about the coding and hope that everything is now super sharp Friendofleonard (talk) 13:58, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose from Harrias
Too many immediate issues for me on this one.
- Lots of WP:OVERLINKing.
- Some weird phrasing, such as "in armoured cruiser HMS Essex."
- Quite a lot of seemingly unsourced content, as no inline citations provided.
- I find the quality of the prose to be below that required for Featured status.
- The citations are poorly formatted, often omitting multiple pieces of information.
Should sweeping improvements be made, I'd be happy to come back for a more detailed review, but in the current state I simply think this article isn't ready for the FA process. Harrias (he/him) • talk 19:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Harrias for these comments. Some of the elements you have signaled were added as a result of recommendations from other reviewers, especially the addition of links to naval ranks and the inclusion (and linking) of ship types – like the “armoured cruiser HMS Essex.” This might be what has increased the sense of overlinking. Regarding inline citations, there are about 80, but more can certainly be added. However I would want to avoid looking as if there are too many inline citations (as well as too much overlinking). Could you help me understand what is the desired density of inline citations, and also give examples of poor formatting (missing information)? And finally, regarding the quality of the prose, I would definitely appreciate your concrete advice on this. Revisions have been made as a result of detailed review by Hawkeye, and I do not know if you were looking at the latest version of the article or at an archived version that was frozen for the FA review process. I have been over the article so many times now that I think a strong external editor might be the best way forward. Thanks again Harrias, and I look forward to your further advice on these elements. Friendofleonard (talk) 12:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Oppose from Ian
Recusing coord duties to review, I must also regretfully oppose, at this stage primarily on prose, tone, and referencing. It looks to me that too much emphasis has been placed on getting this to TFA by a certain date and this has resulted in the article being under-prepared for FAC. I realise this was put up for PR and got no comments but then actively seeking comment from around the traps, or taking to MilHist A-Class Review, would've been better than coming straight to FAC. I started copyediting the lead but stopped as I think it needs a better going-over. Some specifics:
- From there, he was reassigned to command positions on Canada's east coast, initially in command of the Newfoundland Escort Force, then Commanding Officer Atlantic Coast. -- "reassigned" suggests failure in the previous position but I doubt this is meant; "command positions" tends to obviate the need for "command of" and "Commanding Officer".
- Following the Atlantic Convoy Conference of March 1943, Murray was appointed Commander-in-Chief, Canadian Northwest Atlantic, and successfully led Canadian, British, American and other Allied naval and air forces to victory in the Battle of the Atlantic. -- "successfully" is redundant if the efforts resulted in victory.
- Three or four block quotes from the subject seems like overkill and over-reverence. I certainly don't think we need an entire section devoted to a quote.
- One of these block quotes is introduced with the statement his continuing interest in the offensive merit of convoys over patrols is evident: -- this looks like essay language, inappropriate for an encyclopedia.
- Several paragraphs don't end in citations, and that needs to be rectified.
- We shouldn't have a citation on a header as we do with Awards and decorations -- it looks like the source is cited in the section anyway.
- This is not an actionable objection because AFAIK there's no rule against it in WP but the medal bars and ribbons in the Awards and decorations really do seem more appropriate for a children's book than an encyclopedia. Obviously the above-and-beyond-the-call-of-duty awards are important but they appear in the infobox and are mentioned (or should be) in the main body. The service or campaign medals are not required as they are given for being in a certain place at a certain time and that service should be covered in the main body as well. In any case we don't need the images -- if people want to see those they can follow the links to the medal articles.
- Lastly, and this is an actionable objection if the awards table stays because of incorrect/misleading terminology, everything from 1914-15 Star to Canadian Volunteer Service Medal inclusive is not a decoration but a campaign or service medal. Similarly, the two King George medals are commemoration medals, not decorations.
I'm going to pause for breath there. I emphasise that the above comments are not exhaustive but based on a fairly quick walk-through. I think it would be best to withdraw this and go back to PR or even better seek a FAC mentor as a first-time nominator. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ian Rose I agree that it is more important to get the article right than to get it quick, so let us set aside the target date for publication (there is always 8 May 2024) and focus on the best process from here on. For peer review, although there were not a lot of peer review comments through wikipedia, I was able to secure offline reviews by three eminent Canadian naval historians, including one of Murray's biographers and the current official naval historian, and they have confirmed the accuracy of the content. So from here it is, as you suggest, about presentation, tone, style etc. I would be very happy to be coached by a FAC mentor - and as this is a military topic, I would be grateful if you could suggest how I might connect with a mentor who specialises in this domain. I would also be happy to put this up for MilHist A-Class Review. The other items you have signaled in your comments can be dealt with quite easily I feel, like the citations, the overuse of blockquotes, and the medals - but not the prose and tone. I would appreciate your advice on the best way forward (especially obtaining a mentor and WilHist review). Many thanks. Friendofleonard (talk) 12:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Li Rui (politician)
- Nominator(s): —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
This article is about Li Rui, a Chinese communist politician, historian, and dissident. Li was a CCP member from a young age and remained one until he died, but repeatedly annoyed China's leaders by calling for democracy, civil rights, and free elections. There is not a ton of information available on his personal life or background, but the article is as comprehensive as I could make it. The article underwent a GA nomination last January, conducted by Kavyansh.Singh. Looking forward to going through this process again, and thank you for reviewing this article! —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:08, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Image review
- What is "Source Li Nanyang"?
- For both images, when were they first published?
(t · c) buidhe 18:46, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reply: Li Nanyang is Li Rui's daughter. She has provided a number of images of him to various media outlets, but most of them are still covered by copyright (there are some in the NYTimes obituary, for example). As to the age, the studio portrait is from 1945, while he was secretary to Chen Yun (although I don't know the specific date), while the cropped, lower-quality photo is from 1944. It appears to have been sourced from the book 李锐口述往事. which can be seen here p.98 (warning, large PDF) along with many other photos, most of which are probably copyrighted. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:20, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- The date of first publication determines the copyright status, not the image's creation. Both images rely on PD-PRC which requires 50 years after publication; the unpublished criterion is unlikely to apply because the US tag requires that the image have been published before 1998. The book you mention seems to be published in 2017 if Worldcat is correct, so an earlier publication would be necessary. (t · c) buidhe 05:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. I've removed both images from the article for now while I try and see if there is any free use image available of Li Rui. If that doesn't prove to be possible perhaps one or more could be reuploaded directly to Wiki under fair use criteria #10 (WP:NFCI). —Ganesha811 (talk) 05:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have added a fair use image (File:Li Rui studio portrait, 1947.png) and an image of the Three Gorges dam that is usable under CC-by-SA-3.0 (File:Dreischluchtendamm hauptwall 2006.jpg. —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:47, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. I've removed both images from the article for now while I try and see if there is any free use image available of Li Rui. If that doesn't prove to be possible perhaps one or more could be reuploaded directly to Wiki under fair use criteria #10 (WP:NFCI). —Ganesha811 (talk) 05:21, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- The date of first publication determines the copyright status, not the image's creation. Both images rely on PD-PRC which requires 50 years after publication; the unpublished criterion is unlikely to apply because the US tag requires that the image have been published before 1998. The book you mention seems to be published in 2017 if Worldcat is correct, so an earlier publication would be necessary. (t · c) buidhe 05:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reply: Li Nanyang is Li Rui's daughter. She has provided a number of images of him to various media outlets, but most of them are still covered by copyright (there are some in the NYTimes obituary, for example). As to the age, the studio portrait is from 1945, while he was secretary to Chen Yun (although I don't know the specific date), while the cropped, lower-quality photo is from 1944. It appears to have been sourced from the book 李锐口述往事. which can be seen here p.98 (warning, large PDF) along with many other photos, most of which are probably copyrighted. —Ganesha811 (talk) 19:20, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Government of Macedonia (ancient kingdom)
- Nominator(s): Unlimitedlead (talk) 04:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC), User:PericlesofAthens
Have you ever heard of March Madness? Well, it's 1 March (where I live; it's actually 2 March UTC ) and prepare for a whole lot of madness! PericlesofAthens have been working on this article for a bit (kudos on him for building this article from the ground up and taking it through GA), and after a depressing FA nomination in 2018, we believe things will go smoother this time around. Read this article, and you'll discover that Alexander isn't the only great thing about Macedon... Unlimitedlead (talk) 04:05, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Unlimitedlead Thanks for the shoutout and kudos for nominating this article for FA status! Hopefully it will prove successful this time around. I'm not very active here anymore, but I'll be watching it closely whenever I'm around. With a quick inspection things look good, especially in regards to variety of sources used, thorough use of inline citations, and reliable sourcing for images. Pericles of AthensTalk 08:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Iazyges: you previously expressed support for this nomination (back in 2018). Would you be interested in giving this article another review and offering your suggestions? Thanks, Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria, you previously declared all images to be appropriately licensed in the 2018 nomination. I have since added three new images (one at the top, two at the bottom), so would you mind checking on this? Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Iazyges: you previously expressed support for this nomination (back in 2018). Would you be interested in giving this article another review and offering your suggestions? Thanks, Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:42, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Airship
insert WikiCup points declaration I'll get to this soon. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:26, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- As always, these are suggestions, not demands. Feel free to refuse with justification.
- I'm not sure what your position on duplicate links is, but there are a lot.
- Removed them. Unlimitedlead (talk) 00:38, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lead
- Could do with a bit of tightening, esp. first couple of sentences. At the moment reads "The earliest government of ancient Macedonia was established some time during the period of Archaic Greece (8th–5th centuries BC) by the Argead dynasty of kings who ruled over the kingdom. Due to shortcomings in the historical record, very little is known about the origins of Macedonian governmental institutions before the reign of Philip II of Macedon (r. 359 – 336 BC), during the final phase of Classical Greece (480–336 BC)."
- Things I noticed: "some time during the period of" is a bit waffly; "kings who ruled over the kingdom" seems like it's willing to be repetitive to get links in; Ancient Macedonia is linked to from "the origins", which isn't where I would expect that to go; "the origins...before the reign of Philip" surely if little is known about government before Philip, then we not only don't know much about the origins, but a large part of the history?
- What I might do: "The first government of ancient Macedonia was established by the Argead dynasty of Macedonian kings during the Archaic period (8th–5th centuries BC). The early history of Ancient Macedonia is obscure because of shortcomings in the historical record; little is known of governmental institutions before the reign of Philip II during the late Classical period."
- Does that work in your opinion?
- Yes; done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:37, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- "These institutions continued to evolve" is similarly a bit weak: 1) repetition of "institutions", 2) the linking of "continued to evolve" to History of Macedonia (ancient kingdom), a page which discusses almost nothing of the continued evolution of Macedonian government, is a bit odd.
- Changed to "These bureaucratic organizations evolved in complexity under his successor Alexander the Great and the subsequent Antipatrid and Antigonid dynasties of Hellenistic Greece (336–146 BC)." @PericlesofAthens: what do you think of this replacement? Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Unlimitedlead that looks fine to me! No complaints. Pericles of AthensTalk 12:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "the Fourth Macedonian War broke out, which resulted" you could remove the "broke out, which"
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:42, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- The rest of the lead is good, imo.
- Sources (ooh I love a sources section) and Division of power
- Note 1 ("write with apparent certainty and conviction") is WP:OR, no?
- @PericlesofAthens: I do not have access to this particular source; any thoughts? Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:49, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- "was the first to" in two consecutive sentences. also "was the first to refute these ideas" which ideas? Granier's? Then didn't he just write what people had been saying before Granier? Not really a refutation.
- I have since removed the "first to refute" part, but allow me to interpret: " Pietro De Francisci refuted these ideas" means that Francisci disagreed with Granier's theory (of a Macedonian constitutional government), and "advanced the theory that the Macedonian government was an autocracy ruled by the whim of the monarch..." does indeed mean that he continued expanding on what people were saying before. Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Unlimitedlead Sorry to chime in late here, but that is absolutely correct. Thanks for asking! Pericles of AthensTalk 12:45, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Institutions
- "was divided into small tribal regions each having their own petty king" fairly certain a slight change in grammar/punctuation is needed here
- Fixed. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- "an Eastern, Persian monarch" don't think both qualifiers are needed
- Fixed. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Yet it was his father" we sure this isn't MOS:EDITORIAL?
- Fixed. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- The term "somatophylakes" is used before the bodyguard section to define bodyguard, after the bodyguard section to define bodyguard, but not in the bodyguard section to define bodyguard (or anything else, for that matter). Confusing.
- Really? I thought after two previous mentions that the meaning of somatophylakes would be clear. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I'm still quite confused. Is a somatophylax what you would call a proper bodyguard at all, or is it just a modern designation? Was "the agema of the hypaspistai" a proper bodyguard then (and incidentally is the agema or the hypaspistai the "type of ancient special forces usually numbering in the hundreds")? Is the "smaller group of men handpicked by the king either for their individual merits or to honor the noble families to which they belonged" the somatophylakes, or are they some other people? The article says that all of them "were not always responsible for protecting the king's life on and off the battlefield"—were they ever responsible for protection? I just think it's a little confusing. Rest looks good though. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29: "[royal] bodyguards" could be considered a modern translation of somatophylakes. Sorry, "of" was a typo for "or", methinks. I have changed the surrounding language a little as well. And no, they were not responsible for protection; the article states that the distinction was a formal, titular one of status. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:25, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, I'm still quite confused. Is a somatophylax what you would call a proper bodyguard at all, or is it just a modern designation? Was "the agema of the hypaspistai" a proper bodyguard then (and incidentally is the agema or the hypaspistai the "type of ancient special forces usually numbering in the hundreds")? Is the "smaller group of men handpicked by the king either for their individual merits or to honor the noble families to which they belonged" the somatophylakes, or are they some other people? The article says that all of them "were not always responsible for protecting the king's life on and off the battlefield"—were they ever responsible for protection? I just think it's a little confusing. Rest looks good though. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:13, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Really? I thought after two previous mentions that the meaning of somatophylakes would be clear. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:00, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Also, the bodyguard section is a single paragraph, as is the royal page section. Perhaps combine them?
- I take your point, but I think having one section discussing two very different roles would be confusing for readers. If you insist though, I will do so. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:01, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- "The companions ... represented a substantially larger group than the king's bodyguards." but did they include the bodyguards?
- If I'm interpreting the source material correctly, the companions and the bodyguards both comprised the King's court, but the companions did not include the actualy bodyguards. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:04, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- "The most trusted or highest ranking companions formed a council that served as an advisory body to the king." I assume this is the synedrion of the {{further}} hatnote? Perhaps name and link in article text.
- Fixed. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Is note 5 necessary in its entirety?
- I am inclined to think so, as it provides more information about the whole Athenian democracy debacle, which is important to know but not important enough to be in the actual article. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Currency section is nice
- Military
- I'm not sure about this, but the section does seem to slightly lose focus. The emphasis seems to be much more on the army as a military force than as a government institution. That might just be me, though. I'll leave it at that, in case anyone else has any thoughts. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:16, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I tend to think that the military, which was established, maintained, and tied to the Macedonian monarchy, is important enough to have substantial material written on it in this article. I agree, though: I will wait to see what other reviewers have to say. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- @AirshipJungleman29 thanks for the support! Sorry that I'm late to the party, as I do not frequent Wikipedia very often these days. Your input, contributions to improving the article, and support are much appreciated, though. Also great job on @Unlimitedlead, who deserves a great deal of credit even if he somehow doesn't get this article over the finish line of the FA nomination. Looks like it's well on its way, though! Cheers. Pericles of AthensTalk 12:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- I tend to think that the military, which was established, maintained, and tied to the Macedonian monarchy, is important enough to have substantial material written on it in this article. I agree, though: I will wait to see what other reviewers have to say. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:10, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Srnec
Why isn't the title just "Government of ancient Macedonia"? Srnec (talk) 13:29, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Srnec Actually, I'm not sure. Would you like to me move it, request a discussion to move, or leave it be? Unlimitedlead (talk) 16:03, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I think it should be moved. Srnec (talk) 23:35, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Srnec it is named as such because it follows the same convention as the other sub-articles for Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Are you suggesting all of the articles should be moved or retitled? I wouldn't be opposed to that, but just moving this one on its own seems illogical unless you are prepared to move several articles all at once. Pericles of AthensTalk 12:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Doing so might also stir up unnecessary trouble between Greek and North Macedonia nationalists lurking here on Wikipedia, since they contest the region and name "Macedonia", so removing the distinction that we're talking specifically about the kingdom itself would probably disturb the hornet's nest again. Pericles of AthensTalk 12:41, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Srnec it is named as such because it follows the same convention as the other sub-articles for Macedonia (ancient kingdom). Are you suggesting all of the articles should be moved or retitled? I wouldn't be opposed to that, but just moving this one on its own seems illogical unless you are prepared to move several articles all at once. Pericles of AthensTalk 12:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Looking further, I see only one other article with a title like this one—History of Macedonia (ancient kingdom). There more that use "ancient Macedonian": Ancient Macedonians (and the related List of ancient Macedonians and List of ancient Macedonians in epigraphy), Ancient Macedonian language, Ancient Macedonian calendar and Ancient Macedonian army. Now, I see how the latter could be ambiguous, insofar as Roman Macedonia was also ancient; and I could see how the people, the calendar and the language are not inextricably linked to the kingdom; but the army is certainly a parallel to this article and the history one. WP:SHORTFORM gives examples where it could go either way. I think the word "ancient" is enough to clarify and we can avoid parentheses. Srnec (talk) 14:37, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Support Comments from Iazyges
Will review this when I can. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:12, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- For the historiography section, it would be nice to see a short gloss on the time period for the historians mentioned, such as works of Herodotus (5th century), Thucydides (5th century)..." and so on, or perhaps organize it by century such as The main sources of early Macedonian historiography are the works of 5th-century BC historians Herodotus and Thucydides, 1st-century AD Diodorus Siculus, and 2nd-century AD Justin. when a sentence contains many sources.
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- made before Philip II of Macedon's reign is both rare and non-Macedonian in origin. suggest made before Philip II of Macedon's reign (r. 359 – 336 BC) is both rare and non-Macedonian in origin.
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- In general, I think reign length templates for mentioned kings would be very prudent and useful for readers.
- Understood. Will get to later. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Understood. Will get to later. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- The main textual primary sources for the organization of Macedonia's military as it existed under Alexander the Great include Arrian, Quintus Curtius, Diodorus, and Plutarch, while modern historians rely mostly on Polybius and Livy for understanding detailed aspects of the Antigonid-period military.[ is this referenced by Sekunda 2010, pp. 446–447, the reference the note contains? If so, suggest citing it directly before the note.
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- After the Greek victory at Salamis in 480 BC suggest either changing the link to Battle of Salamis to encompass all of Greek victory at Salamis, or changing the text of such as After the Greek victory at the Battle of Salamis in 480 BC
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- It was his father Philip II who had already shown signs... phrasing seems somewhat strange, perhaps His father Philip II had already shown signs...
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- since there are very few means by which modern historians are capable of confirming their veracity (and could have been possibly lower or even higher than the amount stated) not sure parenthesis are the best option here, perhaps since there are very few means by which modern historians are capable of confirming their veracity, and the true number could have been possibly lower or even higher than the amount stated.
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- were organized into chiliarchs suggest short gloss for chiliarch.
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- In around the Antigonid period military section, the article diverges from defining a term in English, giving a Greek name in parenthesis, and then using Greek therafter, to terms being labeled in Greek, defined in English, then used in English going forward. Not certain why this is so, but suggest standardizing to the first.
- Understood. Will get to later. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Actually, I'm not sure I see anything amiss here. Would you mind clarifying where exactly you see the issue? Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:16, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Unlimitedlead: Compare section from Division of power: the king (basileus).[6] From at least the reign of Philip II the king was assisted by the royal pages (basilikoi paides), bodyguards (somatophylakes), companions (hetairoi), friends (philoi) to this section: divided now into chalkaspides 'bronze shield' and leukaspides 'white shield' regiments; the ordering and format are swapped for unknown reasons from [English term (Greek)] to [greek term 'english term'. Maybe it's done because the terms are literal translations instead of general language, but it seems weird to me.
- @Iazyges: Gotcha. This has been adjusted. Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:32, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Unlimitedlead: Compare section from Division of power: the king (basileus).[6] From at least the reign of Philip II the king was assisted by the royal pages (basilikoi paides), bodyguards (somatophylakes), companions (hetairoi), friends (philoi) to this section: divided now into chalkaspides 'bronze shield' and leukaspides 'white shield' regiments; the ordering and format are swapped for unknown reasons from [English term (Greek)] to [greek term 'english term'. Maybe it's done because the terms are literal translations instead of general language, but it seems weird to me.
- Actually, I'm not sure I see anything amiss here. Would you mind clarifying where exactly you see the issue? Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:16, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Understood. Will get to later. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- followed by the Roman victory in the Fourth Macedonian War and establishment of the Roman province of Macedonia. suggest changing followed by to which led to to imply greater causation.
- The proposed phrasing sounds awkward in my opinion. Do you have any other words/phrases instead? Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not that I can think of; it's fine as is. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:10, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- The proposed phrasing sounds awkward in my opinion. Do you have any other words/phrases instead? Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are either of the external links necessary or useful for the article?
- Removed. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @PericlesofAthens and Unlimitedlead: that is all of my suggestions. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 09:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Iazyges Thank you for your helpful comments. Most have been implemented, with just a few replies or inquiries. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Great article, happy to support. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Iazyges Great! Thank you kindly. Sorry once again for being late to the party, @Unlimitedlead, but I have not been able to visit Wikipedia again until just now. Glad to see you are handling this and the necessary image review with ease. Copyright stuff can be aggravating, but if one or two pictures need to be removed until their status is confirmed that's okay. Great job! Pericles of AthensTalk 10:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Great article, happy to support. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:37, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Iazyges Thank you for your helpful comments. Most have been implemented, with just a few replies or inquiries. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- File:Image_larnax_of_philip.jpg needs a tag for the original work. Ditto File:Alexander_III_Babil_Stater.jpg, File:Akedonya_Krallığı_Alexander_III_Kaunos_Tetradrahmi.jpg
- For the first concern, which tag would be most appropriate for a photograph of an ancient object? {{PD-old-100-expired}}? Also, I have replaced the last two with File:INC-2032-a Статер Македонское царство Милет чеканка при Филоксене (аверс).png; is this acceptable?
- That too will need a tag for the original work - old-100-expired will work. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- That too will need a tag for the original work - old-100-expired will work. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- For the first concern, which tag would be most appropriate for a photograph of an ancient object? {{PD-old-100-expired}}? Also, I have replaced the last two with File:INC-2032-a Статер Македонское царство Милет чеканка при Филоксене (аверс).png; is this acceptable?
- File:Magna_Graecia_ancient_colonies_and_dialects-en.svg: see MOS:COLOUR
- That image is not in this article? Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's in a navbox. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've just gone ahead and removed several navboxes, including the one in question. They seem somewhat irrelevant considering this subject matter. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's in a navbox. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- That image is not in this article? Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- File:D473-birème_romaine-Liv2-ch10.png: what's the copyright status of the photo? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:43, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I do not understand. The Commons page already has {{PD-US}} and {{PD-100}}. Is there something else that needs to be done? Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are those meant to apply to the photo itself, or the artifact pictured? If the photo, when and where was it first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I belive it's the artifact pictured, but I'm not sure. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, so then because this is a 3D work we do also need tagging for the photo. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:31, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: is PD-old-100-expired okay? Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- When and where was it first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria The image description suggests a publication in 2007, but being such an ancient artwork, who knows who else could have published it before this. Should I just remove the image :( Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'd suggest doing a bit of digging first, see what you can find. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria The publication captions the image: "© 2003. Photo Scala, Florence/Fotografica Foglia". Any ideas on how this could help us? Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:34, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- If it was copyrighted in 2003, unless it was released under a free license it's almost certainly copyrighted. So you could reach out to that contact to see if they'd be willing to release it, or you could remove/replace the image. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria I have removed that image, and I think that should be it for the image review! Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria @Unlimitedlead What? That has to be entirely incorrect. It is very clearly a very old-timey black-and-white photograph of the Roman relief, and the page for "File:D473-birème_romaine-Liv2-ch10.png" even clearly states that the original photographer was the French geographer Élisée Reclus (1830–1905). Reclus had been dead for 98 years before the year 2003. I think the picture can be restored swiftly and without issue. Any copyright claims on it are dubious if not absurd in my view. Pericles of AthensTalk 10:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are you aware of an earlier publication of this image? Nikkimaria (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- As the image page says (as explained by the original uploader), it comes from the L'Homme et la terre ("The Earth and Its Inhabitants") by Elisee Reclus, published as early as 1876, translated into English and published various times in the 1890s, with the latest publication I've seen being 1905, the year of his death. This website also claims public domain status and Reclus as the original photographer: https://www.timetravelrome.com/2019/10/02/agrippa-victory-at-mylae/ Pericles of AthensTalk 19:38, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are you aware of an earlier publication of this image? Nikkimaria (talk) 11:53, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- If it was copyrighted in 2003, unless it was released under a free license it's almost certainly copyrighted. So you could reach out to that contact to see if they'd be willing to release it, or you could remove/replace the image. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria The publication captions the image: "© 2003. Photo Scala, Florence/Fotografica Foglia". Any ideas on how this could help us? Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:34, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'd suggest doing a bit of digging first, see what you can find. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria The image description suggests a publication in 2007, but being such an ancient artwork, who knows who else could have published it before this. Should I just remove the image :( Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:14, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- When and where was it first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: is PD-old-100-expired okay? Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:33, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Okay, so then because this is a 3D work we do also need tagging for the photo. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:31, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I belive it's the artifact pictured, but I'm not sure. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Are those meant to apply to the photo itself, or the artifact pictured? If the photo, when and where was it first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: I have done some and raised responses to others. Thank you. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: Apologies, but more responses. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:29, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm afraid I do not understand. The Commons page already has {{PD-US}} and {{PD-100}}. Is there something else that needs to be done? Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Illusion of Kate Moss
In the mid 2000s, English supermodel Kate Moss had a small drug scandal, which lost her a ton of sponsorships and saw the press gleefully smearing her as "Cocaine Kate". Her friend Alexander McQueen remained steadfast, and for his Autumn/Winter 2006 show The Widows of Culloden, conceived an art piece featuring Moss to show his support for her. The unnamed piece used an adapted theatrical technique, Pepper's ghost, to project a ghostly image of Moss at life size onstage at the end of the Widows runway show, leading to audience tears and a rowdy standing ovation. The piece was featured at both stagings of the retrospective exhibit Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty, and has garnered significant critical analysis as an art piece in its own right. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:07, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Vami
Reserving a spot. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 08:10, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Moss retired from runway modelling in 2004, focusing on advertising contracts and other ventures. Recommend "to focus".
- Done
- I wonder if the description of the illusion shouldn't be in the first paragraph of #Illusion, and then explained. To that end, why not explain Pepper's ghost in the prose?
- I've put a very trimmed explanation in the prose. I moved the sentence about serpentine dance later down and have collapsed the first two paragraphs into one. I think they logically lead into each other, so I would prefer not to reverse the order.
- [...] dress created by Sarah Burton [...] Who?
- oops, relic from the split. Linked & given context
- Why is paragraph 2 of #Reception and legacy placed before paragraph 3?
- Overall legacy before drilling down to one specific element of legacy, plus para 4 is also about the museum exhibit so I'd have to move that up too, and then I have two specific paragraphs before one broad paragraph
- [...] whereas the illusion functioned as an aesthetic horror that depended on the audience's emotions. I cannot parse this sentence past "that depended". Is that just academic gobbledygook?
- lol, it is a little bit that. Tweaked a little to be more explanatory - how's that?
Responses noted above. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:26, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Aoba47
- This is not required for a FAC or FA, but I think it would be beneficial to archive the source and/or author links for File:Illusion of Kate Moss from Widows of Culloden.gif and File:KateMoss.jpg to avoid any potential headaches with link rot and death.
- I don't think we ordinarily do archiving for Flickr images on Commons, I think the review bot tag with the original URL is taken to be sufficient. But I've done the tumblr one.
- For this part (had been embroiled in a scandal at the time of the Widows show) in the lead, shouldn't it specify that it was a drug scandal? The current wording seems to skirt around the issue, and it may be unnecessarily vague or confusing for readers who look at the lead first without the context provided by the rest of the article.
- This is more of a clarification question than a question. Would it be beneficial to provide some additional context to Moss's alleged drug use? It may be more fitting for the Kate Moss article, but I think it would help unfamiliar readers to add that this controversy and the subsequent fallout was from photos of her alleged drug use. It also probably did not help that she was and still is one of the models most connected with the heroin chic style. I am not saying this would need a lot more prose, but it just seems like one sentence is not enough context.
- I reworded it to say what the scandal came from, not sure if you need more detail than that?
- For this sentence (By 2006, she had not walked in a fashion show in years.) I would specify the amount of years as I'd imagine there would be a more exact figure out there for this kind of information.
- I'm not sure what source my original wording came from, but from some further checking, her absence from the runway turned out to have nothing to do with the scandal. She chose to retire from runway modelling in 2004, well before the drug thing. She was making fat bank from other things, especially advertising, so presumably she was shifting her focus. I've revised the article to reflect this.
- For instances like ("to show that she was more ethereal, bigger than the situation she was in.") and ("only Alexander McQueen could provide the astonishing feat of techno-magic that ended his show."), shouldn't the punctuation be on the outside of the quotation marks? I was only curious because neither instance are full-quoted sentences unlike later instances in the article.
- Yeah, I never get this right lol
- For Citation 28, I believe you should mark that it requires a subscription to view the full article.
- It doesn't seem to ask for one from me
- For this part (In 2014, Vanity Fair named it), I would include the name of the author in the prose to be consistent with the previous instances where the writer and publication are credited that way.
- Done
I hope these comments are helpful so far. This is everything that I noticed after reading through the article once, and after everything has been addressed, I will do several, more thorough readings and add any comments if I notice anything further. I have done some minor edits to the article, and feel free to revert anything you disagree with at all. Aoba47 (talk) 17:57, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Aoba, all done for now. Let me know what you think. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- For Citation 49, I do not believe the title should be in all italics as it is the name of a YouTube video.
- That's how the cite template renders it, and I'm loathe to muck about with an entire template. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:49, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I personally would not use that the AV media template for a YouTube video and I generally use the more generic Web template to avoid this issue. However, this could just be a matter of personal preference. I still think it is an issue to have a title represented incorrectly in a citation, but I will leave that kind of thing up to the source reviewer. This would not hold back my review as I am primarily focused on the prose. If the information is represented incorrectly and cannot be changed due to the template, I'd think the answer would be to use a different template rather than leave an error. Aoba47 (talk) 18:16, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
I am still in the middle of reading the article. I should be done by the end of tomorrow. This is the only thing I have really noticed. I had some very minor edits. It is nothing major, but I just wanted to be transparent on this page. Aoba47 (talk) 01:45, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Peppers_Ghost.jpg is tagged as lacking author information
- File:Loie_Fuller.jpg: when and where was this first published?
- Photographer Frederick Glasier exhibited his photos & made prints for sale in his own studio throughout the early 1900s, see [1]. The print is signed 1902, indicating it was printed for sale at that time. Per Commons, making copies available for sale to the public is considered publication, putting this well into PD. If we want to consider it as an unpublished work instead, Glasier died 1950, and PD for unpublished works with known authors is 1953, so we're also into PD by that metric. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- File:Banquo.jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:48, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Tkbrett
Comments inbound. Tkbrett (✉) 17:58, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Tkbrett ? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:07, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
SC
Excellent – this was one of the more intriguing aspects in your last FAC, so I'm delighted to see a bit more background on it.
- Illusion
- runway show is a duplicate link (from fashion shows above)
- Gothic tropes
- "English lecturer Catherine Spooner": this looks like we're describing her nationality, rather than specialism. Maybe "the professor of literature Catherine Spooner"? (I've also added this to The Widows of Culloden article, where she is just referred to as "Spooner" on her first mention.
That's it. Very little from me (although I have tweaked the quote marks per WP:LQ in these edits). Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 11:50, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Glad you liked it! I was disappointed not to be able to carve off another article from Widows, I would've liked to get a little FT :P Alas. The Spooner thing in the Widows article is probably a relic from splitting this one; thanks for catching it. I've made both of your suggested changes, and as always thanks for catching me on LQ and BrEng, lol. Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 00:20, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Nice article. Enough difference from the info in the show article to make this one work as a standalone. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:19, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Ceoil
Great to see this here, on a growing series that has certainly widened my horizons. One thing, as both designer and model are from the UK, should the article br in BRENG. Not so much the spelling and adding a whole load of "u"'s, but the false title thing, eg "a short film of the English model Kate Moss".
Will be away for bit will revisit on return. Ceoil (talk) 00:38, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- maybe its because of the alliteration, but the lead opening sentance isn't really telling what the "thing" is - "performance projected". what? Live Performance art staged using projectors? Ceoil (talk) 01:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've tweaked the lead a bit - how's that? (As a side note, I readded "actually" - sorry, I know you removed it, but I think it reads better with it). ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, have read it all, and made trivil edits which matter to me not if reverted. Last concern, is the official title the "Illusion of Kate Moss"? If so why is it not "Illusion of Kate Moss" or Illusion of Kate Moss (not sure hat MOS recommends for performance art, but as a title it should have one or the other.
- Anyway, none of these are vexing...although "actually" is my most hated word...may be "in fact". Not withstanding,
- Support. Ceoil (talk) 01:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ah, I'll actually be sure to sneak it into all my future FACs just for you ;) As for the title formatting, there is no official title as far as I can tell. "Illusion of Kate Moss" is a descriptive title, so per MOS:NEITHER, it gets a sad naked title with no italics and no quotation marks. Cheers and thanks for your support! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:02, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review and TOC comments from ErnestKrause
The source review ought to take about a day or two to complete. I'll be doing an indexed review of 1 randomly chosen citation per each 5 citations, and try to report in a day or two for the one or two dozen randomly chosen checks for the source review. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
My TOC comments are going to somewhat limited to three or four items starting with the choice of title for this article:
(1) After doing a Google search on the keywords, then it appears that by a factor or 2 or 3 the preferred reference to this production is to call it the Kate Moss Hologram. The second favorite choice among Google keyword searches is Ghost of Kate Moss. I'm not sure that "Illusion" is the most recognizable form for this fashion art work by McQueen. It is consistent with your Widows article (which I supported), however, even within Wikipedia when I look it up under the article for Savage Beauty, the preference is again for "Hologram". (See comments above from Ceoil).
- PMC,I agree with this actually, hence my confusion above about what the article was about. An illusion is an effect, a hologram is a thing. Ceoil (talk)
(2) Vami's comment about the organization of your TOC on the issue of where to place the Reception section appears to deserve some more comment. Firstly, the last paragraph of the Analysis section contains some critique remarks, and it might look better if it were added to the Reception section instead of the Analysis section. More extensively, I'm going to raise the issue of whether the TOC should separate the aesthetic reception of this fashion art work from the political reception of this work. I'm familiar with Kate Moss being part of the Heroin Chic movement of her time, and potentially there is more to be said about this, as well as McQueen possible participation in it. I seem to remember alot about Moss appearing waif-like and with heavy dark mascara with heavy dark eye make-up doing the heroin chic era. If you separate the history aspects of this fashion artwork from the aesthetics aspects of the work, then it might be useful to add one of the heroin chic image of Moss which were very well received for their aesthetic qualities at that time and highly imitated. (Also, Analysis section normally comes before Legacy sections generally in Wikipedia articles).
(3) You mention the phrase "the illusion" as least one or two dozen times as your favorite way of referencing this fashion art work. Try to take my comments in stride and as constructive. I'm not sure that 'illusion' standing by itself goes far enough to denote that a hologram is not a flat, 2-D image of something, but is instead a 3-D rendering with sculptural qualities not in evidence in conventional images. Kate Moss Hologram (or Alexander McQueen's Kate Moss Hologram) seems to be the preferred reference in the press for this fashion art work.
(4) Source review upcoming in a day or two. I'll try to complete it right after the weekend. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:11, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Starting Source review:
(1) Randomly choosing Hyl, #3 footnote, from first five. There's not one image of Moss in that article about the 1990s, and she is barely mentioned in the article (mentioned twice in passing with other models). You use it with two other references in the main text and nowhere else. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:25, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(2) Randomly selecting #8 from the next five citations. The Evening Standard article appears to be using the scandal aspects to make the opposite point to what is covered in this Wikipedia article. They are stating that Moss continued to prosper and profit from the time the scandal broke in the press. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(3) Randomly selection #11 from the next five citations. The Vogue article does confirm the 'love you' message but does not mention the Neptune colelction by name. Is this the best choice for a citation for this collection? ErnestKrause (talk) 16:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(4) Randomly selecting #20 from the next five citations. The Mower article does mention Kate and the image but does not cover any of the production crew or staff in the first use of this cite. The second use of the cite refers to Mower's well written text about Moss. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(5) Givhan article in footer #29 verifies your quote of her. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(6) Armstrong article footer #31 is blocked from view without registration. Not verified; is there an alternate link? ErnestKrause (talk) 16:44, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(7) Footer #39, Cordoba, blocks access to article based on cookie acceptance required. You use it as one of three cites; possibly to have an alternate. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(8) Footer #41. Armstrong article confirms 'honoured in style'. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:49, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(9) Footer #47. Spooner confirms 'haunting' but not 'melancholy'. You link 'melancholy' without Spooner using it. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
(10) Confirming Nick Knight interview with Moss towards the end of the citation list. ErnestKrause (talk) 16:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
I'll need to hear from you on these points raised from the cite review (I'm doing them now since I may be away for the next two days). ErnestKrause (talk) 16:57, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Constantine III (Western Roman emperor)
- Nominator(s): Gog the Mild (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Many people are vaguely aware that the Roman army left Britain around 400 (February 407) and never returned, ushering the Dark Ages into Britain. Have you ever wondered why? Or who ordered it? Or what happened to them, and why they never returned? Read on. I took this article to GAN in June 2018. (Six months before my first FAC.) I recently reread it and winced. So I have rewritten it, which turned out to take more work than I had anticipated. Hopefully the effort was worthwhile. Your views on this would be welcome. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Unlimitedlead
You know I jump at the chance to review something from you, Gog. Leaving my place here; comments will follow over the next few days. Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:34, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- "making his capital at Arles" Awkward prose: maybe replace "making" with "establishing"
- Done.
- Link Roman Italy to Italy in the lead?
- MOS:OVERLINK states "... the following are usually not linked ... The names of subjects with which most readers will be at least somewhat familiar. This generally includes major examples of ... countries".
- "Meanwhile Constantine invaded northern Italy, but his plans misfired" Interesting: I've never heard the word "misfired" used in this way before. Would "backfired" work here instead?
- No, backfire means something different. Happy to change, but having a bit of a mental block. Any other suggestions?
- Nope, I was just confused at the meaning.
- No, backfire means something different. Happy to change, but having a bit of a mental block. Any other suggestions?
- The word "withdrew" is repeated several times in the lead; try finding synonyms like "retreated".
- Twice. One changed. I have also substituted one usage in the main article.
- I have tweaked the infobox to make it easier on the eyes. Feel free to tweak it yourself or undo.
- It looks good. Thanks.
- Link Stilicho.
- Done.
- Roman Britain is linked in the lead, but not in the body.
- Whoops. Done.
- You don't need to, but I would insert a brief phrase to help the reader unserstand what (or rather, who) Niall of the Nine Hostages was. At first, I thought it was some kind of group, but then I hovered over the link and saw it was a person.
- It's a Seattle grunge band. Done.
- Slavery in ancient Rome might be an appropriate link to place somewhere in the area about the captives being sold as slaves. Then again, this could be considered a trivia link.
- Not done, although happy to discuss further. I think most readers will know what a slave is.
- Highly unlikely, but not every reader will immediately understand what "the continent" means. I would link it.
- Done.
- "and overrun the Roman defensive works" Wrong verb tense. Replace "overrun" with "overran".
- Done.
- Note four seems like it could be placed somewhere in the article's body. It is rather on the short side.
- Done.
- Is note five relevant in this article? It seems like what one might call a "fun fact".
- Removed.
- Link Tyrian purple to purple?
- Seems Easter eggy to me. I mean, in what way is how the dye for the cloak was obtained relevant to the article?
- MOS recommends not linking common locations, but I do not believe Tarragona is one of those common places. I suggest linking in order to spare readers the hassle of looking it up.
- Done.
- "He bears some relation to the Constantine" How so?
- Who cares, this is summary style on a barely relevant piece of cultural trivia. I could change to "He has been associated with ..."?
- Yes, that would work.
- Who cares, this is summary style on a barely relevant piece of cultural trivia. I could change to "He has been associated with ..."?
- Why does the succession box at the bottom of the article not include the title of Roman Emperor?
- I may not have grasped your point. Does this address it?
- Yes.
- I may not have grasped your point. Does this address it?
I am pleased with this article. It involved all my favorite stuff: Rome, the Eastern Empire, Britain, and unecessary violence and death! Woo-hoo! There actually weren't that many instances where I felt the need to insert commas either. These comments are all I have for this article; I will be glad to support once they have been adressed. Great work as always, Gog. Unlimitedlead (talk) 03:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Unlimitedlead, yes, an all-against-all death match. How times have changed. Thanks for the review, all coments addressed, a couple with dissents or queries. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild Support this nomination. It was a delightful read. Unlimitedlead (talk) 14:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Unlimitedlead, much appreciated. Re "misfire", how would you feel about 'but his plan failed and ...'? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:33, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes that is okay. Unlimitedlead (talk) 16:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:32, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes that is okay. Unlimitedlead (talk) 16:29, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you Unlimitedlead, much appreciated. Re "misfire", how would you feel about 'but his plan failed and ...'? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:33, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild Support this nomination. It was a delightful read. Unlimitedlead (talk) 14:30, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Unlimitedlead, yes, an all-against-all death match. How times have changed. Thanks for the review, all coments addressed, a couple with dissents or queries. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:18, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Chris
- "An army under the Gerontius" - the Gerontius?
- Bleh! The general Gerontius. Fixed.
- "After concentrating his forces, Stilicho caught the Goths while besieging Florentia" - who was doing the besieging, Stilicho or the Goths?
- Ah, good point. Added.
- "including the Vandals, the Alans and the Sueves crossed the Rhine" - I'd be tempted to mention the Alans last to break up a slight sea of blue
- Crafty. Done.
- That's what I got as far as the end of "Rise" but unfortunately I have to unexpectedly break off now. Back to finish the job later :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:32, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks CtD, good spots one and all, much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
More comments
- "The moved from Epirus" => "They moved from Epirus"
- Done.
- "But a rift between him and Honorius was obvious." - very brief sentence and starting it with "but" doesn't read brilliantly IMO, can it be merged with another sentence?
- I think, in context, it reads fine.
- "But Honorius continued to refuse to reach an agreement with Alaric." - similar to above
You have a problem with my starting sentences with "But"? Is that a BritEng thing? Amended.
- "It also likely he was counting" => "It is also likely he was counting"
- Done.
- That's it! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:48, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks again ChrisTheDude, addressed above. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:53, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:02, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Support Comments from Iazyges
- Claiming a spot. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lede
- "He was co-emperor of the Roman Empire from 409 until 411." perhaps add "a legitimate" before co-emperor; to explain to a layman the distinction that he had now achieved recognition as emperor from the others.
- I really don't want to go there. If he had overcome Honorius and ruled the west for a further 20 years, his "legitimacy" from 407 would be universally accepted. I have inserted "recognised as", that do? Gog the Mild (talk) 23:17, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Works for me; just wanted a distinction that he was no longer seen as a random dude with an army. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 23:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I really don't want to go there. If he had overcome Honorius and ruled the west for a further 20 years, his "legitimacy" from 407 would be universally accepted. I have inserted "recognised as", that do? Gog the Mild (talk) 23:17, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Body
- "were sold into slavery that the market in slaves collapsed" is somewhat awkward, I think it might be better as simply "were sold into slavery that the market collapsed"
- I don't see that your suggestion is any less awkward (I don't find either awkward) but has the issue of leaving it unclear just what collapsed. "the market" is a different thing from "the market in slaves".
- "the Gallic Roman Jovinus," should change Gallic Roman to Gallo-Roman (as this is a distinct culture he belonged to, rather than a Roman who merely lived in Gaul, as Gallic Roman implies) and link to Gallo-Roman culture.
- Done.
- Footnote 1 ( Constantine was a usurper against Emperor Honorius from 407–409.) should I think be removed or have a citation; I prefer removal as it's very superfluous to the lede.
- Removed.
- @Gog the Mild: That's all my comments, glad to see my neurotic nit-picks from the Constans II GAN were carried over here. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 02:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- But of course. Comments tightening up the prose are most welcome. If I disagree, I'll say so; if I don't I'll copy them through to any other relevant articles. (Unless I forget.)
- Thanks Iazyges, your comments all addressed above. Given your familiarity with the period, you fancy doing the source review? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Happy to support, and take on the source review. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review - pass
- Will take this on. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hughes, Ian (2010): Pen and Sword is not a great source; while Ian Hughes is applauded for being an easy-to-read historian, and is certainly among the best of the pop historians, he has also been noted as making a few mistakes that, to be honest, would not likely pass a more rigorous academic press' review. I would challenge the book, as a product of both him and Pen and Sword, as being an HQRS. Further, the text of the article reads "Stilicho sent orders and funds to strengthen the defences around Hadrian's Wall at about the same time" cited to Hughes, making no mention that Hughes himself qualifies the entire matter with the fact that Stilicho seems to have done it, and goes on to say the narrative is "unsupported except perhaps by archeology" (which is odd in the face of the fact that archeological support for the war is quite weak). The best source I could find to replace it is At the Gates of Rome: The Fall of the Eternal City, AD 410 by Don Hollway (can be found on Definitely-not-Libgen), page 175 says: "Stilicho put Rome’s money – Gildo’s money – to good use. He sent a large part of it to Britannia, to recruit more troops and rebuild and strengthen Hadrian’s Wall and the coastal forts."
{{cite book |last1=Hollway |first1=Don |title=At the Gates of Rome The Fall of the Eternal City, AD 410 |date=2022 |publisher=Bloomsbury Publishing |location=Oxford |isbn=9781472849960}}
- Well, well. I have found Pen & Sword books to be pretty sound, but that is one editor's anecdotal view from a limited sample. This source certainly seems to be best avoided, and given my single cite to it I see no point in attempting to defend it - even if I were inclined to, which I am not. (That said, nonsense crops up in surprising places. I have just read Glantz's Before Stalingrad. Glantz is supposed to be the gold standard for the Eastern Front during WWII, but much of this reads like a so-so GAN. Ah well.) Thanks for spotting this and for spelling out the issue so clearly. Even more thanks for finding an alternate source and handing it to me on a plate. Text lightly edited and Hughes replaced with Holloway.
- I tend to agree with you that Pen & Sword are usually sound; happy to defend it as just an RS for that reason, but too much slips through IMO for HQRS. Thanks for being so flexible, source review passes. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:59, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, well. I have found Pen & Sword books to be pretty sound, but that is one editor's anecdotal view from a limited sample. This source certainly seems to be best avoided, and given my single cite to it I see no point in attempting to defend it - even if I were inclined to, which I am not. (That said, nonsense crops up in surprising places. I have just read Glantz's Before Stalingrad. Glantz is supposed to be the gold standard for the Eastern Front during WWII, but much of this reads like a so-so GAN. Ah well.) Thanks for spotting this and for spelling out the issue so clearly. Even more thanks for finding an alternate source and handing it to me on a plate. Text lightly edited and Hughes replaced with Holloway.
- Spotchecks: ref 17: Drinkwater 1998, p. 275. Good.
- Ref 28: Wijnendaele 2018, pp. 261–262. Good.
- Ref 30: Elton 1999. Good.
- Ref 51: Kulikowski 2000, p. 333. Good.
- Ref 70: Higham 1992, pp. 71–72. Good.
- Ref 83: Curley 1994, p. 34. Good.
- @Gog the Mild: That concludes my source review. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 18:24, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Iazyges, many thanks for taking this on and for spotting a subtle flaw which I had missed. Fixed as you suggest. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:56, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Aside from the outstanding source issue, for the note "After Constantine's death Heros was disposed and exiled, and replaced by Patroclus." should it be "deposed" instead of "disposed?" Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:33, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- It was quite probably both ;-) but my brain was clearly on holiday. Corrected. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:29, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Support Comments from Jim
Started reading, will comment tomorrow-ish Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:45, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'll support anyway, but a few quibbles for your consideration. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- had strengthened his army with barbarians— I think you say elsewhere that they are Germans of various kinds, which would be more specific
- Done.
- so many captives were sold into slavery that the market in slaves collapsed.—any way of avoiding slavery/slaves in the same sentence?
- Ho hum. "into slavery" removed.
- IustinianusMy Latin O level was many decades ago, but I thought that initial "I" was always written as "J" in English, like Justinian
- I think I may have inherited that and not spotted it. Thanks. Corrected.
- Constantine appointed him to the position of caesar (title) — the title is capped in its own article
- No doubt by an editor who hasn't read the MoS, especially MOS:JOBTITLE. Wikipedia is a notoriously unreliable source.
- himself at Saragossa— Zaragoza is how the town spells itself, and I think it's the prevalent form in English too
- Umm. I have rarely come across it in English. While an Ngram - a blunt tool at best, but indicative - suggests that it has become prevalent recently, it does not seem to be overwhelmingly so. The sources don't help - they refer to Caesaraugusta.
- Generalissimowill younger readers know this term? Does it need a link?
- I hadn't realised how much its use had diminished in recent decades, linked.
- That's all, great stuff
- Thanks Jim. Despite having your support in the bank :-) , I would be grateful if you could skim my responses above. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- All the responses are fine Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Jim. Despite having your support in the bank :-) , I would be grateful if you could skim my responses above. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
SC
- Lead & IB
- You have Constans II
listedlinked twice
- I am not seeing it. Which is probably another sign of encroaching senility. Could you help me out?
- In the IB: Alongside Constans II (409-411) and Issue Constans II
- I am not seeing it. Which is probably another sign of encroaching senility. Could you help me out?
- "In Hispania Honorius's": I don't normally suggest extra commas, but I think one after Hispania will stop people wondering who Hispania Honorius was...
- Hispania Honorius, co-consul alongside Biggus Dikkus; you have not heard of him. Comma inserted.
- I know his wife...
- Hispania Honorius, co-consul alongside Biggus Dikkus; you have not heard of him. Comma inserted.
- Rise
- Almannics: is there a link that could be used here?
- Ah ha. Yes there is. Thank you. Done.
- Co-emperor
- "respecting the person of the Emperor": lower case e?
- As it refers to a known specific individual, I don't think so.
That's it from me – nicely done article. - SchroCat (talk) 11:39, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Cheers SchroCat, good spots there; appreciated. Two done, one not done and one cry for help. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support My pleasure! The duplicate link in the IB will be sorted, I am sure, so moving to support here. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks SC. Fixed, I think. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support My pleasure! The duplicate link in the IB will be sorted, I am sure, so moving to support here. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:26, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Cheers SchroCat, good spots there; appreciated. Two done, one not done and one cry for help. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:20, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review - pass
- File:Solidus of Constantine III (west).png - coin is PD and VRT for photograph - OK
- File:Theodosius I's empire.png - own work w/ source - OK
- File:Roman Gaul - AD 400.png - own work w/ source - OK
- File:Siliqua Constantine III-RIC 1355.jpg - coin is PD and VRT for photograph - OK
- File:Siliqua Constans II Arelate.jpg - ditto - OK
- File:Gold Solidus of Constantine III, Lugdunum.jpg - public domain for coin, verified at source link that the photograph is freely license - OK
- File:Solidus of Constantius III.png - public domain for coin and VRT for photograph - OK
Everything with the images looks to be in order, passing. Hog Farm Talk 02:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Request for the coordinators
@WP:FAC coordinators: Greetings oh mighty ones. This humble supplicant, viewing their current offering and considering that all is estimable, craves the boon of being permitted to present a further oblation. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:27, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Siege of Bukhara
- Nominator(s): ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:08, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
This was the article that started my Wikipedia journey, I suppose you could say. I created it early last year, expanded it, got it to GA, went on to other stuff, and here I am back at the beginning. Nominating it on a whim and on Gog's suggestion, as my second FA candidate (and a potential source of WikiCup points). This is an incident during the Mongol invasion of Khwarazmia, where Genghis Khan spectacularly bypassed a static defensive strategy, forced one of Asia's greatest cities to surrender in a week, burnt the place down, enslaved most of the inhabitants, delivered a surprisingly theological speech, and naffed off to do more killing, burning, and enslaving. Very Genghis. Hope you enjoy. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:08, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
That's right, blame me ... grumble .... moan ... I suppose I had better look it over then. Reserving my spot. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:58, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- "The city of Bukhara was a major trading and cultural centre". Consider adding 'the' or 'a', as appropriate, before "cultural".
- I'm not sure either makes sense, so I've changed to "a major centre of trade and culture". Better?
- "A Mongol force, estimated to number between 30,000 and 50,000 men, however managed to traverse the Kyzylkum Desert, previously thought to be impassable for large armies." Suggest 'A Mongol force, estimated to number between 30,000 and 50,000 men, traversed the Kyzylkum Desert, previously thought to be impassable for large armies.'
- Done
- "before it was breached." Breached and stormed, or breached and they surrendered?
- Breached and stormed.
- And in the main article?
- "The Mongol army killed everybody in the citadel". What about the rest of the garrison?
- Either killed in the sortie or surrendered with the city.
- "within a fairly short space of time". Delete "fairly".
- Done.
- "a library of 45,000 books". Just checking that they were definitely books.
- I do mean books. The region was renowned for the quality of its paper (which rivalled Chinese standards) and for the productiveness of its bookbinders.
- "which had originally been commissioned in 1121". Does this need "originally"?
- Probably not.
- "By 1215, they themselves had been subjugated by the Khwarazmians"> Delete "themselves". (Who else would they be?
- I think I may have slipped into Latin syntax there. Oops.
- "Outraged, Genghis left his ongoing war against the Chinese Jin dynasty, leaving only a minimal force behind, and rode westwards in 1219." Perhaps explicitly mention that he took some troops wilh him?
- Done
- "Estimates range from as few as 75,000 to as many as 700,000". Would that be estimates by contemporaries?
- I think a strong case could be made for including most or all of all three Notes in the main article.
- I don't mind, so I've done so.
- "then descended onto Otrar and besieged it." Perhaps "onto" → 'on'?
- Done.
- "As the Kyzylkum was thought to be impassable by large armies". State by whom.
- Don't know who. Timothy May: "The wily Mongol leader led his army through the Kizil Kum desert, thought to be impassable by such a large force"; May is a leading historian on the Mongol Empire, and cites a dizzying array of primary sources for this one sentence, few of which I have access to: "Juwayni/Qazvini, v1, 82–3; Juvaini/Boyle, 106–7; Juzjani/Habibi, v2, 653; Juzjani/ Raverty, 976–8. RD/Karimi, 360–2; RD/Thackston1, 246–7; RD/Thackston2, 173–4; Ibn al-Athir, 365–7; Ibn al-Athir/Richards, 207–9."
- Ok. Optionally, maybe insert 'at the time' or 'by contemporaries'?
- "the manouevre has been considered a masterstroke of warfare." State by whom.
- Done.
- "The Khan's march through the Kyzylkum had left his field army impotent"> This construction has the Khan's army impotent.
- So it does. Corrected
- "the citadel itself was taken in a fortnight". Taken how?
- Breached by siege engines and stormed, presumably; as everyone inside was killed and the Mongols hadn't quite got into the habit of doing paperwork, there are no precise details and all the sources treat it as a formality.
- Ok, but the lead now states "breached and stormed".
- "less than two weeks"; "a fortnight". Which?
- Twelve days, to be precise; clarified.
- "given a speech at the Friday Mosque". Was that the actual name of the mosque?
- No, it's a Muslim term, which I have now linked.
- I thought it might be. Lower case m then?
- "which would follow afterwards in 1220 and 1221." Delete "afterwards".
- Done
- "Shah Muhammad would die destitute". "would die" → 'died'.
- Done.
- "but was eventually crushed at the Battle of the Indus." When was this?
- Nov '21. Added.
That was a good read. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:35, 1 March 2023 (UTC) Thanks for your comments, Gog the Mild. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 00:03, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lovely stuff. A couple of comebacks above. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:26, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Gog the Mild, I've decapitalised mosque, added a "contemporaries", and changed "stormed" to "taken", which I feel reflects the detail (or lack of such) in the sources. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:43, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lovely stuff. A couple of comebacks above. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:26, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good thinking. Supporting. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:52, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Serial #
- For your use of quote marks, see MOS:DOUBLE.
- Blaming that on inexperienced Airship
- Suggest linking vassal; vassalage is not a common word, except among those who sweat on WP...
- Done.
- Ditto Central Asia, even though it's inside a quote.
- Done.
- I'm wondering if para 2 of Background could be clarified; you've got a difficult job, with so many names of tribes, people and places.
- I believe the name-abundance is due to an earlier demand to condense a bloated section. It's definitely condensed now; whether it is clear is another thing. I would welcome any suggestions.
- I think "common enemy" is the usual phrase, but.
- Done
- Not sure if "apprehensive" is quite the right word. But I know what you're getting at.
- I think it works. Do words like worried/alarmed/concerned work better for you?
- Does al-Nasawi have an article?
- He does indeed.
- You could probably lose "change in attitude to the memory of" and tighten that sentence to something like, "The chronicler al-Nasawi attributes this to an unintended earlier encounter with Mongol troops, whose speed and mobility frightened the Shah".
- Done
- Perhaps "Genghis left his ongoing war"
- Done
- "modern historians": needs citing otherwise we are weighing the historiographical consensus in Wikivoice (OR). However, "several", plus the cites you provide in n.b would resolve this.
- I've gone for your second suggestion, Serial Number 54129. I should note that every historian since Barthold has gradually decreased their estimates from a maximum of 200,000, but annoyingly none of them bother to note that. I think that's all of your comments responded to. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Forfce/forces repetition: "army" in the second usage perhaps. Or even, "TThe Mongols..." would work.
- Rephrased.
- To the first, it's a desert; to the second, the Khwarazmians. May (cited) says "The wily Mongol leader led his army through the Kizil Kum desert, thought to be impassable by such a large force."
- "has been considered a masterstroke" probably another [who?] I'm afraid.
- Sources at end of sentence. I can cite by name in the body, if that's better?
- (talk page stalker) I think that would be helpful. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Done.
- (talk page stalker) I think that would be helpful. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:04, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- First sentence of 'Aftermath' needs citing.
- Done
- " the rest of Bukhara; the Mongols set fire" I'd suggest creating two sentences at the semi-colon.
- Done
- That's mine. Nice article, cheers. SN54129 16:09, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Serial Number 54129, I've responded to most of your comments; will get to the final one shortly. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:36, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Done.
- File:Genghis_Khan's_Middle_Eastern_campaigns_1216-1224.jpg is very difficult to read and interpret as presently designed
- But the detail... File:Genghis Khan empire-en.svg might be better I suppose...
- File:Bukhara01.jpg needs a tag for the original work. Ditto File:UZ_Bukhara_Samanid-mausoleum.jpg, File:Bukhara_sights8.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:24, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Z1720
Military history is not my specialty, so consider this a non-expert prose review.
- "Bukhara was caught completely by surprise," Not sure about this phrasing, as I'm concerned about MOS:IDIOM or sensationalism. Maybe, "Bukhara was surprised," "Bukhara was surprised by the Mongol's attack", or something similar? Feel free to workshop or keep as-is.
- Possibly a little sensationalist, yes, although that is the general tone of the sources. I'll tweak.
- "The Mongol army killed everybody in the citadel and enslaved most of the population." The population of what? The city? i would clarify.
- Done.
- "Rossabi indicates that the total" This is the first mention of Rossabi in the article: I suggest using the full name and wikilinking to Morris Rossabi if this is him.
- "while Smith gives an approximation of around 130,000." Same as the above, suggest using the full name in the first mention.
- "The minimum figure of 75,000 is given by Sverdrup," same as above.
- All done.
- "Genghis soon arrived with his youngest son Tolui, and split the invasion force into four divisions: while Chagatai and Ogedai were to remain besieging Otrar, Jochi was to head northwest in the direction of Gurganj, and a minor detachment was sent to take Khujand, but Genghis himself took Tolui and around half of the army — between 30,000 and 50,000 men — and headed westwards." This is quite a long sentence. Maybe place a period after Gurganj, and delete the word "and" there?
- Done
- "the historian Peter Golden termed the relationship" The people mentioned above did not get an introduction to their credentials, but this person does. Why the discrepancy? Perhaps either everyone gets a credential mention (my recommendation) or none of them do.
- I think I'll go for none.
- "The chronicler Juvaini records that the" This is the second mention of Juvaini in the article: I suggest moving the credentials "The chronicler" to his first mention and wikilinking him.
- Done
- "believed to have been executed in 1206.[32][26]" Although not necessary, I like it when the refs are in numerical order.
- Fair enough
- "Ata-Malik Juvayni," Is this the same person as Juvaini? If so, why is there a difference of spelling in the article? Should it be standardised?
- Oops. Has been now.
- "The Mongols set fire to the city in an attempt to flush out the holdouts, but since most structures in the city were wooden the soon-uncontrollable fire reduced most of the city to cinders, including the famed library." I don't like the flow of this sentence. Perhaps, "The Mongols set fire to the city in an attempt to flush out the holdouts; since most structures in the city were wooden, the soon-uncontrollable fire reduced most of the city to cinders, including the famed library." This adds a semi-colon after holdouts and a comma after wooden. Thoughts?
- Done—also removed the "but".
- "Most of the stone structures which were left standing by the fire were razed by the Mongols," Perhaps, "Most of the stone structures left standing by the fire were razed by the Mongols," (removed "which were") or "Most of the stone structures, which were left standing by the fire, were razed by the Mongols" (added two commas)
- " including the first Po-i-Kalyan mosque, although the Kalyan minaret was left standing." Perhaps " including the first Po-i-Kalyan mosque; the Kalyan minaret was left standing."
- Both done.
- "the city's craftsmen who were sent to factories and instructed to produce Mongol weaponry, and all remaining men of fighting age were conscripted into the Mongol forces." Delete the word "who"
- Typo.
- "eventually crushed at the" crushed might be MOS:EUPH, maybe replace with defeated?
- Done
Those are my thoughts. Please ping when you have done through these. Z1720 (talk) 02:37, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Z1720, thank you for some excellent prose comments. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:13, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
CommentsSupport by Borsoka
- ...Qarakhanids ... due to their large population and territory. Can a dynasty have a population?
- Unsure, so altered.
- Link Naiman to Naimans.
- Link Otrar also in the main text.
- Both done.
- ..., although several modern historians consider numbers over 200,000 exaggerated. The highest estimates were made by classical Muslim historians such as Juzjani and Rashid al-Din. Consider changing the sequence of the two statements, because modern historians are listed in the following sentence.
- Removed a sentence and reorganised.
- Give a short explanation for "tumen".
- Link Jebe.
- Consider introducing Jochi, Chagatai and Ogedai as Ghengis Khan's sons, and Jebe as a Mongol general.
- All done.
- ...the Peter Golden... The?
- Oops
- ...at the Irghiz River... Already linked.
- Redone.
- ...the first Po-i-Kalyan mosque... When the Po-i-Kalyan mosque is mentioned for the first time in the article, it is not mentioned as the first mosque. Borsoka (talk) 06:40, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- First unnecessary.
- Thanks for some very pertinent comments on things that had eluded me, Borsoka. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 17:08, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- @WP:FAC coordinators: since this article has now attracted three supports, and is (I believe) only now waiting on a source review, could I nominate another one? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 02:13, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the quick response. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:14, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review
- I think the sources listed under "Medieval" should give the modern citation information for the work you actually consulted. E.g. for Rashid al-Din, you consulted an edition by Thackston, but you don't give the publisher or year of publication of that edition.
- Done where possible.
- You're inconsistent about the use of the publisher location field -- for example Barthold, Blair, and Mote have no location; Emin, Man, and May have location.
- You give an ISBN for Richard Nelson Frye, but 1965 is too early -- did you consult a reprint? If so I'd use the orig parameter to give the 1965 date.
- For FN 40 you give the website as whc.unesco.org; that's really the domain name -- the website is "UNESCO: World Heritage Convention".
- All done.
- The image File:Genghis_Khan_empire-en.svg says it's been superseded; I didn't scan the two images to see what the differences are, but can you confirm that you're using the appropriate version? And can you provide a citation for the caption, as sourcing, since the image doesn't give a clear source for what it shows.
- I don't really understand why the image was superseded, so I've changed to the newer one, and added two sources on Commons.
- For Emin you give the title as "Muslims in the USSR Мусульмане в СССР [Muslims in the USSR]." Presumably the first part should have only the Cyrillic?
- Too many parameters. Fixed.
-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for the delay, Mike Christie. Above addressed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:02, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Martinus (son of Heraclius)
- Nominator(s): Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:20, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
This article is about a caesar of the Byzantine Empire, a brother of one of my previous FA's, David. Like his brother, he was tied to dynastic intrigue surrounding an incestuous marriage and preferred succession. He never lived to be emperor in his own right, but instead either died in the process of being emasculated or survived to live out the rest of his life in obscurity on Rhodes. As a consequence of being less important, there is less to say about him than of his brother, but I belive there is enough for it to pass FAC. I will note that there is significant amounts of info that could be pulled from the David article to expand contexts, but I was worried about losing focus; happy to pull such over if editors feel it would benefit the article. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:20, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Image review the only image's licensing is OK, but it sandwiches and is too small to read clearly. (t · c) buidhe 03:23, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Buidhe: Hopefully fixed; expanded image and moved to the side. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Would it be better to remove the Heraclian Dynasty banner, given that Martinus is not in it? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah I would remove any navbox that does not have the article linked. (t · c) buidhe 04:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Buidhe: Done. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 04:54, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah I would remove any navbox that does not have the article linked. (t · c) buidhe 04:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Would it be better to remove the Heraclian Dynasty banner, given that Martinus is not in it? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Buidhe: Hopefully fixed; expanded image and moved to the side. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:28, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Support by Unlimitedlead
- I would briefly insert a definition for caesar. Admittedly, it is a strange term and could be confusing to unfamiliar readers.
- Done
- "Heraclius left the Byzantine Empire to two of Martinus' brothers, Constantine III and Heraclonas" When did this happen? And why did he leave then the throne? Did he die? Abdicate?
- Done
- "to make" sounds somewhat coloquial; perhaps try "to install" and then adjust the surrounding grammar as necessary.
- Done.
- "Valentinus seized Constantinople regardless..." There is nothing before this sentence that indicates that he intended on taking Constantinople.
- Inserted "Across from Constantinople" when I say he marched to Chalcedon; do you think that is sufficient?
- Trivial matter: but maybe mention that Heraclius and Martina were married in the History section?
- Done
- Define nobilissimus briefly: maybe try "Martinus was declared a nobilissimus, one of the highest imperial titles, under Heraclius..."
- Went with "a high courtly title"
- Please adjust all {{circa}} templates in the article to read as, {{circa|638}} not {{circa}}638.
- Done.
- Link papyrus?
- Done.
More to follow in a few minutes. Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- By chance, was Martinus named after his mother? Just a thought.
- Figured this was the case but was unable to find a source for it; a redoubled search (I basically just used variations of "named for" in quotes) has turned up that this is true; will add it once it finishes downloading from not-Libgen.
- I'm sure there's a good reason for this that I'm not picking up on, but why does the lead and infobox say that Martinus became caesar in c. 638 if the History section provides much evidence that it was in 639?
- Fuller expanation in the lede; I've changed it to circa 639 in the infobox for simplicity.
- "This could be seen as a reaction to Pyrrhos bypassing David and Martinus after the death of Heraclius" In what way did he 'bypass' them? I'm a little lost.
- The primary source is very unclear on what this means, and PbmZ cites it directly with little explanation; I think it means that he basically just started ignoring them and making his own decisions, but it's not really clear, so I've removed it.
- Link will?
- Done
- Ditto with regent?
- Done
- "On 20/24 April or 26 May 641, Constantine died of an advanced case of tuberculosis, although some supporters of Constantine alleged that Martina had him poisoned..." You can replace "some supporters of Constantine" with "some of his supporters".}}}
- Done.
- "under the regency of Martina" Ditto, you can replace this with "under her regency".
- Done.
- "demanding that Patriarch Pyrrhus must crown Constans II as emperor" This sounds strange; I think you should delete "must".
- Done.
- Link crown with Coronation of the Byzantine emperor.
- Done
- Link abdicate?
- Done.
- "Martina, now in a truly desperate situation, offered the military further donatives, recalled an influential patron of Valentinus, Philagrius, from his exile in Africa, and offered Valentinus the title of comes excubitorum (count of the excubitors)." The paragraph never quite explain why Martina was doing these things?
- Explained that the latter two were negotiation pieces, and explained the first as "gifts or bribes" (I'm not sure it's ever really
- "Despite these offers..." What offers? It sounds more like Martina merely capitulated to his requests.
- Changed to "overture"
- "Valentinus entered the city shortly thereafter" Which city? Based on the lead, is it Constantinople?
- Whoops, added.
- I think Political mutilation in Byzantine culture would be appropriate to link somewhere, maybe "nose cut off".
- Done.
- Add ALT text to your image?
- Done.
- [[Category:7th-century Byzantine emperors]] seems odd, seeing as Martinus was not an emperor himself.
- Removed.
That's all I've got. A fascinating short read. Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:18, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Unlimitedlead: Done all, thank you for reviewing! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:47, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
CommentsSupport by Borsoka
- ...from c. 638–September/October 641 The habitual phrase would be "from c. 638 to 641" in a first sentence in the lead. Based on the main text, I understand "c. 639" would be a better starting year.
- Done.
- I slightly rephrased the first sentence.
- Done.
Under Heraclius, Martinus was elevated to caesar in c. 638 That he was made caesar is mentioned in the first sentence. I assume he was made caesar by his father.- Done.
Martinus was the son of Emperor Heraclius and Empress Martina. Mention that Martina was her husband's niece and second wife. I assume Martinus was not their first son.- Done.
Martinus was born to Byzantine Emperor Heraclius and Empress Martina at an unknown date. Mention that Martina was her husband's niece and second wife. Also mention that their marriage give rise to opposition by the clergy. List Heraclius sons (both by his first wife and his second wife) to introduce them before they are mentioned as caesars, co-emperors and emperors.- Done.
Introduce Constantine III as Martinus's half-brother, and Heraclonas as Martinus's elder full brother.- Done.
Valentinus ... cut off Martinus' nose and emasculated him... I doubt that Valantinus was the executor. I think everything that happened to Martinus could be summarize in a new sentence: "Martinus was dismembered and exiled to Rhodes."- Done.
That he died likely soon after his fall, should also be mentioned in the lead.- Done.
...the later historian and Emperor Constantine VII I assume you want to write either "the later historian Emperor Constantine VII" or "the later historian and emperor Constantine VII".- Done.
Introduce John of Nikiu.- Done.
Introduce Pyrrchus of Constantinople as Patriarch.- Done.
Introduce Constantine III as a son of Heraclius and his first wife.- Done in family bit.
Do we know at what age Constantine III and Heraclonas succeeded their father?If Constantine III was an adult why did he need a regent?- Done; the regency thing is difficult, but it seems possible that Heraclius wanted to favor her and ensure her a position in the future, and did so by naming her regent, even if Constantine should have been capable of serving as such for his half-brother.
- Treadgold writes that Martina was named as regent for Heraclonas in case Constantine died. (Treadgold, p. 307)
- @Borsoka: I've amended the text to say that Heraclius wanted Constantine and Heraclonas both to consider Martina as their empress and mother, and later on explained the whole regency business as applying to Heraclonas; an interesting distinction, given that, in both scenarios, she is technically serving as regent, as the two are nominally equal, and indeed she exercised much power. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 05:08, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Treadgold writes that Martina was named as regent for Heraclonas in case Constantine died. (Treadgold, p. 307)
- Done; the regency thing is difficult, but it seems possible that Heraclius wanted to favor her and ensure her a position in the future, and did so by naming her regent, even if Constantine should have been capable of serving as such for his half-brother.
...leaving Heraclonas... Consider rephrasing: "...leaving her son Heraclonas..."- Done.
Another son, Theodosius, suffered no punishment as he was deaf-mute, and thus was not in a position to threaten the throne. Delete.Borsoka (talk) 06:08, 4 March 2023 (UTC)- Done.
- @Borsoka: Done all, thanks for reviewing! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 15:49, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for this new episode of your series of "Forgotten Byzantine Royals". It is a nice article. I support its promotion. Borsoka (talk) 05:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Src review
WIP. SN54129 17:54, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
This version reviewed. Inc. spot checks. SN54129 17:57, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think it's necessary to have your 'Primary sources' section over four columns when that's the same number of entries; ironically, I'd suggest that it makes it possibly easier to miss the trailing three, and with only four entries, one column will not breach WP:WHITESPACE. SN54129 19:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Done.
- Your Garland '02 and Bellinger are missing publisher location information.
- Added.
- Lille needs ISBN.
- It's pulled from a template, which doesn't really use an ISBN because the online version doesn't strictly have one. Perhaps a DOI might be used, but it links directly to it and is a name recognized publication, so I don't know that that would be useful.
- Format ISBNs consistently
- Done.
- All the PmbZ refs check out (not necessarily, that surprisingly) per text attribution.
- 2 Tougher: supports naming after Martina;' Tougher 4a, b, c: mother's death, his full quiver of sons, elevation of Heraclonus.
- All DIR entries check out, even if it is a Wordpress blog (was?), its claims to being peer-reviewed are irrefutable, it seems.
- I have never understood why such a useful and high-quality source hosts itself on such an amateur-looking site.
- Alexander chackes out at nine sones
- 6 Spatharakis 1976, p. 19: checks out at 10 sons.
- But note that Alexander 230 fn58 also cites another source as the number being 11, so I recommend recasting the sentence as
with sources estimating nine, 10 or 11 children
with the three cites at the back.- Done.
- 15 Treadgold, 308: supports allegation of poisoning. Likewise 17 a,b: Mob.
- Other
- I c/e'd a contraction out.
- Be consistent between s's and s'.
- Done.
- That's that. Nice article; congratulations on beating out the top twenty :D SN54129 19:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Serial Number 54129: Thanks for the review, all points should be done or responded to. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 21:14, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- That's that. Nice article; congratulations on beating out the top twenty :D SN54129 19:06, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Good ole Iazyges! Always a pleasure working with you. Happy to pass the source review, flying colours and bar etc :) SN54129 21:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Always a pleasure with you as well ;). Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:02, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
CommentsSupport by Constantine
Reserving a spot here. Constantine ✍ 11:39, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lede
tertiary heir may not be immediately understood. I for one had never encountered the term before, and googling it indicates a) that it is rare and b) that it is a technical legal term for a grandchild of a primary heir. This in turn means that as a gloss of caesar it is incorrect, since anybody could be named caesar, and a caesar could indeed be the primary heir, if there were no co-emperors, and none of the caesares in this article were Heraclius' great-grandsons. I much prefer glossing caesar as something like '...elevated to caesar, a junior imperial title which placed him on the line of succession, at some point...'- I hadn't considered it as a legal term, just "they're an heir, but usually tertiary to a co-emperor by this time"; Done.
- across from Constantinople per WP:POPE, 'across the Bosporus strait from the imperial capital, Constantinople,'
- Done.
- I added something ;)
- Done.
- I added something ;)
- Done.
to force Martina to install Constans II...Valentinus seized Constantinople regardless 'regardless' implies that Constans II was installed, but we are not told that. Better 'and forced Martina to install Constans II'- Done.
dismembered and exiled dismemberment is fatal. 'Mutilated' is I think the word you're looking for, which should be linked to Political mutilation in Byzantine culture as well.- Done.
- History section
Instead of 'History', perhaps 'Life' as title?- Done.
Per above on the gloss of caesar.- Done.
What is CPR XXIII 35?- Done.
Why Nicolas Gonis when the reference uses the transliteration 'Nikolaos'? And is he likely to have an article?- Done
, who would come to replace him as Patriarch under Constans II. is this relevant here?- Removed.
recalling an influential patron...and offered him 'recalling an influential patron...and offering him', or period, and then 'For this reason, she recalled an influential patron...and offered him'.- Done.
The gloss for comes excubitorum is correct, but won't help anyone who doesn't know who/what the excubitors are and why their count was important. Perhaps 'offered him the title of comes excubitorum, a very influential post that entailed command over the imperial bodyguard'?- Done.
'elevated Constans to sole emperor'- Done.
Remove , where following, and replace with a full stop.- Done.
- Sources
All are high-quality sources, but am surprised not to find Kaegi's biography of Heralius among them.- Seems to be an accident of happenstance; I also think I might just not have had the work at the time I first wrote these, as it was Haukurth that added it for the David article; I've added it in and cited it the part that directly relates to him. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- No worries, and wasn't going to fail it for that. But it should at least be in a 'further reading' section. Constantine ✍ 17:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Seems to be an accident of happenstance; I also think I might just not have had the work at the time I first wrote these, as it was Haukurth that added it for the David article; I've added it in and cited it the part that directly relates to him. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- The title of Grumel 1958 is obviously mangled, and it misses a language parameter.
- Done.
- Per this the title is 'Traité d'études byzantines. Tome 1, La chronologie'. You can also use the Gallica link.
- Done. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Per this the title is 'Traité d'études byzantines. Tome 1, La chronologie'. You can also use the Gallica link.
- Done.
Spatharakis 1976 needs to be capitalized- Done.
- Tougher 2019 is, as the title indicates, a collection of papers. Hence the author is not Tougher; she is the editor of the volume. Please identify the paper and its author.
- Sometimes I feel really dumb reading these and wondering how it didn't occur to me... Fixed.
- Can you also add the title of the paper and page range?
- Done.
- Can you also add the title of the paper and page range?
- Sometimes I feel really dumb reading these and wondering how it didn't occur to me... Fixed.
That's it for a first pass. Constantine ✍ 12:46, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Cplakidas: Done all; thank you for the review! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 20:48, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
@Iazyges:replied above, and one minor comment in addition:
- The primary sources are mentioned (except for the De Ceremoniis) in the article body. So unless you link to specific editions of them, I'd say the section is redundant. And, having the primary sources as 'further reading' is odd, it seems to devalue them; if you want to keep this, I would simply call the section 'Primary sources'.
- Done.
Otherwise nothing to complain about :). Constantine ✍ 17:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Cplakidas: Done all. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:04, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Iazyges: Excellent. That leaves me with only the pleasant task of supporting. Nice work! Constantine ✍ 19:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
William D. Leahy
This article is about William D. Leahy, who was America's most senior military officer during World War II, but probably the least well known of the seven five-star officers. Despite (or perhaps because of this) there is a fair bit of scholarship about him. He is the subject of four PhD theses used in the article. The article did well on DYK, and will probably be quite popular as TFA. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
Eddie891
- Signalling intent to comment here Eddie891 Talk Work 13:12, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not a full review yet, but per MOS:CITELEAD O'Brien's direct quote in the lead should probably have a cite with it, and in the body of the article the reader would presumably benefit from knowing who the first most powerful man in the world was. There's an implication that it's Roosevelt, but there are a number of other global leaders it could have been-- Eddie891 Talk Work 13:54, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Every other power in the world was 'reactive' to American decision making. As Leahy had more influence than anyone not named Roosevelt or Truman, he was even more powerful than leaders of other nations such as Winston Churchill or Joseph Stalin." (O'Brien, p. 3) On reflection, I have removed the quote. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:20, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Wisconsin Legislature in 1872," This reads confusingly because you just established that they were living in Iowa in 1875. How does Wisconsin fit in to the timeline?
- "He had five brothers and a sister" Math is not my strong spot, but 5+1+1 = 7. What happened to the eighth child?
- "his paternal grandparents having arrived in the United States in 1836" Why do you mention the paternal, but not maternal grandparents?
- Do we know which of Ashland's schools he attended?
- Do you have a year for the nose break?
- "but this required an appointment from his local Congressman, Thomas Lynch" Could his senator not have appointed him, or was there a reason this was no possible?
Down thru early life and education-- I'm not seeing anything major, don't be afraid to push back on any/all of these. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- "This was the only naval battle Leahy witnessed in person" I'm struggling to find this on p. 25 of the cited source, could you help me out?
- "although Leahy did not like their chances if the 4,500 Chinese troops in the vicinity joined the uprising, as they had in the Battle of Tientsin" this feels a little extraneous- is it worth including?
- "Unlike most Americans, Leahy was appalled by American brutality and the widespread use of torture" My reading of Thomas is that he's only addressing the opinions of American officers/soldiers. Might be worth clarifying, adding another source, or telling me how wrong I am
- "whose older sister Mary was engaged to Albert P. Niblack, an officer of the Annapolis class of 1880 under whom Leahy had served" This also feels extraneous, I'd consider removing
- "Louise subsequently convinced him to convert from Roman Catholicism" My reading of O'Brien is that while Leahy's family was Roman Catholic, he himself would not have identified as much-- specifically p. 26 "showed no interest in theology, the Bible, or religious doctrine." Maybe it would be better to somehow establish in the early life section (though I'm not convinced that it would fit there) that his family was Roman Catholic and just say "convert to Episcopalianism" here?
- Interestingly, Thomas gets his religion wrong on p. 12, implying that Leahy was an Episcopalian while at the Naval Academy (nothing actionable about that here).
- I think you need to add pp. 28 and 29 to the citation for the text "However, he was present for the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. His family had to leave their house in the face of the resulting fires..."
- "a change Leahy came to see as a wise one" What does this add?
- "Mayo and then his replacement, Rear Admiral William Fullam, was reassigned," I'd think you want to say 'were' reassigned if you're talking about both of them
- "in charge of one of the Navy's most sensitive offices. In this role he was in charge of all officer assignments" so was he in charge of the whole office, or just officer assignments? If the first, the second would presumably not be necessary to state
- Maybe say something like "leaving Leahy as de facto head of one of the Navy's most sensitive offices, overseeing all officer assignments"
- The Thomas cited is almost certainly Gerald Eustis Thomas, suggest authorlink
Down through Banana Wars. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:45, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look so far-- I'll pick up after you've gotten the chance to go through Harry's below, no point in potentially duplicating. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Harry
Well done on another important article! Comments:
- An 1897 graduate of the United States Naval Academy at Annapolis, Maryland Location is not really relevant; it hasn't moved, and it would still be the US Naval Academy if it was in Nebraska. If you really want to keep Annaopolis, you could pipe it to USNA but I don't think you need it in the lead.
- Leahy saw service in the Spanish–American War, the Philippine–American War, Boxer Rebellion in China, the Banana Wars and World War I I think you need a definite article before Boxer Rebellion (per all the other conflicts mentioned) and a serial comma before the "and".
- In one paragraph, you have United States Naval Academy, United States Navy, and U.S. Ambassador to France. I'm aware that two of those are proper nouns, but I think we've well and truly established his nationality and you could afford to lose at least the last one. (I made an edit to this effect to the first paragraph)
- Chief of Staff to President Roosevelt just Roosevelt (or "the president"); you've introduced him above.
- Changed to "the President"
- President is not a proper noun unless attached to a name; I'm tempted to say the same of "Chief of Staff"
- More repetition of US in the third paragraph. It appears three times in a fairly short paragraph, none as part of a proper noun.
- I like a nice, concise lead but this one could do with a few more details: Why was his ambassadorship controversial? Some dates of battles/promotions/roles held pre-WWII would help to establish a career timeline. How, when, and why did he acquire a five-star rank? You say he was the de facto CJCS but the uninitiated reader might not realise that meant he was head of all the armed forces.
- Leahy learned how to sail on a sailing ship Redundancy (he wouldn't have learnt it on a paddle steamer!)
- As of 2022, no other class had had more than four not sure that's not trivia; there probably weren't as many opportunities to most other generations given that the navy was in greater demand in the first half of the C20 than ever before or since.
- I think it is important. Obviously part of the reason was World War II, although when the are began there were only four 4-star admirals on active duty (Hart, Stark, Kimmel and King). Whereas today, with no war on, there are... eleven. The other part is the Navy's career policies. The Army equivalent would be the class of 1915 aka the class the stars fell on, which included Dwight Eisenhower and Omar Bradley. But note that they were twenty years younger. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- What was he before he was an ensign? A midshipman?
- Naval cadet. They didn't become midshipmen until 1902. (Already had to revert two IPs who wanted to edit the article without knowing what they are talking about.) They had to serve two years' sea duty before being commissioned as ensigns. They were not commissioned on graduation until 1912. It says this in the article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- On August 28, the Castine was ordered to Amoy help protect American interests there against the possibility of a Japanese coup.[21] The Castine returned to the Philippines, arriving back in Manila on September 16, 1900 Maybe rephrase to avoid the impression that they returned to the Philippines because they were ordered to Amoy?
- Still an ensign, he was given his first command Possibly off-topic but was this common for an ensign?
- However, he was present for the 1906 San Francisco earthquake "However" adds nothing here; it's not contradicting the previous statement
- United States occupation of Haiti, where Leahy again acted as chief of staff, this time to Rear Admiral William B. Caperton. In May 1916, Dolphin participated in the United States occupation of the Dominican Republic We can infer that these were US occupations
- with what was then a radical new design lose the "what was then" for timelessness
- who had been a critic of the
U.S.Navy's gunnery - But in the wake of the the "but" suggests a connection to the previous sentence but I don't see one.
- Leahy's old friend Franklin Roosevelt just Roosevelt again
- along with cruisers with a total displacement of 60,000 long tons (61,000 t) and destroyers with a total displacement of 30,000 long tons (30,000 t) I think this is getting away from Leahy, the subject at hand
- joined
his wifeLouise - I feel some of the detail on the development of Roosevelt Roads is getting off-topic
- On February 1, 1941, Richardson was recalled and replaced as CINCUS by Admiral Husband Kimmel not seeing relevance to Leahy?
- It is about Leahy's dealing with Roosevelt. He rarely argued with him. O
- The Fall of France in June 1940 came as a shock to many Americans;[96] Henry L. Stimson and McGeorge Bundy described it as "the most shocking single event of the war".[97] American security had been underwritten by Britain and France, allowing the United States to have a comparatively low amount of defense spending, and planning was based on the assumption that France would be a bulwark against Germany, as it had been in World War I, and that the United States would have ample time to mobilize industry and create armies. Now, with France gone, Germany could directly threaten the United States.[98] I know this is background to his appointment but it's diverging quite a long way from Leahy; can we shorten?
- Leahy sailed from Puerto Rico on November 28, and arrived in New York on December 2, from whence he immediately flew to Washington, D.C., to confer with Roosevelt Is his route really relevant? Surely it's enough just to say that he went to France via DC? Likewise the sentences about his journey from Norfolk to Vichy.
- "My major task", Leahy later recalled "was to keep the French on our side in so far as possible This quote essentially duplicates the previous sentence.
- The paragraph The United States had some levers... doesn't mention Leahy at all; I'm sure it could be condensed and merged with the following one, which focuses on Leahy's role.
- Leahy regarded Hopkins as a "pinko" needs a citation, as both a direct quote and a red flag claim.
I frequently joked with him about those days and sometimes called him “Pinko” or “Do-Gooder.” He took it all in good spirit and we never had any major differences of opinion. By his brilliant mind, his loyalty, and his selfless devotion to Franklin Roosevelt in helping carry on the war, Harry Hopkins soon erased completely any previous misgivings I might have held.
— I Was There, p. 138
- The extensive background on Hopkins isn't relevant; for a biography of Leahy, we should be content that Hopkins' health was the reason for Leahy's increasing influence. I would cull the paragraph after the precarious state of Hopkins's health.
- he accompanied
PresidentRoosevelt - This was unnecessary; the two commanders could have sent representatives... not relevant to Leahy
- Nor did he agree with formalizing the role of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Do we know why?
- Yes. Added a bit more
- at the age of eighty-four 84 per MOS:NUMERAL
- MOS:NUMERAL:
Integers greater than nine expressible in one or two words may be expressed either in numerals or in words
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- MOS:NUMERAL:
- Do we really need the dates of rank section? It entirely duplicates the prose? And if we must have it, do we need a picture of every rank insignia on every uniform? None of that seems encyclopaedic. I would say the same about the decorations (a Navy Cross for a voyage when he didn't even come into direct contact with the enemy, really?) but I know these enjoy consensus (though I can't fathom why).
- I am very fond of the dates of rank section, as I am often looking up an article to determine what rank someone held on a particular date. I didn't add it though; it has been in the article since 2006. Originally it was a list; it was changed to the current format in 2007. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
That's quite a long list bust most of it is fairly straightforward. I also made a few copy edits as I went through. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:56, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Airport Central railway station
This article is about one of Transperth's newest stations (it opened on 9 October 2022) and my personal favourite design-wise. This would be my second featured article after Daglish railway station. I look forward to receiving any comments. Steelkamp (talk) 05:59, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Spot check needed
- Hi Steelkamp, and welcome back to FAC. Just noting that somehow your first nomination at FAC didn't get a source to text integrity spot check, so it will need one this time. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:53, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Image review—pass (t · c) buidhe 07:14, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- the article structure looks good to me I'd give it a pass for style guidelines but I'd see what other users think about it as well
- Also definitely a pass 1d and e- the article appears to be stable and free from edit wars NotOrrio (talk) 01:11, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "which are the longest operational escalators in the southern hemisphere at 35 metres (115 ft) long and 15 metres (49 ft) high; although they will" - semi colon should be a comma
- "On the southern wall is a large glass panel consisting of 50 panels" - any way to avoid repetition of "panel"?
- "the significance of the Swan River and the Whadjuk country to Noongar people" => "the significance of the Swan River and the Whadjuk country to the Noongar people"
- Image captions which are complete sentences do not need full stops
- "Rita Saffioti announced the opening date of the project had been delayed from 2020 to 2021" => "Rita Saffioti announced that the opening date of the project had been delayed from 2020 to 2021"
- "saying it will open some time later in the year." => "saying it would open some time later in the year."
- That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:21, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Done. Steelkamp (talk) 01:32, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:45, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
John M Wolfson
- Is security needed to go from the airport to the station (or vice versa), or is it all landside? I presume airport security is not a factor in boarding/alighting the station itself, but I just wanted to make sure.
Otherwise good work; image review has already been passed, and while this does not count as a proper source review I see nothing alarming in citations. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:58, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- The station is all landside. In fact, the Skybridge doesn't actually enter the airport building, it instead stops a few metres short and passengers have to walk outside. I suppose that made construction easier. Steelkamp (talk) 02:33, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Huh, so it is. Support. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Comment. I was going to come do a source review here, but I'm concerned that the vast majority of the sources in use are not independent. Can you elaborate on your approach to sourcing here? Nikkimaria (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: I've added some new independent sources where I could. The reason there is a large number of non independent sources in the history section is because the Forrestfield–Airport Link website provided the most detail on the construction process at the highest frequency. It provided construction updates every few months. For the most part, the news media only covered the signing of contracts, the start of construction, and any construction delays.
- As for the services section, that is mostly non independent sources because independent sources generally don't cover that. The only potentially flattering thing there is the "no surcharge" bit, which does have an independent source. The only bit of negative coverage I could find for the services is [4], which I've added.
- As for the description section, again, independent sources don't typically cover that sort of thing. I do have independent sources for the "longest operational escalators in the southern hemisphere" bit though. Steelkamp (talk) 08:15, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "Platforms - 2 platform edges with 1 island platform". What is a "platform edge? How many platforms does the island platform have? I assume 2, but it would be nice to be told. Or do you mean '1 island platform with 2 platform edges'?
- Reworded it as suggested.
- "construction of the rest of the station started after that." Consider 'construction of the rest of the station then started.'
- Done.
- "It is served by trains every twelve minutes during peak hour". Should that be 'peak hours'?
Both seem to be correct based on the Wikipedia article for rush hour and this article from the Sydney Morning Herald.Never mind, I've done away with the issue by replacing "peak hour" with "peak".
- "The journey to Perth station takes eighteen minutes." Perhaps expand to include how far this is? And in the main article.
- I can't seem to find a source which says the distance to Perth. The source I used for other articles (page 13) only gives the distance of Airport Central station from the Midland line (6.2 km).
- "On the concourse are fare gates and utilities." In this context, what is a utility.
- Well I originally had it as "toilets, and a staff office" but I changed it following a comment from the good article reviewer. Look at the source, it doesn't actually say there is a staff office there but it does for the toilets so I've changed that.
- "Noongar" is mentioned twice. Who are they?
- Added an explanatory footnote.
- "to arrive at Airport Central station in late-February and late-March 2018 respectively"> You don't need "respectively".
- Removed.
- "Airport Central station". Why the lower-case initial s? Ditto Perth station, Claremont station etc.
- For consistency with the page title and for compliance with Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Capital letters, which says "only words and phrases that are consistently capitalized in a substantial majority of independent, reliable sources are capitalized in Wikipedia." Official sources all seem to capitalise "station" but independent sources are mixed as to whether they capitalise "station" or not. I remove the "railway" mainly to be concise, but also because not many sources actually include that. I would prefer if the page title were changes but I know that is a requested move I will not win as established convention for Australian stations on Wikipedia is to include "railway".
- If you were being consistent with the article title you would include "railway" in each station title. The MoS - "Geographical or place names are the nouns used to refer to specific places and geographic features. These are treated like other proper names and take an initial capital letter on all major elements" - seems pretty clear. I fail to see how it can be read such that Perth station complies. (Short of arguing that Perth station is not a "place".) (Or Airport Central railway station.) I am obviously open to discussion and persuasion re interpretation, but I note that even within the article "Airport Central Station" has an upper-case S.
- When capitalised the way the title is now, the only part of the name that is a proper noun is "Airport Central", and the "railway station" bit is merely a description, which can be shortened to "station" when the context is clear, such as within this article. Apart from the titles of references and the initial mention of the official name in the lead, the article is consistent with using lowercase "station" and it would require an RM to change that.
- If you were being consistent with the article title you would include "railway" in each station title. The MoS - "Geographical or place names are the nouns used to refer to specific places and geographic features. These are treated like other proper names and take an initial capital letter on all major elements" - seems pretty clear. I fail to see how it can be read such that Perth station complies. (Short of arguing that Perth station is not a "place".) (Or Airport Central railway station.) I am obviously open to discussion and persuasion re interpretation, but I note that even within the article "Airport Central Station" has an upper-case S.
- "Transport Minister Rita Saffioti". Is that a regional or national minister?
- State minister, which I've clarified.
- "every twelve minutes during peak hour on weekdays". Just checking, they stop every 12 minutes for a single hour, five days a week - yes?
Peak hour goes for longer than a literal hour, but despite that, peak hour without the s seems to be correct as per previous comment about this.I've done away with the issue by replacing "peak hour" with "peak".
- "At night, trains are half-hourly or hourly. The first train arrives at the station at 5:30 am on weekdays". There seems to be a contradiction here.
- I've tried to add that services end by 2 am on weekends. Hopefully my wording is fine. Its difficult to write though because the last train is later on Friday and Saturday nights and the first train is earlier on weekdays compared to weekends. Additionally trains heading towards High Wycombe end later than trains heading towards Perth/Claremont. I don't like to mention specific times as they will change when the timetable changes every few years, but I did mention the first weekday train at 5:30 as a secondary source specifically mentions that time.
- I agree re not generally mentioning specific times, but also like the mention of a specific time in the discussion of the specific dispute. How about 'The last train leaves at about 2 am with the next train arriving approximately three to four hours later – 5:30 am on weekdays in 2022 – which has been criticised ...'?
- Sounds good, I have reworded as suggested.
- I agree re not generally mentioning specific times, but also like the mention of a specific time in the discussion of the specific dispute. How about 'The last train leaves at about 2 am with the next train arriving approximately three to four hours later – 5:30 am on weekdays in 2022 – which has been criticised ...'?
Nice work. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review :) Steelkamp (talk) 02:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Have I adequately addressed your comments and do you have anything further to add? Steelkamp (talk) 15:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- A couple of responses. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Have I adequately addressed your comments and do you have anything further to add? Steelkamp (talk) 15:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review
Footnote numbers refer to this version.
- The archive link for FN 14 doesn't work for me -- I get "failed to load PDF document".
- I see. I've changed the archive url.
- Suggest adding "url-access=subscription" to FN 44.
- Added url-access=limited for WAtoday refs. It requires a subscription after a certain amount of visits. I always forget that website is paywalled as I have blocked that website's cookies,
Spotchecks:
- FNs 23 and 24 cite "During this, several archaeological discoveries were made, including a headstone from the 1890s." Verified, but this relies on "pieces of broken dinnerware and bottles dating from the 1950s" being considered to be archaeological discoveries, which while technically true is not what a reader thinks of when seeing the phrase. I would suggest cutting this to just "During this time a headstone from the 1890s was discovered" and dropping the other cite.
- Reworded as suggested.
- FN 1 cites "Under the Perth Airport master plan, terminals three and four near Redcliffe station will be replaced by new terminals in the Airport Central precinct." Can you point me at the text that supports this? The citation gives three pages that clearly are relevant but I can't spot fully supporting text.
- On page 123:
- "After 2025, when all regular passenger transport services consolidate in the Central Terminal precinct, ..."
- "With the future consolidation of terminals to the Airport Central Precinct by 2025, ..."
- FN 32 cites "This also caused the second TBM, Sandy, to stop on 28 March." Technically this is correct, but what the source is saying is that the second machine stopped because it came closer to the first machine than best practices dictate. This was because of the ground disturbance, so it's not wrong as you have it, but since Sandy didn't encounter the ground disturbance I would suggest rephrasing.
- Added some text to clarify.
- FN 7 cites "although they will be overtaken by 45-metre (148 ft) escalators at Sydney Central station in 2024". Verified.
- FNs 59 & 60 cite "Following the state budget on 12 May 2022, the government changed its position on the line's opening date, saying it would open some time later in the year." Verified.
- FN 29 cites "Excavation was completed in January 2018 and construction of the concrete base slab commenced the following month." Verified.
One request for the text above, and two suggested changes, neither of which I regard as a problem with the spotcheck. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:39, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Pass for both the source review and the spot check. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:24, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Ignace Tonené
This article is about Ignace Tonené, a 19th-century fur trader in Canada and the Indigenous chief of the Teme-Augama Anishnabai. His gold prospecting caused a gold rush in 1906. CT55555(talk) 22:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
First-time nomination
- Hi CT55555, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:18, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- No, a reviewer will materialise. This is largely an internal prompt/reminder. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:57, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
Image review
Licensing looks ok. But there is a contradiction in the dates of the personal life section. He couldn't have married his first wife after she died. (t · c) buidhe 00:10, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for catching that error, I have now fixed it. They married in 1860. CT55555(talk) 00:21, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Just re-pinging you, because I added an image since your review. CT55555(talk) 18:08, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- The image I have added is up for deletion discussion, although I think it will be kept and the deletion discussion is because someone assumes (due to low resolution) that it is not original work. I sincerely think that assumption of bad faith is at odds with normal behaviour and I assume the image will be kept or speedy kept.
- Link: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_Bluesmtb
- cc/ping @Buidhe CT55555(talk) 15:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- AGF is an enwiki, not Commons, rule and anyway doesn't apply to reasonable suspicion of copyright issues. Now that I look closer I think the deletion !votes have a point. The image will have to be removed since it's very unlikely that the discussion would be closed before the FAC is. (t · c) buidhe 18:20, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Heartfox
"died 1916" → Hodgins and Morrison (HM) give "d. 15 March 1916 in the Lac Abitibi region, Que"add the marriages and number of children to the infoboxNias not given in infobox but Maiagizis is?"negotiated with the federal and provincial governments" → I would specify that these are referring to the Canadian federal and Ontario provincial governments per WP:EASTEREGG"also known as Nias and Maiagizis" → this should be repeated in the body, ideally with a note specifying the English meaning as indicated by HMyou don't need to repeat citations if the whole paragraph is supported by the same one (ie early life section)the anike ogima (English: deputy-chief)", "As the anike ogima" → see MOS:FOREIGNITALIC"Tonené worked for the Hudson's Bay Company" → specify that he did so from 1857"Tonené was elected to succeed his father" → this is the exact wording of the original source and should be rephrased.There is also close paraphrasing elsewhere."Tonené, with two associates, met Charles Skene, a federal Indian agent to explain their concerns about arriving lumberjacks and that they sought an annuity and a reserve, since their people's land had not been ceded to the Canadian government" → this can be written clearer without four commas in one sentence"During a January 1, 1879 speech" → see MOS:DATECOMMA"scarcer...so" → see MOS:ELIPSIS"which resulted in an acknowledgement from Lawrence Vankoughnet" → give a word or two before the name to explain who this is; readers should be able to have a basic understanding without having to click on a link"He continued to press for federal financial support and the creation of a reserve through a series of meetings and letters" → with who?"in English" → not seeing this in HMother first nations" → shouldn't First Nations be capitalized?"which he proposed to be", "The community agreed" → the tribal council proposed it collectively, not Tonené alone"south end of Lake Temagami" → Lake Temagami is already linked in the early life sectionsource says Mowat blocked it "mainly because of the valuable pine in the region". This is essential context and should be added"In 1888, after Oliver Mowat's refusal to create the reserve, Tonené moved his family to land between Lake Opasatica and Lake Dasserat near Abitibi, Quebec" → specify that 1888 was also when he was no longer head chiefDuring the journey, Tonené fed his family by hunting and trapping and, motivated by the discovery of silver at Cobalt, Ontario, prospecting" → no this was in 1903 not during the journey to Bear Island."became so good" → this is kind of informal"Quebec-Ontario" → see MOS:ENBETWEENcartographic.info → please cite government of Canada website instead of Google MapsAngus needs page number(s)Creskey is a book review of Angus. Please cite Angus instead.you provide a publisher location for one book but not the other; be consistentis there not an ISBN for Potts, Angus? page number should read "p. 212"instead of www.biographi.ca write Dictionary of Canadian Biography and you really only need to include ""Biography – Tonené, Ignace" in the titlethe further reading appears to be a master's thesis and that is not really necessary to include
Best, Heartfox (talk) 04:06, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Partly an update, party a note to myself: all issues addressed, except:
- the anike ogima (English: deputy-chief)", "As the anike ogima" → see MOS:FOREIGNITALIC (I don't understand the feedback)
It should read as deputy-chief (anike ogima) — "Use foreign words sparingly"
- Close paraphrasing, (I still need to review)
- Page numbers for Cobalt (book)
- CT55555(talk) 16:10, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Heartfox Thank you for the clear feedback, most of which I have addressed. Regarding my points 1 through 3 above:
- Can you help me understand what the edit should be (or did it already get resolved perhaps)?
- I appologise for this, I thought I had sufficiently changed everything into my own words, can you direct me towards where you saw the close paraphrasing, or if there is a tool you recommend to search for this?
- You can check https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Ignace+Tonen%C3%A9&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=1&use_links=1&turnitin=0 to see what sentences can be changed to differ a bit more
- I've been unable to ascertain this from online work, I will need to revisit the library, so it might take a little time to find the page numbers.
- CT55555(talk) 16:31, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Heartfox Thank you for the clear feedback, most of which I have addressed. Regarding my points 1 through 3 above:
- Is my use of MOS:ELIPSIS still incorrect? Maybe it's my eyesight, maybe my intelligence (lol), maybe my source code stills, but I can't see the difference between the correct and incorrect way to do them, so I'm confused if they are wrong or right.
- If they are wrong, and anyone is willing to make the edit, I'd be very grateful. CT55555(talk) 18:05, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
"and commonly known as Chief Tonené" → needs a citationYou can use Template:Marriage for the marriages in the infoboxThere are still paragraphs with repeated sentences being cited to the same source. It's okay to just have one citation at the end of all the sentences citing the same one.You didn't need to split up the paragraphs. It's okay if they're not all about the exact same thing. Having four two-sentence paragraphs in a row is very choppy and discouraged."and in 1903 starting prospecting motivated by the discovery of silver at Cobalt, Ontario, prospecting" → prospecting repeated twice"for the reserve, the community agreed should be about 100 square miles around Cross Lake and the south end of Lake Temagami. The community agreed." → for the reserve; the community that agreed it should be about 100 square miles around Cross Lake and the south end of Lake Temagami."primarily concerned about the pine lumber at the location" → specify that it was about the value of the pine, not just the pine itself.use a consistent date format; the death is written differently in the infobox and prose
I have struck addressed comments and replied to your edits. Pinging buidhe as a new image has been added. Best, Heartfox (talk) 18:30, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Heartfox, for the fast re-review, and for the clear feedback. I figured everything out and made every edit request (I think, I hope) with the exception of the page numbers for the Cobalt book (pending library visit). CT55555(talk) 19:41, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Update, I was able to ascertain the page numbers for Cobalt: Cradle of the Demon Metals, Birth of a Mining Superpower and added them in CT55555(talk) 20:50, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think I've done everything suggested. One point remains not struck through ("There are still paragraphs with repeated sentences being cited to the same source. It's okay to just have one citation at the end of all the sentences citing the same one.") even though I think I've addressed that. Please let me know where you see any errors, or if you consider this one addressed. CT55555(talk) 14:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Hello, a lot has changed since I first reviewed the article, including the addition of a new book which is now the second-most cited reference. This is really not ideal when the article has so few sources to begin with. I have already spent much time reviewing, and I don't feel comfortable spending more time adding more comments at this time. Consider the comments above as a quasi-peer review. Best, Heartfox (talk) 18:31, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Hi, another reviewer encouraged me to add that book, so I hope I've navigated correctly. I appreciate all the work you've put into this. CT55555(talk) 19:05, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Mike Christie
I was the GA reviewer, and I thought this was close to FAC standard when I passed it. A few more comments:
- "As the deputy chief, Tonené was also known as Chief Tonene": if the point is that they dropped the accent I'm not sure that's worth mentioning, or even that it's accurate -- this is a 2000s source that is not claiming to give contemporary usage, and Googling "site:https://temagamifirstnation.ca tonene" returns three uses of his name on the site, none with the accent, so I think they're just omitting it. If the point is that he was known as "Chief" even though he was just a deputy chief again I would cut it; I don't think the source is clear that the "Chief" usage is contemporary with the events described, rather than simply using the name he has since become known by.
- The section on "Temagami leadership" could do with a sentence or two more of background about the Robinson treaties. At first mention you simply say "he raised the issue of his community's exclusion from the 1850 Robinson Treaty between European settlers and Ojibwa nations around Lake Huron", but a reader unfamiliar with the treaties will have no idea what this refers to or what the benefits to his people would have been. Later you link to the same article, with different link text: "Robinson-Huron Treaty"; perhaps make this a section link to the relevant section of the article.
- Are any more details available about how his claim was jumped? I had a look in newspapers.com but couldn't find anything.
-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:54, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for this feedback.
- I've removed the alternative name. My initial motivation were both about the accent and the Chief title, but I agree with your feedback, it's not necessary.
- I added some background to explain what the treaty is, made the two mentioned of the treaties/treaty more similar and made the second link go to the relevant treaty.
- I re-read the relevant parts of Cobalt: Cradle of the Demon Metals, Birth of a Mining Superpower to get more background on the theft. The book doesn't say much more than what was already in the article. I checked Charlie Angus bibliography and he cites a draft article by David Wright. Searching for that article online takes me to the comment page on Wiki Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File_talk:Tournenie_(HS85-10-21122).jpg which doesn't add any more. I've searched extensively while writing this article and I suspect that no more reliable sources about this exist, at least online.
- CT55555(talk) 13:58, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- The changes look good, except that I see you added a reference to section 141 of the Indian Act. I don't know if it's correct, but our article says that was added in 1927. What's your source for that section number? And more generally that section doesn't mention any restriction on access to the courts prior to 1927, so I'm also curious what the source is for saying the Indian Act was an issue at all? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- From Cobalt page 42 "Tonene's claims were jumped by white prospectors. he tried to establish his rights through the courts, but under section 141 of the Indian Act it was illegal for Tonene to hire a lawyer." If it is clear that Charlie Angus made an error in his book (I don't know, I considered it a reliable source), I could just delete that line, I'm neutral on the issue. CT55555(talk) 14:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Following some references it appears that there was no law against Indians obtaining legal aid until the 1927 version of the Indian Act, so I think it should be cut. In addition, the biography.ca source says "one of" his claims was jumped; that is, he had more than one claim, and not all were jumped. I think that should be clarified -- I would definitely rank that source as more reliable than a book by a politician. And the mention of the Tonene Old Indian Mining Company is probably worth including too, though it should be clear Tonene's relationship with it is completely unknown. Also, have you looked at this source? I found it via the biography.ca references; it mentions Tonene several times though I don't know if it covers anything you don't have. It might be useful to replace the Angus source in some cases since this is an academic publication. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I had not seen that source and it contains helpful details on his father, grandfather and brother, also his early leadership activities and some details that helped me expand the article! Thanks! Any tips you have on how you found that would be welcome.
- Rather than drop the Indian Act detail, I said that the book claimed.... but if you feel that it should be deleted, I'll agree and do that.
- I added mention of the mining company.
- The academic source has so much overlapping content with Angus, that I suspect Angus used it as a source, so perhaps I should make those changes. That will take me a bit of time. I'll update on that soon.
- Likewise the claim/claims issue will take me more time to process. Will update on that soon too. CT55555(talk) 23:40, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Re the Indian Act, everything I'm finding says the restriction was introduced in 1927 -- e.g. this, or see this, which explicitly says indigenous people were only banned from hiring lawyers to represent them from 1927 to 1952. I think Tonené's problem was more likely to be what Annalise Acorn outlines on p. 133 here, in the essay "Trust in the Relationship between Indigenous People and the Canadian State": rather than any legal prohibition, it was the practical barrier to getting justice through the courts that stifled indigenous lawsuits. That's only my guess, though, and I think it would stray into original research to introduce anything into the article suggesting that. But I think this all means we shouldn't mention the Indian Act with regard to the claim jumping; it's clear Angus is wrong. As to how I found the source: I starting searching in archive.org for the sources referenced by biography.ca -- archive.org has started carrying an amazing number of books over the last few years and you can find stuff there that's not visible in Google Books. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have now reviewed. I was not able to favour the more academic source for the Cobalt book's claims, as the content is not the same. It did let me add a few details (job titles, tree speices) so I made some minor improvements. CT55555(talk) 14:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Following some references it appears that there was no law against Indians obtaining legal aid until the 1927 version of the Indian Act, so I think it should be cut. In addition, the biography.ca source says "one of" his claims was jumped; that is, he had more than one claim, and not all were jumped. I think that should be clarified -- I would definitely rank that source as more reliable than a book by a politician. And the mention of the Tonene Old Indian Mining Company is probably worth including too, though it should be clear Tonene's relationship with it is completely unknown. Also, have you looked at this source? I found it via the biography.ca references; it mentions Tonene several times though I don't know if it covers anything you don't have. It might be useful to replace the Angus source in some cases since this is an academic publication. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:45, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- From Cobalt page 42 "Tonene's claims were jumped by white prospectors. he tried to establish his rights through the courts, but under section 141 of the Indian Act it was illegal for Tonene to hire a lawyer." If it is clear that Charlie Angus made an error in his book (I don't know, I considered it a reliable source), I could just delete that line, I'm neutral on the issue. CT55555(talk) 14:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- The changes look good, except that I see you added a reference to section 141 of the Indian Act. I don't know if it's correct, but our article says that was added in 1927. What's your source for that section number? And more generally that section doesn't mention any restriction on access to the courts prior to 1927, so I'm also curious what the source is for saying the Indian Act was an issue at all? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think I have now addressed each of these recommendations. Please let me know if there is anything remaining that I should do. CT55555(talk) 14:46, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- The only thing left is that I think we should include the biography.ca information that Tonené had multiple claims, and one was stolen, rather than implying his only claim was stolen. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've done that. I was careful because:
- I've written several mining articles and I think most mines are a combination of various claims and I think what most people call a claim is legally a cluster of adjacent claims. i.e. the distinction is often not made, even in more official sources.
- Tonene died poor. The Kerr-Addison Mine produced 12 million ounces of gold. Clearly the one that was stolen was the important one.
- So I don't want to imply that was just one of several important claims that was stolen, the theft was clearly the one/ones that mattered.
- So I avoided implying he had only one, but I've not emphasised that too much, as it could distract from the point. I hope you'll agree with that? CT55555(talk) 14:56, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree it's tricky, and that we have to be careful here. The source says "...he began prospecting. He was successful enough that one of his claims was jumped; Indian Affairs was unable to secure redress." Rereading I don't think it asserts that he definitely had more than one claim -- I would guess that the author found information in Indian Affairs archives about the failure to correct the claim jumping, so that means he had one claim, but it doesn't say if or how many other claims he had. I would also cut "ore body" as being unnecessary detail and also to avoid close paraphrasing concerns. How about "He discovered the Kerr Addison gold mine at McGarry, and is known to have staked at least one claim there, though that claim was stolen from him by white settlers"? Then something similar in the lead. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've done almost that, but needed to add words "... at a location that later became the..." because the mine wasn't created until several years later.
- I think that satisfactorily resolvs it. What do you think? CT55555(talk) 15:15, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I made minor subsequent edits, I think no meaning was changed. But now I think "at least one claim there" could be replaced with "a claim there" as that means the same and doesn't hint so strongly towards something unknown. If you agree so far, would you also agree to that? CT55555(talk) 15:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's a fine point, but I think we do need to imply more than one claim -- the biography.ca source does say "one of his claims". The lead currently says "although his claim over the gold was stolen from him by white Canadian prospectors"; could we make that "one of his claims", which is the phrasing the source uses? It's too short a phrase to be a close paraphrasing issue. Then in the body I think it would be best to leave it as is. SchroCat, since you're reviewing this too, would you mind commenting? To save you reading the whole discussion, the issue is how to represent the sources, one of which says "one of his claims" but gives information about only one claim. I think that means we should avoid wording that implies there was only one claim. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with your analysis and changed the lead accordingly. CT55555(talk) 16:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support, in that case. SchroCat, looks like the question is resolved, though of course if you do take a look it would be good to have your opinion. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:53, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the ping. The lead looks fine, although the body says staked at least one claim there, though that claim was stolen from him by white settlers". There are two points here - one of which is the quote mark, which needs to either have a twin or be removed. The other point moves from plural to singular (at least one claim ... that claim). Could "that" be replaced by "a"? - SchroCat (talk) 16:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support, in that case. SchroCat, looks like the question is resolved, though of course if you do take a look it would be good to have your opinion. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:53, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with your analysis and changed the lead accordingly. CT55555(talk) 16:49, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- It's a fine point, but I think we do need to imply more than one claim -- the biography.ca source does say "one of his claims". The lead currently says "although his claim over the gold was stolen from him by white Canadian prospectors"; could we make that "one of his claims", which is the phrasing the source uses? It's too short a phrase to be a close paraphrasing issue. Then in the body I think it would be best to leave it as is. SchroCat, since you're reviewing this too, would you mind commenting? To save you reading the whole discussion, the issue is how to represent the sources, one of which says "one of his claims" but gives information about only one claim. I think that means we should avoid wording that implies there was only one claim. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:44, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I made minor subsequent edits, I think no meaning was changed. But now I think "at least one claim there" could be replaced with "a claim there" as that means the same and doesn't hint so strongly towards something unknown. If you agree so far, would you also agree to that? CT55555(talk) 15:18, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I agree it's tricky, and that we have to be careful here. The source says "...he began prospecting. He was successful enough that one of his claims was jumped; Indian Affairs was unable to secure redress." Rereading I don't think it asserts that he definitely had more than one claim -- I would guess that the author found information in Indian Affairs archives about the failure to correct the claim jumping, so that means he had one claim, but it doesn't say if or how many other claims he had. I would also cut "ore body" as being unnecessary detail and also to avoid close paraphrasing concerns. How about "He discovered the Kerr Addison gold mine at McGarry, and is known to have staked at least one claim there, though that claim was stolen from him by white settlers"? Then something similar in the lead. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:08, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've done that. I was careful because:
- The only thing left is that I think we should include the biography.ca information that Tonené had multiple claims, and one was stolen, rather than implying his only claim was stolen. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:47, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from SC
A good article, but a few comments:
- "and The Crown": should be a lower-case "t"
- "for both an immediate and an ongoing financial payments": this doesn't quite work. "for an immediate and ongoing financial payments" would work
- "During a January 1, 1879, speech": I'm never happy seeing constructions like this – and the day isn't necessary. How about "During a speech in January 1879"?
- "Canadian Prime Minister John A. Macdonald deferred the matter to the Ontario Premier as land claims were a provincial government, rather than a federal issue, although in 1883 the Department of Indian Affairs agreed to an annual payment to the nation comparable to the amount other First Nations included in the Robinson Huron Treaty were receiving." This sentence is a little long and tries to do too much – so much so that I had to re-read it a couple of times to make sure I understood it. It could do with rewording and probably splitting.
- "the community agreed it should be about 100 square miles surrounding Cross Lake and at the south end of Lake Temagami. The community agreed." Why are we told "the community agreed" twice in quick succession?
- "starting prospecting motivated": comma after prospecting needed
- "gold instigating the": "instigated" would be better
- You state in the lead that "his stake was stolen from him by white Canadian prospectors": that isn't quite matched by "his claim was stolen from him".
That's my lot. – SchroCat (talk) 09:40, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks. I appreciate the way you presented the feedback to make it easy to make the improvements. I agree with all this helpful feedback and have made all the suggested improvements. CT55555(talk) 14:02, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review
- The date formats used in the footnotes should be made consistent; you have "1 March 2022" and "2013-02-15".
- The two web citations using {{cite web}} are fine, but are inconsistent with the Canadian Geographical Names Database citation.
- The three book citations are not consistent -- you might find {{cite book}} worth trying, though it's completely optional, as it would automatically resolve some consistency issues. Specific points:
- You have a page number at the end of the Potts cite after the ISBN but not for any of the other citations. Cites have to allow a reader to find the material; citing to a whole book is not precise enough.
- Formatting nitpicks: you have a full stop and a space after "Charlie Angus (2022)", but neither after "Bruce W. Hodgins and Jamie Benidickson (1989)".
- Be consistent about whether you use "Last name, first name" or "First name last name".
As this is your first FAC we need to do a spotcheck. I've already looked at several sources as part of the review, but will check some more once you've added page numbers. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:11, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clear details. I believe I have now addressed them all. CT55555(talk) 21:00, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Can you divide FN 2 into separate footnotes for the different page numbers? E.g. there should be one for p. 35, one for 40-48 (or more, if that range could be sensibly subdivided).
Spotchecks:
- FN 6 cites "In 2016, the lake south of Bear Lake and north of Larder Lake was officially renamed as Chief Tonene Lake." Mostly verified, but as far as I can tell it's not clear there was a prior name, so "named" rather than "renamed" might be safer.
- FNs 1 & 4 cite "Tonené and two associates met federal Indian agent Charles Skene to explain their concerns about arriving lumberjacks. As their people's land had not been ceded to the Canadian government, the delegation sought an annuity and a reserve." Can you give the source material you're using from Potts for this? From the other source the supporting sentence is "In 1877 Tonené and two others met on Lake Nipissing with federal Indian agent Charles Skene, and explained that their community had never ceded its land but now wanted an annuity from the treaty and a reserve." This is too closely paraphrased; it's essentially the same sentence with some synonyms substituted. In a situation like this it's usually better to forget the original sentence and re-explain the content from scratch without reference to the source, to try to come up with a new way to give the information. And a lumberjack is a workman; a lumberman can mean a businessman who runs a lumber company, so those are not synonyms.
- FN 2 cites "He continued to press the government for federal financial support and the creation of a reserve through a series of meetings and letters written in Anishinaabe, which resulted in an acknowledgement from Indian agent Deputy Superintendent Lawrence Vankoughnet in 1880 that approximately 2,700 square miles of Temagami land was indeed unceded." Is this from p. 46? If so it's actually 2770 square miles, so 2,800 would be a more natural way to round it. I can't see anything there about the language of the letters, and only one meeting is clearly described. Is there more about this elsewhere in the source?
- FN 5 cites "His successful finds of gold instigated the Larder Lake gold rush of 1906, according to the Canadian Mining Journal." Can you quote the supporting text?
- FN 1 cites "Initially, Canadian Prime Minister John A. Macdonald deferred the matter to the Ontario Premier, but in 1883, the Department of Indian Affairs agreed to an annual payment to the nation." The supporting text in the source is "Though the deputy superintendent general of Indian affairs, Lawrence Vankoughnet, agreed in 1880 that the Temagami land, estimated at 2,770 square miles, “does not appear to have been surrendered,” the superintendent general (and prime minister), Sir John A. Macdonald, deferred action since only the province could set land aside. Nevertheless, in 1883 Indian Affairs agreed to pay an annual grant equivalent to that provided to other bands under the Robinson-Huron Treaty." This seems inaccurate to me -- there's no reason to say "Initially", since the source doesn't connect Macdonald's action with the action by Indian Affairs, and no mention of the Ontario Premier.
- FN 1 cites "In his leadership role, he raised the issue of his community's exclusion from the Robinson Treaties between European settlers and Ojibwa nations around Lake Huron." The source has "As second chief, Tonené had raised the matter of his people's non-participation in the treaty negotiated by William Benjamin Robinson in 1850 with Ojibwa communities on Lake Huron." This is too close; again this is the original sentence with some synonyms substituted.
- FN 1 cites "He was born in 1840 or 1841 near Lake Temagami in the Teme-Augama Anishnabai community of the Temagami First Nation in what British settlers knew as Upper Canada." The source has "b. 1840 or 1841 in the vicinity of Lake Temagami, Upper Canada, eldest son of Kabimigwune (François) and Marian; d. March 15, 1916 in the Lac Abitibi region, Que. Ignace Tonené was a member of the highly nomadic group of natives known in the 19th century, and through much of the 20th, as the Temagami band of Ojibwa, who now regard themselves as a non-Ojibwa “border people” called the Teme-Augama Anishnabai." The source deliberately avoids giving his people the name "Teme-Augama Anishnabai" at the time of his birth, and doesn't say anything about the community he was born into, only the people he was a member of.
Oppose. I'm sorry to do this, since I think a lot of care has gone into the article, but short articles with thin sourcing can be particularly difficult to work with because it's hard to piece the material together without re-using the original sentences. Here the problems with integrity seem to be the result of slight inaccuracies introduced by paraphrasing, with the unfortunate result that the close paraphrasing problems are not eliminated either. This sort of thing is not all that quick to fix, but it's a short article -- if you decide to rework the text while it's still here at FAC, I suggest getting another source reviewer to take a look. If another reviewer feels the problems are gone I will re-evaluate my oppose. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:59, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- FN6 if you click "other names" you get to here: https://geonames.nrcan.gc.ca/search-place-names/unique?id=0c5258d7849c20c33345630cad47791b and you see the earlier names lac Tournen and Tournene Lake (quote "previously official"). So it was officially renamed. Maybe I should add a citation, I thought because it was one click it might be OK. CT55555(talk) 22:04, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
FNs 1 & 4 cite "Tonené and two associates met federal Indian agent Charles Skene to explain their concerns about arriving lumberjacks. As their people's land had not been ceded to the Canadian government, the delegation sought an annuity and a reserve."
- It is from: In 1877 Tonené and two others met on Lake Nipissing with federal Indian agent Charles Skene, and explained that their community had never ceded its land but now wanted an annuity from the treaty and a reserve..
- I see your point, it is very similar. I tried to rewrite it in my own words, but my desire for accuracy got the better of me.
- I have rewritten that sentence to: Tonené was concerned about the impact of lumberjacks and their impact on the natural resources. He advocated to federal Indian agent Charles Skene for the provision of an annuity payment and the creation of reserve. CT55555(talk) 22:12, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- 2,700 now corrected to 2,800. Sorry bad mathematics. CT55555(talk) 22:15, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding the language of the letters. Source 1 says: sending letters written in his own language which is my source for "and letters written in Anishinaab" CT55555(talk) 22:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- The point about the meetings is from the earlier part of that sentence in the source "Tonené kept up the pressure for grants and a reserve, meeting several times with Skene and his successor..." CT55555(talk) 22:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- The source for the Canadian Mining Journal line is Coblat. "The Canadian Mining Journal credited Tonene with launching the 1906 Larder Lake gold rush..." p42 CT55555(talk) 22:19, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I felt that "initially" was a fair paraphrasing, the source seems to say that happened first. Quoting: "Sir John A. Macdonald*, deferred action since only the province could set land aside. Nevertheless, in 1883 Indian Affairs agreed to pay an annual grant equivalent to that provided to other bands under the Robinson-Huron Treaty." It seems unavoidably correct that Sir John's actions were initial. So I think my words are correct, but I feel like maybe I'm missing something here? CT55555(talk) 22:22, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I note the very fair observation about my close paraphrasing. I again strived for accuracy and got too close to the original words. I have now rewritten the sentence: "As second chief, Tonené had raised the matter of his people's non-participation in the treaty negotiated by William Benjamin Robinson in 1850 with Ojibwa communities on Lake Huron". CT55555(talk) 22:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- That is an astute observation, the subtly of which escaped me until now. I have now removed the Teme-Augama Anishnabai label in the early life section. CT55555(talk) 22:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
Otto Klemperer
This article is about a German conductor, famous for his interpretations of Beethoven and other German composers. He battled against continual setbacks, including a brain tumour, bipolar disorder and multiple burns, and was regarded in the 1950s to the 1970s as the most authoritative conductor of the German classical repertory. I had the luck, as a young man, half a century ago, to go to his last concerts, and I hope I have done him justice in the article as it now stands. Tim riley talk 21:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Wehwalt
- Much of the matter regarding dates of citizenship in the info box is not well-sourced in the article. His citizenship situation is a bit glossed-over in the article, especially in the 1930s.
- I can't be more specific, I'm afraid. The main source (the Heyworth two-volume biography) states that the Nazis deprived Jews of their German citizenship in 1935, and I cannot find any reference to the legal status of his citizenship of anywhere until 1940 when he became a US citizen. Tim riley talk 09:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- "The board of the Los Angeles orchestra terminated his contract, and his subsequent appearances were few, and seldom with prestigious ensembles.[21]" I take it that subsequent appearances refers to in Los Angeles? I might add a "there" or "with it" following "appearances" if so.
- It's not really made clear where he was living at and after the time of his termination by Los Angeles, and on what, leaving aside his daughter's factory earnings.
- You title The Marriage of Figaro both in English and Italian at different points.
- "he accepted the offer of Israeli citizenship". Is that a special offer made by the government or is it the standard offer of citizenship open to anyone that Israel recognises as a Jew and who cares to meet the requirements for Israeli citizenship? Had he not been a famous conductor, he might have run afoul of the Brother Daniel decision. Also, I note a number of AP stories from August 5, 1970 that mention this, and it states he plans to reside in Tel Aviv, for example here. Anything come of that?
- It was a personal offer made by the Israeli government. It caused some difficulty with the West German government. This is from Heyworth:
- Some weeks later the West German consulate in Zurich wrote to warn Klemperer that if, as the Jewish Chronicle in London had claimed, he himself had asked for Israeli citizenship, he had offended against German regulations and should forfeit his German passport. The storm eventually blew over after the Israeli government provided a document certifying that the passport had been issued under the Return Law, which for undivulged reasons obviated any expression of intention on Klemperer's part.
- There is no suggestion I can find that Klemperer contemplated living in Israel. Tim riley talk 09:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- That brief squib of an article also says he had Swiss citizenship. They get it wrong?
- Footnote 1. It's really more about pronunciation than spelling (which would be in Hebrew characters anyway). Both groups would spell it (in Hebrew) the same, they would just pronounce it differently. That's probably more than you want to know about this. Suggest the links be pipes to Ashkenazi Hebrew and Sephardi Hebrew and suggest you state "rendering" rather than "spelling".
- Could we have a little more on his personal life?
- When in the manic phases of his illness, Klemperer developed passionate, not to say obsessive, feelings for a number of women over the years. I could add a line to that effect, but to my mind it borders on tittle-tattle, though I am not implacably opposed to mentioning it. He remained devoted to his wife and family. Tim riley talk 09:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's it. Enjoyable read.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:05, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- File:C_1920_Otto_Klemperer.jpg: when and where was this first published?
- I don't know. Do we need a publication date for a picture from the Bain collection? I thought they were public domain. Tim riley talk 09:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- With the current tagging you would, but I think you want PD-Bain instead? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- File:Otto_Klemperer_by_Soshana.jpg is missing a tag for the original work. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:03, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- I can't provide one. Does that mean I should delete the photo? Tim riley talk 09:05, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- If you cannot, yes. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Deleted from the article. Does your advice, above, mean we should take steps to have the file removed from Commons? Tim riley talk 08:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's not a requirement from the perspective of this FAC since the image is no longer in the article. If you'd want to pursue it otherwise, go ahead. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:01, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
As ever, Nikkimaria, thank you for the review and helpful advice. Tim riley talk 08:46, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments and support from Gerda
Interested in the topic, I'll take a look, skipping lead and infobox for now. I have the feeling that music-related facts would interest me more than the details of citizenship, which possibly could be summarized as German, American and Israeli. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:24, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
All comments are just suggestions.
Early years
- "production of Orpheus in the Underworld at the New Theatre, Berlin" - I bet the performance was in German, and would prefer the German title Orpheus in der Unterwelt, and - anyway - to add "Offenbach's" - as we do have readers unfamiliar with such titles in whatever language.
- I think you are probably correct that it was given in German, but if I understand the MoS aright we should give operas etc the title by which they are best known in English usage. My personal preference would be to use the title of the original language - Orphée aux enfers, Le nozze di Figaro etc, but I think I must follow the WP formulas. Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- We are not slaves of the MoS ;) - I would always use the original title for a premiere, and most often use the title used for a performance, which will mentioned in reviews, for example. I would always add the last name of the composer, as we write for a broad audience, readers who'd rather know Offenbach than any of the titles. --GA
- I think you are probably correct that it was given in German, but if I understand the MoS aright we should give operas etc the title by which they are best known in English usage. My personal preference would be to use the title of the original language - Orphée aux enfers, Le nozze di Figaro etc, but I think I must follow the WP formulas. Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Germany
- "She was a Christian; he converted from Judaism. He remained a practising Roman Catholic until 1967, when he left the faith." - I suggest: "She was a Catholic; he converted from Judaism, and remained a practising church member until 1967." (thinking that faith is something personal that only he really knew)
- Joanna was a Protestant before marrying Klemperer. I cannot be certain whether she too converted to Roman Catholicism, though I think she probably did. Why, if so, I cannot comment on. Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- That is more complex than I thought, sorry. The German article has nothing about her religion. --GA
- Joanna was a Protestant before marrying Klemperer. I cannot be certain whether she too converted to Roman Catholicism, though I think she probably did. Why, if so, I cannot comment on. Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- why "modernistic" vs. modern?
- There is a great difference. Modern just means new (though quite possibly traditional in style), but modernistic, according to the OED, denotes "Any of various movements in art, architecture, literature, etc., generally characterized by a deliberate break with classical and traditional forms or methods of expression; the work or ideas of the adherents of such a movement". Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for explaining, and it seems different from German, where "modernistisch" has a negative connotation. --GA
- There is a great difference. Modern just means new (though quite possibly traditional in style), but modernistic, according to the OED, denotes "Any of various movements in art, architecture, literature, etc., generally characterized by a deliberate break with classical and traditional forms or methods of expression; the work or ideas of the adherents of such a movement". Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- "from The Marriage of Figaro, Don Giovanni, Fidelio and Lohengrin to Elektra and The Soldier's Tale" - I suggest to add the composers: from Mozarts Figaro and Don Giovanni, Beethoven's Fidelio and Wagner's Lohengrin to Elektra by Richard Strauss and Stravinsky's Die Geschichte vom Soldaten. I wonder if there could be a hint at the fact that the last two works were really young then.
- I don't think readers of an article about a conductor will need to be told who composed Figaro, and the blue link will provide the information for any who need it. It is to distinguish between the established classics and the modernistic works that I have put the Strauss and Stravinsky works after the "to", but I am reluctant to impose an editorial comment about their modernity. Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- As said before, I would write for readers who may not know Figaro and Fidelio at all but may have heard of Mozart and Beethoven, giving them a clue about the period, especially when none of the works matters (no review, no director, no singers), but the broadness of repertoire.
- I don't think readers of an article about a conductor will need to be told who composed Figaro, and the blue link will provide the information for any who need it. It is to distinguish between the established classics and the modernistic works that I have put the Strauss and Stravinsky works after the "to", but I am reluctant to impose an editorial comment about their modernity. Tim riley talk 16:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
I got to the Holländer at the Kroll Opera, no comments but I made some suggested changes that you can easily revert if not convinced. - Real life calling. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:08, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Berlin
- In the long list of works at the Kroll Opera, I'd not link the composers, to avoid a sea of blue: whoever doesn't know Hindemith can be sure to find him when looking at Cardillac. The composer of Erwartung was Schönberg, - he used Schoenberg only later. (I happened to see Das Leben des Orest last year, but missed then that Klemperer conducted the premiere, - nice to know.)
- Our WP article on Schoenberg uses that spelling throughout. Many, perhaps most, readers of this article will not know that he dropped the umlaut when he settled in America; it would be unreasonably confusing to spell his name two different ways here, and "oe" for "ö" in German names is not incorrect in English usage: as early as 1885 the Court Circular in The Times referred to "The Count Erbach of Erbach-Schoenberg", and the composer was printed as "Arnold Schoenberg" from 1912 onwards. It was not that umlauts were unavailable for compositors and editors: Marie Löhr was given hers from 1902. As to removing the links from what I agree is a sea of blue, if I take them out you may be perfectly certain that someone else will put them back again. Tim riley talk 09:06, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- I understand the umlaut concern, and while I observe that some editors are picky on such things as the historic precision of diacritics, I'm not one of them. - If "someone else will put them back again" I'm perfectly willing to restore the version without. --GA
- Our WP article on Schoenberg uses that spelling throughout. Many, perhaps most, readers of this article will not know that he dropped the umlaut when he settled in America; it would be unreasonably confusing to spell his name two different ways here, and "oe" for "ö" in German names is not incorrect in English usage: as early as 1885 the Court Circular in The Times referred to "The Count Erbach of Erbach-Schoenberg", and the composer was printed as "Arnold Schoenberg" from 1912 onwards. It was not that umlauts were unavailable for compositors and editors: Marie Löhr was given hers from 1902. As to removing the links from what I agree is a sea of blue, if I take them out you may be perfectly certain that someone else will put them back again. Tim riley talk 09:06, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Is the image of the Kroll Opera really the best image of places where he worked? Wiesbaden File:Staatstheater Wiesbaden Zuschauersaa012.JPG - It's sad that all interior images of the Kroll we have are Nazi pics.
- Bruckner's Eighth - again I wouldn't link the composer.
- "where with such conductors as Bruno Walter, Wilhelm Furtwängler and Leo Blech already established, there was little important work for him" - I stumbled over "where with such" and would probably get the fact first and the reason afterwards, but that may be just me.
Los Angeles
- both Stravinsky and Schoenberg were linked before (in the present version), intentionally?
- Strangely the "highlight duplicate links" tool missed the duplicate link to Stravinsky (perhaps because it is in a quote rather than in the main text). The second link to Schoenberg is in a caption, and is par for the course. 09:06, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- I looked at the image caption first and got the impression that Klemperer did not programme Schoenberg (not at all), and then was corrected by Gurrelieder, a giant work. I suggest to trim the caption to simply teaching, not grumbling ;)
- Done.
- I wonder if the musicologist's "penetratingly" comment might be better in the composition section.
- "but realised that 'after this affair of the Mahler symphony I wouldn't be engaged again'" - I'm no friend of quotes that switch within a sentence from third person to first person, and would write "but realised that 'after this affair of the Mahler symphony' he wouldn't be engaged again".
- "little-known John Barbirolli" - then little-known perhaps
1938 to 1945
- "but left him lame and partly paralysed on his right side" - in German we have only one word for lame and paralysed, what's the difference?
- "As her father struggled to support the family from his modest fees, Lotte worked in a factory to bring in some money" - I struggled to remember what "her" meant, - would it be bad English to say that his daughter Lotte worked ... as her father ...?
Post-war
- Was the image of the Hungarian Opera chosen to express the darkness there? File:Hungarian State Opera.jpg?
- Aladár Tóth - that one?
- Mozart operas: Mozart was linked before, but List of Mozart operas might be a better link
- I cannot find an earlier link to Mozart in the main text. Tim riley talk 09:06, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Please excuse my bad memory, I had forgotten that it was in the lead. I still believe that those "readers of a conductor's article" who know that Figaro is by Mozart won't need a link to him, at all ;) --GA
- I cannot find an earlier link to Mozart in the main text. Tim riley talk 09:06, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the substantial review in London. Do we know what was played, besides "Beethoven"?
London
- Do we need two descriptions of the Philharmonia when we have an article? Rolls-Royce is funny but what does it tell us about Klemperer?
- Rolls-Royce is not intended to be funny. It is a standard – perhaps clichéd – image for anything of the very highest excellence. The OED says it denotes "Any product considered to be the highest quality or best example of its type or field". The superb playing of the Philharmonia was key to making Klemperer's (and in the early 50s Karajan's) recordings sell so well. Klemperer's recordings with less prestigious orchestras such as the Vienna Symphony were well-reviewed but did not sell anything like as well.
- If the hint at high class connected to selling well is intended, fine. I missed it, though, but possibly just me again. --GA
- Rolls-Royce is not intended to be funny. It is a standard – perhaps clichéd – image for anything of the very highest excellence. The OED says it denotes "Any product considered to be the highest quality or best example of its type or field". The superb playing of the Philharmonia was key to making Klemperer's (and in the early 50s Karajan's) recordings sell so well. Klemperer's recordings with less prestigious orchestras such as the Vienna Symphony were well-reviewed but did not sell anything like as well.
- I am surprised that Mahler's Second has just a number, while Beethoven's Ninth is named Choral Symphony (and I first confused it with his Choral Fantasy.
Later years
- Could the younger sister perhaps be introduced in the beginning, when it was open how many sisters he had, just an older one for sure?
I read until his death, and don't know when I'll get to the rest, having to travel for a sad reason. Thank you already for an enlightening article. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:30, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Returned from a funeral: thank you for your replies and changes. All understood even when I made no extra note. I'll probably continue reading tomorrow, as a RD (recent death) article is waiting, and I have rehearsal tonight. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:47, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Composition
- I assume that his early "songs" where of the lied genre.
- Critical comments of his compositions are the best in the article, better than those of conducting and recording!
Recordings
I looked at the Main article, and think it would profit a lot of links to the pieces: better a link to a particular symphony than key and Op. number, - this is not relevant to the FAC, but by the time he'll appear as TFA it should change. Some recordings are listed in greater detail in opera discographies, and perhaps a link could go there for details such as soloists in roles. Touching that Schwarzkopf was First Lady, but a reader who never heard her name will not be impressed.
- I have much work to do on the discography article, and will attend to it as soon as I can. Tim riley talk 18:42, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Now back to the conductor article:
- General: I wonder if Bruckner's Eighth should be linked, for example, - yes it was linked further up, but I can see readers jump to recordings without reading it all sequentially. (I would perhaps not say so if it was at least linked in the discography.)
- I shouldn't for my own part object to a second link, despite WP:OVERLINK, and if you want to add one, I'd suggest you go ahead. Tim riley talk 18:42, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- done ---GA
- I shouldn't for my own part object to a second link, despite WP:OVERLINK, and if you want to add one, I'd suggest you go ahead. Tim riley talk 18:42, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- General: lists of soloists name remain pretty meaningless name-calling if not assigned roles, or at least a piece.
- For personal sentimentality: Can we perhaps include Kathleen Ferrier's Mahler?
- An excellent idea. By all means add it, I'd say. Tim riley talk 18:42, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'll think about it, but today have a busy day (expanded Tilge, Höchster, meine Sünden, BWV 1083, wanting to do the translation to German, and want to expand Mary Bauermeister further, with a nod to Jerome Kohl who started it). ---GA
- I tried, please check. I trust that it's covered by the ref. I found this review interesting, and this collection personal and interesting. - I wonder if File:Kirchner - Der Komponist Otto Klemperer.jpg might be worthy of inclusion. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Tweaked and cited: the discography in the Heyworth biography covers it. Tim riley talk 15:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- (not that it belongs here but in the context of indenting, and not worth an extra thread: I try to follow Wikipedia:Colons and asterisks, for the sake of users needing a screenreader, in a nutshell: when replying to an asterisk, keep the asterisk.) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:55, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Tweaked and cited: the discography in the Heyworth biography covers it. Tim riley talk 15:09, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- An excellent idea. By all means add it, I'd say. Tim riley talk 18:42, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Honours
- link Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany?
- I updated the chair to 2023, - perhaps "currently" could be avoided, by saying since when he held it?
Reputation
- I had to search backwards for who Mann was, but others may have a better memory.
- Missa solemnis before, Missa solemnis here, - I think the former is better.
- I love the conclusion with Beethoven praise!
Lead
- "was a 20th-century conductor" - born 1985, do we really need "20th-century"?
- "A protégé of the composer Gustav Mahler" - for his conducting career, the conductor Mahler was likely more important; we could have both functions, or none as he seems rather well-known now.
- brain tumor: I wonder if this particular medical problem might be shortened, and rather other such setbacks be added to a summary of how ill health hit him but he resurfaced again and again.
- Last sentence: I think Mozart has undue weight by length and final position, and would prefer a wording that ends on Beethoven, as the article does.
Infobox
- After having read the article, I believe the citizenship is of minor importance. Perhaps Israeli could be dropped at all, as more honorary, without residency there. The others could go without the years.
- What I miss is a list of organisations he worked for, the major opera houses and orchestras - for much more music ;)
- Sorry you think that. I thought I'd covered the major ones of his long career. Tim riley talk
- I'll perhaps get back to that topic when I'm less busy, see above. ---Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:10, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- still busy (with his wife, among other topics) but trying to clarify: for a reader who knows nothing when arriving at the article, the exact details of citizenship seem less important than "making some music" in paragraph organizations, such as key assignments of his career, with the number of them listed depending on the wanted degree of detail, my suggestion: (Prussian State Theatre Wiesbaden ·) Kroll Opera · Los Angeles Philharmonic (· Hungarian State Opera ·) Philharmonia Orchestra. This would also add the precision of Los Angeles vs. just US. I expect that some readers would immediately connect a location with the Kroll Opera and the Philharmonia, and could see these key places in the ibox sooner than in the lead, and get interested to find out more detail about someone at an avantgarde theatre and a high-class orchestra, - more interested I think than just reading someone worked in three countries. Please compare his wife's article, where I tried to pick her most relevant stations of work among the many. Yesterday I began reading the Heyworth bio, - great reading! I wonder if the order of conversion and marriage should be changed, as in the bio. First he converted, then came more closeness to her (her visit in Maria Laach) and the wedding, after for about two years they had been more or less been people working together. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:18, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- ALtered sentence about conversion/marriage. The info about appointments is adequately summarised in the lead, in my view. Tim riley talk 08:57, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the change. I agree that the stations of his career are summarised in the lead, although they miss where he liked it best ;) - Only: they don't show in the infobox, where I think a number of our reader will look first. Even if no stations there, I'd remove the years from the citizenships, as undue detail, but you decide. - I fixed indenting again. Did you read the essay? Nutshell: when replying to a thread, keep what was there before and add one, for accessibility. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:17, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry you think that. I thought I'd covered the major ones of his long career. Tim riley talk
Regardless of what you think of these suggestions, I support the article for our highest quality. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Having read more about his wife, I have a few more questions:
- "She retired from singing in the mid-1930s." I can't access Heyworth vol 2, but Großes Sängerlexikon notes a vocal crisis (after 1928), and several agree that her singing career was over when they left Germany in 1933 the latest. - If your sources have records of her appearing after 1928, I'd be grateful if you could add them to her article.
- I believe that mentioning the world premieres of Die tote Stadt and Der Zwerg would actually be more related to his career than whichever years his wife stopped singing on stage, and Marietta, a role she created, would tell those who know the opera in one word what she was able to do.
- If you know which other operas Klemperer conducted in Cologne, it might give a clue for the role pictured, possibly in 1922. It doesn't look (to me) like any of the ones already mentioned, unless perhaps Despina. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Berlin (next header) is also a German opera house, - I suggest to name the houses in the header, instead of "German opera houses". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Commments by Dudley
- I find your comments on Klemperer's Judaism confusing. In the lead you do not mention it, although it seems relevant to his decision to leave Germany on the rise of Nazism. You mention in a note the Sephardi version of his name and in the main text that the family name was changed in response to a decree aimed at Jewish assimilation, but you do not say that they were Jewish. The note and the statement that Ida was Sephardi imply that the father was Ashkenazi, but he had the Sephardi form of the name. If they were both Sephardi why did they give their son the Ashkenazi form of the name? Maybe I have muddled it up but it seems unclear.
- "She was a Christian; he converted from Judaism.[20] He remained a practising Roman Catholic until 1967, when he left the faith." I read this at first that he converted her to Christianity until I looked more closely and noticed the semi-colon. Also I would spell out that he did not just leave the faith but returned to Judaism.
- "He was sounded out by an American visitor influential in music in the US" Is the visitor's name not known?
- "Then for a year he and his family were, as he put it, virtually prisoners in the US because of new legislation.[60] He had taken American citizenship in 1940 and held an American passport since then; under the new law the authorities refused to renew his and his family's passports." I am not sure whether this is misleading. According to [5] he was refused a passport because of his left-wing views. According to Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 it prevented him travelling without a passport (rather than allowing the authorities to refuse to renew it).
- The source is unequivocal: "The Americans refused to renew our passports on account of the McCarren/Walter bill, and for a year I was virtually a prisoner". As to his political views, I suppose working even as a musician in communist Hungary might have made him anathema to the more rabid McCarthyites, but the responsible official in Washington recorded that Klemperer was "clear from a security standpoint". He had political views, but Heyworth describes them as of minor importance compared to his artistic principles: for instance he conducted the memorial concert in Amsterdam for the conductor Willem Mengelberg – whom he revered as a major champion of Mahler's music – despite the fact that Mengelberg was disgraced and exiled for his collaboration with the Nazis: "Once more, Klemperer's artistic allegiances had taken precedence over political issues", says Heyworth. Tim riley talk
- Hmm. I am not convinced. "on account of the McCarren/Walter bill" is different from "under the new law", the wording in the Wiki article. "on account of" could mean that as the law forbade people travelling abroad without passports, it gave the McCarthyites the chance to stop people they disliked from travelling, not that it gave them a new power to withdraw passports, which is what the Wiki article says. "under the law" does not make sense if he was clear from a security standpoint. Ha. I am winning the battle to be the most pedantic!!! Dudley Miles (talk) 13:58, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- This is another first-rate article, although it does seem to me not a fully rounded picture. It has nothing on his political views even though they were significant enough to get him in trouble with the American authorities and it gives the birth and death dates of his siblings but not his children. His wife's death is only mentioned in the infobox. Dudley Miles (talk) 11:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think I may be sailing close to the wind by including the dates of the siblings: I believe we are discouraged from adding people's dates to the text, though I should be delighted to learn that I am under a misapprehension. I've added a line about his wife's death. Thank you for your comments, Dudley: I think the text is the better for them. Tim riley talk 12:49, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support. As I wrote above a first rate article, although as I also wrote above I do think a few extra details would give a fuller picture of his character. I would put the horsewhip and Schumann affair in the main text. I would also add a sentence about his politics and that they were of minor importance, citing Mengelberg memorial. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:42, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
SC
Putting down a marker: will be along shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 17:30, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- I've made a few minor tweaks that should be uncontroversial, but feel free to revert if you disagree with them.
Support. I had my say at PR, and the article has been strengthened since then. - SchroCat (talk) 20:13, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Ian
Recusing coord duties to show up after the hard work is done, but I did read through the whole thing for the first time since I looked it over at PR, and have nothing to complain about. I'll just reserve final judgement until after a source review is in (will add a request for that at WT:FAC)... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Such quick service with the SR from SN -- support. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:59, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review
[In progress] SN54129 13:55, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
This version reviewed.
- I wonder what year your OED reference is from?
- A couple of chapters (Keene, Keller) need pp ranges for chapters.
- Reid, unless a repr., is too early to have an ISBN; WorldCat will provide an OCLC.
- I hadn't spotted that the Reid biography (a school prize circa 1968 in the case of my copy) was reprinted in the 1970s. (And I'm glad it was, because a later biography of Sargent by one Richard Aldous was ... well, well, perhaps I'd better leave the sentence unfinished.) You're right that an oclc is wanted here. Done. Tim riley talk 15:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Not Sackville before Schwarzkopf?
- Nitpicking to buggery, but your ISBNs are formatted in several ways.
- Are they? I can't see anything wrong. Am looking straight through something obvious? I think I copied and pasted most of the ISBNs from WorldCat. Can you give me an example of what you boggle at? Tim riley talk 15:33, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Brain catching up with fingers: not WorldCat, which doesn't believe in hyphens, but from this ISBN machine. Tim riley talk 15:36, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Overall
- Apart from the formatting nitpicks, the sources themselves are of the highest quality, as one would expect from subject experts and reputable publishers alike, which comprise the sources used.
- A search of the relevant databases reveals no significant works that one would expect to find in a comprehensive biography of the topic (even Chichton's obit. spans less than 2 pages, for example), as much of that which is unused are reviews of his pieces rather than of the man himself. Conversely, nothing has been used that would appear overly tangential. You might, perhaps, find something relevant in the selection of newspaper cuttings you link to in 'External links#; the odd primary source is acceptable, of course.A good read—thanks. SN54129 14:31, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- SN 54129, thank you for the review. I've gone through the text once more and I think I've answered your points. See what you think. Tim riley talk 15:55, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- My dear fellow, all is well. Interesting about Sackville—it never occurred to me that the W would take precedence! All else is minutiae, so obvs, passing source review. Over to Ian, then to reign terror and destruction! Again, nice article! SN54129 16:42, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Jim
This has been picked over by those far more expert than I, so the following comments are more to show I've read it than reflecting any real concerns Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lotte Lehmann and Elisabeth Schumann— perhaps precede with "sopranos"?
- Sanatorium—maybe a link for this increasing obscure word?
- He settled in Zürich, and obtained German citizenship and right of residency in Switzerland—what's the relevance of German citizenship to being able to live in Switzerland?
- And that's all, great work Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:22, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Hajj: Journey to the Heart of Islam
- Nominator(s): MartinPoulter (talk) 17:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
I do a lot of work trying to urge cultural institutions (GLAMs) to share content with Wikimedia. One promising approach is to find a public exhibition that has been thoroughly documented and has attracted a lot of third-party coverage, then to summarise its content and reception with a Wikipedia article and Commons category. I'm lucky enough to be a Wikimedian In Residence, so I've written this on paid time (as I declare on my user page), and my host institution has freely shared images of objects that were exhibited. I think this is some of my best wiki work and hope the attention given this article will persuade more museums to share images. MartinPoulter (talk) 17:53, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
SC
Putting down a marker: will be along shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 21:35, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- Lead
- Link the Kaaba?
- done
- "by the then Prince Charles": just "by Prince Charles"
- done
- Preparation and launch
- The two red-linked people: are they notable enough for their own articles (I ask from a position of complete ignorance of either of them). If you think they are notable, then that's fine. (Ditto for Ayman Yossri further down the page.)
- I've un-red-linked Qaisra Khan. I'm more confident that Venetia Porter deserves her own article. Ayman Yossri seems as notable as the other artists in that list of contemporary artists. This isn't based on a thorough search for sources so I'm persuadable either way about the notability of these people.
- "40 collections from 14 countries contributed more than two hundred objects": per MOS:NUMNOTES, this should either be "40 collections ... 14 countries ... 200 objects" or "forty collections ... fourteen countries ... two hundred objects"
- done: using numerals consistently in both parts of the article that mention these numbers
- The then Prince Charles gave": just "Prince Charles gave"
- done
- "on 26 January.": as it's in a section where the only other year was 2010, you should probably add a year here.
- done
- Related exhibitions
- If we have "Hajj: Journey to the Heart of Islam" and" Hajj: The Journey through Art", why does "Longing for Mecca: The pilgrim's journey" also not have a capitalised sub-title?
- done: It was that way in source, but I've now capitalised the sub-title for consistency.
- Refs
- A lot of the refs have "language=en" or similar. We shouldn't include the language field if it is in English, only other language.
- done
- FN 50: (february 2019 – january 2020) should be capitalised, regardless of the original
- done
- You should check the capitalisation on the references and sources and make them consistent
- Here I welcome more specific advice. The Berns paper is titled "Hajj journey to the heart of islam"; the Berns thesis chapter is titled "Hajj: Journey to the Heart of Islam". The Porter book is titled "Hajj: journey to the heart of Islam". Are you giving me the go-ahead to capitalise these the same way? Are there other inconsistencies I'm missing? Spacing before colons wasn't consistent and that's now been fixed.
- (Note to co-ords: this is not a source review, just a few things that caught my eye)
That's it from me. I saw the exhibition when it was on, so it was good to read this and catch up on some of the background. – SchroCat (talk) 13:32, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks SchroCat for these corrections. I didn't attend the exhibition myself, so it's good to have the input of someone who did. MartinPoulter (talk) 15:25, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. Good article that reads rather well. Based on prose only. (It's a shame you missed it - it was a truly superb exhibition!) - SchroCat (talk) 15:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques". Shouldn't that be a lower-case initial c per MOS:JOBTITLES. Similarly in the main article.
- done
- "the Museum of Islamic Art in Doha, Arab World Institute in Paris, National Museum of Ethnology in Leiden, and Tropenmuseum in Amsterdam". Why are the last three missing definite articles?
- done: articles added
- If Venetia Porter is red linked at first mention in the article, she should also be in the lead.
- done
- Several References seem to be missing (available) publisher locations.
- done for all books
- All foreign language words and phrases should be in lang templates.
- done, except I'm having trouble with the phrase "ihram clothing": the whole phase is wiki-linked but just the first word is of Arabic derivation. This markup ihram clothing doesn't seem to work in the article and yet it works here. I'm stumped- advice welcome.
- P.S. Oxford English Dictionary, Collins Dictionary, and Merriam-Webster say "ihram" is an English word in its own right (a loanword, like "hajj") so I think it's okay to leave without the language tag. MartinPoulter (talk) 16:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- done, except I'm having trouble with the phrase "ihram clothing": the whole phase is wiki-linked but just the first word is of Arabic derivation. This markup ihram clothing doesn't seem to work in the article and yet it works here. I'm stumped- advice welcome.
- "trek across desert or ocean". I am not sure that "trek across ... ocean" works.
- done: now "journey"
- "which help devotees turn towards the city for prayer". Perhaps unpack a little further why this happens?
- done: added an extra bit of text to that sentence with a new supporting ref.
- "The king of Bone's diary". Should that not be an upper-case K?
- done
- "show that a hajj has been completed". 'showing'?
- done
- "to show how the Masjid al-Haram has been modernised". A brief note of what the "Masjid al-Haram" is?
- done
- "red herring". See MOS:IDIOM.
- done: replaced
- "an exhibition catalogue that also includes". "that" → 'which'.
- done
- "The Khalili Collection of Hajj and the Arts of Pilgrimage". Should that be in italics?
- In the context in which it's used, it refers to the collection, not to a publication about the collection, so I think it's correct as it is?
- Why is Hajj: Journey to the Heart of Islam presented in italics, but the titles of other exhibitions in inverted commas? Why are some presented in title case and others in sentence case?
Gog the Mild (talk) 19:59, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Gog the Mild for finding the relevant guidance on this: all exhibition titles, including the article title, are now presented without quotes or italics. Capitalisation follows the way exhibition titles are capitalised in the source. MartinPoulter (talk) 16:17, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- MartinPoulter Nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:42, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: I appreciate the nudge- the initial notification of your post got swamped in my watchlist! Hugely grateful for the suggestions: I've fixed a number of these just now and I'll have time to address the rest (and report here) early next week. MartinPoulter (talk) 12:46, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- One question for now: there's a case inconsistency in capitalisation of exhibition titles (your last point) between Hajj: The Journey through Art and Longing for Mecca: The pilgrim’s journey because that's how they are capitalised in this source. I'm not sure whether consistency with the source or consistency within the article is more important. What do you recommend? MartinPoulter (talk) 14:16, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, the MoS trumps everything, so I shall investigate and report back. Note the comment above in green which does not seem to have been addressed. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:35, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- At Wikipedia, every day is a school day. See MOS:NEITHER: "There are cases in which titles should not be in italics nor in quotation marks ... Exhibitions, concerts, and other events: the world's fairs, Expo 2010, Cannes Film Festival, Burning Man, Lollapalooza". So I am afraid it would seem that they all need taking out of italics, including the article title! (But please don't change the article title until this nomination is closed and the bot has done its thing.) Gog the Mild (talk) 21:51, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Well, the MoS trumps everything, so I shall investigate and report back. Note the comment above in green which does not seem to have been addressed. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:35, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
1986 Tour de France
- Nominator(s): Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
This article is about the 1986 edition of the Tour de France, the most prestigious cycling race in the world. It featured a fierce battle between teammates Bernard Hinault and Greg LeMond, who would become the first American winner of the race. After my nomination of 1998 Tour de France failed to pick up any responses, I am hoping for more engagement here. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Procedural note -- although the nominator had another FAC archived just now, it had no comments so the coords are waiving the usual two-week break between such noms... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Ian Rose: Thank you! Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "Greg LeMond of La Vie Claire won the race" - maybe "Greg LeMond of the La Vie Claire team won the race" so it doesn't read like La Vie Claire is the town he comes from?
- "It was the first ever victory for a rider outside of Europe." - eh? He won in Europe. Or do you mean "It was the first ever victory for a rider born outside of Europe."....?
- "Several attacks during the race" - they attacked each other?
- "Stage 12 saw Hinault attack with Pedro Delgado" - more attacking? Really not sure what this means
- "Hinault [...] was caught and dropped" - what was he dropped off? There's some really confusing wording being used here
- "One of cycling's Grand Tours, the Tour consisted of 23 stages, beginning with a prologue in Boulogne-Billancourt and concluded on the Champs-Élysées in Paris" => "One of cycling's Grand Tours, the Tour consisted of 23 stages, beginning with a prologue in Boulogne-Billancourt and concluding on the Champs-Élysées in Paris"
- That's what I got on the lead. Back for more later! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
More comments
- "In the Spring" - MOS:SEASONS recommends not using seasons
- "having Hinault, who he expected to take an early lead" => "having Hinault, whom he expected to take an early lead"
- "The race route for the 1986 edition of the Tour de France was unveiled on 8 October 1985 by both Jacques Goddet and Félix Lévitan." - add a few words to explain who these guys are/were
- Prologue seems to be linked in an image caption but not in the prose
- "which he reached in time but the yellow jersey was lost" - first mention of the jersey, could do with a link and a brief explanation of what it is
- "from his teammate Marie, who he now led by six seconds" => "from his teammate Marie, whom he now led by six seconds"
- "Mathieu Hermans, (Seat–Orbea) and" - comma's in the wrong place
- "Pedro Delgado (pictured in 2016) won stage 12, but later dropped out after his mother passed away." => "Pedro Delgado (pictured in 2016) won stage 12, but later dropped out after his mother died."
- "Sensing that the French public, clearly favouring Hinault, made LeMond nervous, the former led all the way up the climb" - this doesn't make sense grammatically. I think what you mean is "Sensing that the French public clearly favoured Hinault made LeMond nervous; the former led all the way up the climb"
- Think that's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Zwerg Nase, nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:56, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Older nominations
Crash Bandicoot (video game)
- Nominator(s): Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
This article is about a 1996 video game that kicked off an ongoing franchise and put its developer Naughty Dog on the map. The page had previously gone through a peer review and FA nomination a little over a year ago, but didn't make the cut due to a lack of input. I frankly blame my own poor timing for that on account of the nomination being made just before the holiday season, which would naturally have diverted everyone's attention. Now, having waited for a more opportune time of year, here's hoping for better luck this go-round. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
First-time nomination
- Hi Cat's Tuxedo, and welcome back to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Image review by ProtoDrake
I've checked over the image licensing, and everything seems to be in order. I am a little sceptical about using a video for gameplay given some recent discussions in the VG WikiProject space on the subject, so that might come up and you might need to find a screenshot. Nevertheless, I think this is a nominal Pass. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- @ProtoDrake: Thanks. Whatever the outcome of that discussion may be (if there is one), I got a backup image on hand just in case. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 04:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Coordinator comment - I'm sorry, but at about three weeks in without any general supports, this candidacy will have to be closed if there isn't a significant movement towards a consensus to promote over the next few days. Hog Farm Talk 02:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
The Next Day
This article is about... David Bowie's 25th and penultimate studio album The Next Day. After its unsuccessful first nomination, I opened a pretty [PR] and extensive prose copyedits to where I now believe its finally ready for the star. Hopefully second time's the charm. Re-pinging previous FAC and PR contributors Ceoil SchroCat Ian Rose ChrisTheDude Aoba47 David Fuchs – zmbro (talk) (cont) 23:22, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Ceoil
Have been following closely - much improved and happy to see it back. My demands to follow in a few days grumble, grumble. Ceoil (talk) 22:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Lead
- Would go with Brit Eng and so should be "by the English musician David Bowie"
- ...was recorded in New York City
at the Magic Shop and Human Worldwide Studios- too much detail for the lead - old and new is hackneyed phrasing, and would use the term session musicians here...some of whom he had worked with in the past
- I changed received critical acclaim and was regarded - to "well received by critics as Bowie's best work in decades".
- More later Ceoil (talk) 23:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
Leaning support, with more quibbles
- "McNulty applied studio processing on the mixing board so it would "sound like a record on playback"" - not sure what this means. Link mixing board.
- " themes of tyranny and violence" - They were heavily indicating fascism. Suggest "Evoking" rathet that "themes", which is a very vague jurnalistic term way too rampant on wiki). Ceoil (talk) 02:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Overall it reads very well, the extraneous stuff has been cut. I was happy with quality of sources at last FAC, it's a very interesting, gripping article, Support. Nice work. Ceoil (talk) 12:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ceoil Thank you Ceoil. I'm happy we had a more positive and less troublesome collaboration after This Year's Model. Looking forward to more stuff in the future, and if you ever need help with any of your articles I'd be more than happy to assist :-) – zmbro (talk) (cont) 17:26, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
SC
Will be along shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 17:24, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Support. It's much stronger than on its first visit to FAC and reads nicely now. Great to see the number of quotes reduced from first time round - and it reads much more smoothly because of it. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 21:27, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Aoba47
I supported during the first FAC and I support the FAC again for promotion this time. I read through the article a few more times since it was posted, and I could not find anything further to comment on here. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 01:52, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review
- Source 6 says it was published on 12 Jan 2013 09.00 GMT, not 11 Jan.
- Source 8, 9, 11, 64, 65 need to be marked as dead as the main links aren't working.
- Italicize titles of albums/works per MOS:CONFORMTITLE (e.g. The Next Day in ref. 9 title).
- The Independent should be linked in ref. 28, not ref. 34.
- Rock's Backpages can be linked in ref. 36.
- NY Times should be linked in ref. 68, not 96
- Watch out for WP:QWQ in ref. 81 title.
- Ref. 88 should have Grammy Awards as publisher, not grammy.com in website.
- I would say "David Bowie The Next Day Review" is the actual title of ref. 98. What you have is more of a subtitle.
- PopMatters can be linked in ref. 114 (and in the body).
- Spot-checks: 6 (it says Bowie avoided PR campaign but there's no mention that Sony is Columbia Records' PR firm), 9 (it doesn't say had worked with Bowie on records from Let's Dance (1983) to Heathen.), 21 in part, 97b, 116, 120. FrB.TG (talk) 17:13, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
North East MRT line
This article is about Singapore's 3rd MRT line first opened nearly 20 years ago. It is the first fully automated underground MRT line in Singapore, and I hope to have this passed before 20 June, which is the line's 20th anniversary. ZKang123 (talk) 07:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Epicgenius
Lead:
- "Operated by SBS Transit, the 20-kilometre (12 mi) line is the MRT's shortest." - The fact that the NEL is the shortest in the MRT system doesn't seem to be mentioned, or cited, directly in the article.
- "Chinatown, Little India, Serangoon and Hougang" - Can these be linked?
- "Coloured purple on official maps, it is the country's first fully-automated underground rail line. ... Singapore's third MRT line" - This info should be in one sentence, rather than split across two paragraphs. For instance, "Coloured purple on official maps, it is Singapore's third MRT line and the country's first fully-automated underground rail line."
- "the NEL was planned during the 1980s and 1990s to alleviate traffic congestion on roads leading to the northeast suburbs. Its alignment and stations were finalised in 1996." - Can you add more detail about the delays to the lead? This should only be one sentence, but a concise explanation about why the project was delayed would be great.
- "except for two stations; Buangkok station opened on 15 January 2006, and Woodleigh station began operations on 20 June 2011." - I would clarify that these stations were built along with the rest of the line but didn't open in 2003 (as opposed to being in-fill stations that were built after the line had already opened). E.g. "Two stations did not open with the rest of the line; Buangkok station opened on 15 January 2006, and Woodleigh station began operations on 20 June 2011.
- The third paragraph appears to be summarising the "Culture", "Infrastructure", and "Station facilities" sections, but it is quite short. In particular, I suggest adding details about the facilities (i.e. elevators/lifts, safety, accessibility, Civil Defence) which do not appear to be summarised at all. By contrast, that paragraph describes the rolling stock and signalling system in some detail.
More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 16:15, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Addressed most of above points. Although unsure how I would cite it is the shortest, given the other lines' distances are longer... ZKang123 (talk) 02:29, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- My apologies, I forgot about this, as I was busy in real life. I'll leave some more comments tomorrow. For line lengths, I would either leave out this information altogether or find a secondary source. If you really can't find a source but still want to include it, I would add an explanatory footnote which gives the length of every MRT line. – Epicgenius (talk) 03:57, 5 March 2023 (UTC)
- Epicgenius, any more to come? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:08, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yep. I will look into this more within the next day or so. – Epicgenius (talk) 21:00, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- History:
- "roads would be inadequate to serve planned 21st-century housing estates" - Do you mean that roads alone could not serve the projected traffic counts?
- "To minimise the impact on other development, plans for the line were developed early to determine which parcels of land would be needed for its construction" - Who developed these plans? I would personally rephrase this as "To minimise the impact on other development, [the planner] developed plans for the line early on to determine which parcels of land would be needed for its construction".
- "portion after Braddell Road" - North or south of Braddell Road?
- "In February 1991, it was proposed to extend the line to Pulau Tekong via Pulau Ubin, to serve future residential and industrial developments in the long-term plans for the islands." - I'd change "the islands" to "these islands", as many readers may not immediately realize that Pulau Tekong and Pulau Ubin are islands, even if it's implied.
- "the Woodlands extension took precedence with firm plans for development there, unlike in the northeast" - I also think it's redundant to say "the Woodlands extension took precedence" twice in two sentences. Instead, I suggest "there were firm plans for development around the Woodlands extension, unlike in the northeast"
- "On 20 May 1999, SBS Transit (then Singapore Bus Service) was appointed to operate the line with the Sengkang and Punggol LRT systems." - Just to clarify, do you mean that SBS Transit was appointed to operate the line and operate both LRT systems?
- "In 1998, the timeline for Punggol station was moved up because of planning housing developments" - Should this be "planned housing developments"?
- "Two delays occurred that day: a train, stalled between Boon Keng and Potong Pasir, had to be manually steered to Farrer Park; and another train was removed from service when it failed to leave Dhoby Ghaut station because its sensors mistakenly indicated that a set of doors remained open" - I think the details of these delays might be excessive, unless these delays negatively operated the line's operation for a long time (e.g. a few days or longer). In fact, I think the info in this sentence is encapsulated by the beginning of the following paragraph: "Although the NEL has experienced a few glitches since its opening..."
- "On 17 June 2003, SBS Transit announced that two stations (Woodleigh and Buangkok)" - You've already mentioned the names of the two stations in the previous section. I would just say "On 17 June 2003, SBS Transit announced that Woodleigh and Buangkok stations"
- "The Buangkok station opened "with much fanfare" and activities which included a walk-and-jog" - Similarly, I think it would suffice to say that the Buangkok station opened as scheduled.
- "Several commuters alighted at Woodleigh station by accident on its opening day, intending to get off at the adjacent Serangoon station and unaware that Woodleigh had opened; SBS deployed several staff members to assist confused commuters. Other curious commuters alighted to see the station's interior or try an alternative route from the station" - I think this detail may be excessive, too. I would assume that some commuters would be confused and others would want to look at the station when it opened.
- "transport minister Ong Ye Kung said" - Did Ong say this when tunneling was completed, or at some other time?
- More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Network and operations:
- "5:30 am and 12:30 am", "5.42 am", "11:56 pm" - These should be formatted consistently (with either a period or a colon between the hour and minute).
- "The NEL initially had a higher fare than the North South and East West lines" - Just wondering, was the original NEL fare a flat fare or a distance-based fare? Later on, the article says that the NEL uses the same distance-based fare as other lines, but I wonder if a distance-based fare was used beforehand, too.
- "15-year license" - Should this be "licence"? Incidentally, this sounds a little like a lease.
- "the fully-underground 20-kilometre (12 mi) NEL runs ... The line runs" - This is a little redundant; I suggest changing one of these sentences to not use "runs". E.g. "the fully-underground 20-kilometre (12 mi) NEL operates between Singapore's city centre and the northeastern parts of the island."
- "The NEL will continue towards the Punggol Coast station in 2024," - I suggest "The NEL is expected to continue towards the Punggol Coast station in 2024". Otherwise, we run the risk of WP:CRYSTALBALL-like wording.
- "and the line is coloured purple on official maps" - How come this is in the "Stations" section?
- "may be built in the future" - I'd drop "in the future", as the phrase "may be built" already implies the future.
- Culture
- "Unlike the other NEL stations, the entrances to Buangkok do not use glass" - I'd say "Unlike at the other NEL stations". You're comparing the Buangkok entrances and the other stations' entrances, rather than comparing Buangkok's entrances and the other stations themselves.
- Are Dhoby Ghaut, Sengkang and Punggol given their own paragraphs because they have particularly interesting designs?
- "The network's first such integration" - Of an office building and station complex?
- "the Punggol station was intended to be integrated with the LRT station and the bus interchange" - I would mention, more directly, that Punggol station also features an LRT station and bus interchange (currently, this is implied rather than stated directly). Also, unless it's the case that Punggol station wasn't integrated with the LRT station and bus interchange, I'd just drop "intended to be". E.g. "Designed by the 3HPArchitects and Farrells architectural firms, the Punggol station was also integrated with an LRT station and bus interchange".
- Do we have references for the artwork list?
- More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from Mike Christie
Feel free to revert any copyedits I've made that you disagree with.
I see you have a footnote to explain "Woodlands extension", but why not link the phrase to North–South MRT line#Woodlands extension in the text?"Yeo's successor, Mah Bow Tan, said that the northeast's low population made it financially unfeasible to build the NEL instead of the Woodlands extension. Mah said in 1992 that the Woodlands extension was built because, unlike the northeast, plans were "firmed up" for development in Woodlands; the NEL would be built when housing developments in the northeast were completed." If I have this right, the first sentence is sourced to 1993 comments, and the second is from 1992. There's some redundancy here, and I don't like "was built" when in January 1992 the Woodlands extension had not yet started construction. I think we could compress this to "According to Yeo's successor, Mah Bow Tan, the Woodlands extension took precedence because there were firm plans for development there, unlike in the northeast, where the low population meant that the NEL would not be as cost-effective."- "When the 16 stations were announced, Potong Pasir (then named Sennett), Woodleigh and Punggol would not be built with the other stations due to lack of development around the station sites." Suggest "Three of the 16 stations announced in 1996, Potong Pasir (then named Sennett), Woodleigh and Punggol, were not included in the initial plan. Their construction was deferred until the areas around them were further developed."
"The timeline for Punggol station was moved up to serve the upcoming Punggol 21 developments". I don't have access to the source for this, so can't be sure this works, but I think the date should be mentioned; perhaps "In 1998 the timeline for Punggol station was moved up because of planning housing developments" in the area. If Punggol 21 is worth mentioning specifically, and I suspect it is, how about a red link?- I don't quite follow the sentences about Sennett station. If the government made no decision to construct Sennett/Potong Pasir until February 2002, how were they able to build it in such a short time? It sound like the lines were handed over for testing in December 2002. Did Potong Pasir really go from paper to working station in ten months? I see from the "Opening of reserved stations" sections that Woodleigh, at least, was built but not opened, but this seems out of sync with the earlier "...would not be built with the other stations".
"many of whom were impressed by its comfort and speed". Suggest cutting this; it's not very useful to the reader, and in fact the source article quotes quite a few minor complaints as well."A station designated "NE2", between HarbourFront and Outram Park, may be built in the future if development warrants it". According to the planning map, this station was included in the 1991 concept plan; I think that would be worth mentioning at this point.- "Its simple layout, spacious interior and transparency facilitate navigation." What does "facilitate navigation" mean? And I don't see anything about this in the given source -- am I missing something?
"To increase the line extension's capacity": what does "line extension" mean here? Just the Punggol Coast station? If so it seems odd that almost a twenty percent increase in rolling stock was needed for one more station."Each train, made of fire-resistant materials, includes fire and smoke detectors and a fire barrier under its frame. They have..." Syntax should be consistent; "Each train" is singular, but "They" is plural. Suggest "The trains are made of fire-resistant materials, and include fire and smoke detectors and a fire barrier under the frame. They have...""and three additional stabling tracks are being built for the NELe": needs an "as of" date, and I assume that "e" is just a typo?- "the IAGO (Informatisation et Automatisation par Guide d’Onde) waveguide allows two-way communication between the trains and the waveguides": surely not what you meant to say -- nobody is communicating with the waveguides.
"The reliability of the line's signalling system ensured that the NEL maintains its "mean kilometres between failures" target of one million train-km (620,000 train-miles)." The source doesn't really draw this conclusion so directly. It talks about the improvements to reliability, and then mentions this number."The renewal programmes maintain the line's reliability" -- suggest cutting this; it doesn't tell the reader anything the previous sentences haven't conveyed."Every station has a passenger service centre (PSC) on its concourse.[165] The PSCs are generally curved, unlike the boxier designs of those in older MRT stations.[166] In addition to assisting passengers and checking and topping up their fare cards, the PSC monitors and controls the functions of connecting tunnels and communicates with the OCC at the depot." You're using PSC to mean both the physical structure and the employees that staff it, which is a bit disconcerting to read. I think making it "the PSC's staff monitor and control..." would address this."Station seats have armrests to assist those who have difficulty standing." This seems to make no sense. The armrests are not in use by those standing."set up by the to improve"?
-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
- Going through the suggestions:
- "When the 16 stations were announced, Potong Pasir (then named Sennett), Woodleigh and Punggol would not be built with the other stations due to lack of development around the station sites." Suggest "Three of the 16 stations announced in 1996, Potong Pasir (then named Sennett), Woodleigh and Punggol, were not included in the initial plan. Their construction was deferred until the areas around them were further developed."
- I don't quite follow the sentences about Sennett station. If the government made no decision to construct Sennett/Potong Pasir until February 2002, how were they able to build it in such a short time? It sound like the lines were handed over for testing in December 2002. Did Potong Pasir really go from paper to working station in ten months? I see from the "Opening of reserved stations" sections that Woodleigh, at least, was built but not opened, but this seems out of sync with the earlier "...would not be built with the other stations".
- As for Senett (now Potong Pasir), it was planned to be built as a shell station, then the government decided to build the station in full but let it remain closed. According to the source, the three stations were announced but they would be "reserved".
- OK, but we still have "would not be built" in the article -- you're saying they were in fact partly built? Or at least Sennett and Woodleigh were? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:11, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Its simple layout, spacious interior and transparency facilitate navigation." What does "facilitate navigation" mean? And I don't see anything about this in the given source -- am I missing something?
- I'm trying to rephrase from this portion: "The space planning of the station took future connections into consideration and adopted a simple layout to allow clear and easy wayfinding to help commuters navigate to the various modes of transport". Might specify "visual navigation".
- The source here is the LTA so I don't think we should phrase this (complimentary) description as if it were an achievement; it should be stated as the goal of the design. I also don't see anything in what you quote about a spacious interior or transparency. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:16, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "To increase the line extension's capacity": what does "line extension" mean here? Just the Punggol Coast station? If so it seems odd that almost a twenty percent increase in rolling stock was needed for one more station.
- I guess passenger capacity for the train load.
- "and three additional stabling tracks are being built for the NELe": needs an "as of" date, and I assume that "e" is just a typo?
- NELe: North East Line extension. Added as of 2019.
- "the IAGO (Informatisation et Automatisation par Guide d’Onde) waveguide allows two-way communication between the trains and the waveguides": surely not what you meant to say -- nobody is communicating with the waveguides.
- I guess something went wrong in the copyediting... (version before copyedit). The original version was "the IAGO waveguide (Informatisation et Automatisation par Guide d’Onde or waveguide transmission line system for computer and automation applications), which allows two-way communication between the trains and the track tubes emitting the microwaves, monitors the trains' positions and movements".
Actually according to the source it says: In a world first, the IAGO waveguide - essentially a microwave emitting tube running the entire length of the track - sends "signals" which are picked up by receivers on board the moving train, enabling the train's position to be known accurately. There is two way communication between the train and the waveguide.- You now have "...which allows two-way communication between the trains and the track tubes emitting the microwaves..." I would make this just "allows communication between trains". A waveguide for microwaves is the equivalent of a wire for a landline telephone; two people on a phone call are communicating with each other, not with the wire, and similarly here the trains are communicating with each other, and not with the waveguide. Similarly a waveguide is not going to "monitor the trains' positions and movements" -- an overall system that incorporates the waveguide might do such a thing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- "The reliability of the line's signalling system ensured that the NEL maintains its "mean kilometres between failures" target of one million train-km (620,000 train-miles)." The source doesn't really draw this conclusion so directly. It talks about the improvements to reliability, and then mentions this number.
- How would I rephrase this? Maybe " The NEL maintains its "mean kilometres between failures" target of one million train-km"?
- Station seats have armrests to assist those who have difficulty standing
- Those who need help to get up from their seats... ZKang123 (talk) 09:07, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Also here's the book source for further cross-checking. ZKang123 (talk) 09:10, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've struck some points above and left replies for the ones I think need more attention. FYI, for future reference, it might be easier for you to reply directly in the original bullet list by indenting -- that would save you from having to copy down the text for each point. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:34, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ok addressed the above points ZKang123 (talk) 12:51, 12 March 2023 (UTC)
Accessibility review
Ensure all tables have row scopes, col scopes, and captions per MOS:DTAB. Heartfox (talk) 02:33, 7 March 2023 (UTC)
Hurricane Ophelia (2005)
- Nominator(s): ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 00:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
After letting things sit for a bit I've decided to bring this back to FAC for another go. The previous nomination failed after becoming stale, but I firmly believe it remains at the highest quality the site has to offer. For newer reviewers, I hope you enjoy the read on this oddity of the 2005 Atlantic hurricane season. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 00:06, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Has had (passed) a CCI check; see Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Ophelia (2005)/archive1#CCI check. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:28, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Licence and use of the files seems OK to me, but File:Ophelia 2005 rainfall.gif should probably have a link to the source webpage, not to the actual file URL. ALT text seems OK to me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:24, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Updated the link for the aforementioned file to the Ophelia page ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 19:19, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
- Note: I've added a revised version of the track map: File:Ophelia 2005 path.png. This has slightly different colors that adhere to MOS:ACCESS per a recent RfC. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:41, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support. I supported it last time after giving it an extensive review, and the article is just as good, if not better, than it was previously. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:21, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
SC
Putting down a marker: will be along shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 13:08, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Lead
- "it organized into": that seems an odd use of "organized". Transformed or changed would be better. (If it's standard terminology for weather systems, then it may be OK, but it's a borderline WP:JARGON point.
- It's standard wording for weather events and is used commonly in news media not just the science field. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "dissipating on September 23 over the North Sea": looking at the track map, that's not the North Sea: it's the Norwegian Sea. (I appreciate the source may say something different, but it's wrong, if the map is anything to go by: it may be worth doing some searches to see if there is anything that says Norwegian Sea, and if not, just leave as is. At some point someone from Norway will comment on it!)
- Corrected, simple map-based judgement should be a problem with the coordinates readily available. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "2,000 people utilized": used? (It's normally always better to go for the shorter more simple word)
- Changed to used for all instances of "utilized" ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Background
- "by almost all standards of measure": this doesn't need to be a quote – it can be reworded
- Done ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "a record-tying": do we need this? The whole paragraph is about how many records there were and the grammar is clumsy
- Removed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "aforementioned": Are these the ones from the previous sentence? If so the word is superfluous
- Removed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Done to the end of Origins: more shortly. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 19:53, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Continuing...
- Fluctuation
- "anything but straightforward": again, this should be reworded, rather than quoted
- Simplified to just say it was complex ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "This marked the earliest formation of a season's fifteenth named storm.": I'm not sure what this means
- It's the earliest date the 15th storm of a given season formed. Basically the rate at which storms were forming, in this case it was faster than ever recorded within the hurricane center's database. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- North Carolina impact
- "spits and spurts": reword, don't quote
- Removed the quote entirely, sentence is unchanged without it ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "compontent": component?
- Fixed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Ophelia ultimately dissipated on September 23 over the North Sea": ditto my comment on the Norwegian sea above. I was a bit surprised to read about the North Atlantic and North Sea in a section titled "North Carolina" too.
- Florida
- "people utilized the shelter": "used" would be better – here and in subsequent places
- "Shipment of an external tank to": tank? Armoured, water, petrol, sceptic or storage?
- It's the Space Shuttle external tank, found a supplemental source to support it. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "struggled with evacuation decisions": another quote that should be rephrased. Doubly so in this case as it raises more questions than anything. It's best to explain what the problem was, rather than using an unclear quote.
- Reworded ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Elsewhere
- "Food and water was provided": were provided
- Fixed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Canada
- "hyped...at all".: per WP:ELLIPSES this should be
"hyped{{nbsp}}... at all"
to give "hyped ... at all"- Fixed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Southeastern United States
- "occurred in poor drainage area within Jacksonville": a poor drainage area?
- Fixed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "A teenage surfer went missing about 200 yd (180 m) off the coat of Folly Beach, rescue operations were suspended on September 14 due to continued rough seas": this is a comma splice that needs to be addressed.
- Split into two sentences ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Done to the end of Southeastern United States; more to come. - SchroCat (talk) 13:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
Continuing once more
- North Carolina
- "possibly overprepared [sic]": why sic? I'm not sure it's needed
- I honestly don't remember, removed it ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "By September 16, only 5,700 homes remained without power": probably best to give a date when the power went off, or this has no frame of reference
- Added the context in the preceding sentence ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "the infamous Queen Anne's Revenge": "infamous" is POV and unsupported by the source
- Removed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "This sewage line previously burst in July and later burst a third time in October": if these two are unconnected to Ophelia, then you don't need this
- Removed it ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- Aftermath
- has to change... Same ELLIPSES point here
- Fixed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- "disruption to ferry service": to the ferry service or to ferry services?
- The latter, fixed ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
That's my lot. - SchroCat (talk) 15:31, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the review SchroCat! I've either addressed or replied to all of your comments. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:28, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments from TAOT
I started a review last time, but an unfortunately-timed bout of Lyme disease forced me to drop out of reviewing. Ticks are not very active this time of year, so hopefully I can see this through this time. I will add comments in the near future. I do ask that you check if my comments from last time have been addressed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 14:13, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm glad you're doing better Trainsandotherthings. Thank you for coming back to this review. I had either replied to or addressed your comments on the previous nomination. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 22:32, 6 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've been unusually busy in real life lately (didn't even touch my computer at all yesterday) but I will get to the current review hopefully tomorrow. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Lead
- Does it make sense to mention which ocean the hurricane was in in the first sentence?
- The year and land context is more important imo, the ocean is mentioned in the second sentence. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Be consistent about linking or not linking states.
- Linked Florida in the lead, not sure where other missing ones are? ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
largely dominated by a lull between two ridges to the north and east
if I'm wrong ignore this, but would this be a Trough?- That is correct but the sources don't specify that it's a trough and just call it a lull between ridges so I don't think we're allowed to call it a trough. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
and gradual upwelling of cooler waters from its meandering path
on its meandering path?- Reworded ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Both paragraphs are rather long, is it worth breaking the lead into three paragraphs?
- I'm not sure it would provide much benefit. The opening paragraph covers meteo info and the second covers its effects. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
More than 2,000 people used public shelters by the time of its closest approach to land.
This is awkwardly worded, suggest something like "More than 2,000 people used public shelters when it approached land."- Changed. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- In the infobox, can you be more specific than "Europe" for the locations impacted?
- I think I just forgot to remove it. I couldn't find any source linking any impacts in Europe to ex-Ophelia. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- More to come later. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:47, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've taken care of or replied to the above concerns, Trainsandotherthings. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
- Noted. I will add more comments tomorrow. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:19, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
- I've taken care of or replied to the above concerns, Trainsandotherthings. ~ Cyclonebiskit (chat) 18:19, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
Tomb of Philippe Pot
A particularly mournful 15th century French tomb sculpture with eight pleurants (weepers) in black hoods carrying the deceased towards his grave. Enjoy! Ceoil (talk) 22:38, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
SC
- Marker for further comment, following my PR on this article. I'm working on a couple of other reviews (and busy in RL), but I will make it here are some point soon... (ish!) - SchroCat (talk) 22:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)
- Just watching and waiting for the dust to settle at the moment. Once the editing spurts are completed, I'll be along to do a full runthrough. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:20, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
OK, I think the heavy editing has finished? If so, there are just a few little tweaks needed:
- Life and death
- "in June Charles the Bold's daughter": I think a comma after June would help (some may trip up wondering who "June Charles" is
- Effigy
- "Lying on a limestone slab, and he is dressed": "and" isn't needed
- Pleurants
- "that referring to specific": "refers"
- Provenance
- "The tomb passed though a number of owners": "through", not though
That's my lot. - SchroCat (talk) 15:15, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Schro; have those sorted now, but am still doing a bit of regigging - noting major, a new source (Scholten) arrived in the post this morning and want to incorporate; should help address some of Borsoka's concerns below - maybe 200 odd words left to be added. Will ping when done. Ceoil (talk) 19:54, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
Just a couple more quite minor points on a further readthrough:
- I'm not sure why we have "pleurants (pleurants)" in the lead? If the word is a cognate then we won't need bracket. (I may be talking absolute nonsense, so if there's a guideline that says you're doing it right, then carry on!)
- The lead says Pot "around 49 years old, some 13 years before his death": that would make him 62 (ish). The body says he died in "1493 aged around 65". If the sources are confused on the issue, you could change the lead reference to "over a decade before his death" or "around 49 years old, before his death, when he was about 65", either of which gets rid of the problem. - SchroCat (talk) 09:41, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- Support Good article. Next time I'm going to the Louvre, I'll make sure I pay a visit. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 18:51, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Because France does not have freedom of panorama, all pictures of 3D works in France need a tag for the original work, not just the photo. Ditto Russia
- @Nikkimaria have added PD-France to each, which seems to cover it. Ceoil (talk) 02:48, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- File:Donor_panel_of_Philippe_Pot_of_Notre-Dame_de_Dijon.jpg needs a US tag. Ditto File:Les_funérailles_d_Étienne_Chevalier_(cropped)_(cropped).jpg
- File:Charles_Edouard_de_Beaumont_At_the_Tomb_of_Philippe_Pot_or_Au_Solei_1875.jpg: when and where was this first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:27, 14 February 2023 (UTC)
PCN02WPS
Happy to give this a review, comments to come. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 23:35, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Lead and infobox
- "Tomb" appears not to require capitalization in the bold text (referred to as "the tomb" throughout the article)
- "two last Dukes of Burgundy:" → recommend "last two"
- Also, I think another punctuation mark would be better here since the sentence continues after the information that the colon preceded (comma would be my choice, that seems to flow well)
- "Battle of Nancy" is capitalized in its article, does it need caps here?
- "The detailed inscriptions running along the sides" → could simplify with "on the sides" or "written on the sides"
- Could link lead in the lead's 3rd paragraph
- "recorded as completed in 1480" → "recorded as having been completed in 1480"
- "was placed in the 19th century in a private garden in Dijon" → I'd switch the "private garden" and "19th century" bits
- In the infobox, "size" parameter would benefit from some sort of differentiation between measurements and the next label (like a comma or line break)
- My only other infobox comment is that "c." should use {{circa}} since it is the first occurrence per MOS:MISCSHORT
Life and death
- "long term" → "long-term"
- "Battle of Nancy" is only previously linked in the lead so it can be linked here
- "in 1477" is repeated in the first paragraph, the second instance could be replaced with "in the same year"
- does "Burgundian style" need a hyphen since it's a compound adjective?
- Not clear who the "he" is that hired Sluter and for which tomb, is this Philip the Bold or Pot? It's clear sentence 3 is talking about Pot but sentence 2 reads ambiguously.
- In the second paragraph, sentence 3 is essentially a repeat of sentence 1
- "in a style that reaches back" → this is worded a little oddly, perhaps "dates back"?
- "The tomb is first recorded" → present tense sounds odd here
- "given the inscriptions" → "given that the inscriptions" or "since [or because] the inscriptions"
- To avoid duplicating too much information among paragraphs, I would remove "at the battle of Nancy" (since this is mentioned in para 1)
- "It was placed in the chapel..." → comma is unneeded in this sentence since "at the corner of the south arm of the transept" isn't a complete sentence on its own
- I suppose it's not 100% needed but is there a translation of the motto?
- Does "his chapel" refer to Saint-Jean-Baptiste? If so the article does not mention that the chapel was his prior to this
Attribution
- Philippe' → remove apostrophe
- First sentence is missing some words and punctuation, and duplicates the "Battle of Nancy" information from the first section
- "It is probable that" → What "it" refers to is unclear
- "to agree an overall design" → missing word
- Give Moiturier's full name and link him since he's not mentioned previously in the body
- "between distinguish" → words are in the wrong order
- When discussing Marcoux, present tense is used with "notes" but past tense is used with "believed"
- "that it they were likely" → sounds like "it" isn't needed here
More comments to come shortly, just saving my progress. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 00:13, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Description
- "ie can be seen from all sides" → "i.e." needs periods per MOS:LATINABBR
- The last sentence of the first paragraph is a little on the long side - a good place to break it up would be after "iconography", and replacing the dash with a comma would work well
- "The eight mourners on average" → I think starting the sentence with "on average" flows better here
- "that is slightly less than life-sized." → "that is" can be taken out
- "that mostly covering their faces" → missing word
- Dagobert's death date is given in the "Life and death" section so I don't think it's needed here
- Last bit of the first paragraph doesn't appear cited; if it uses ref 24, that can be repeated
- "individually designed" → hyphen here for compound adjective
- I'm not convinced that the numbers to label the mourners are necessary; the representation of the shields can just be listed on their own, though commas do need to be added (if the numbers are kept, mourner #5 is listed as being both on the left and on the right)
- "Their weighty and austere poses gives" → "poses gives" do not agree
- "individualised facial characteristics" → "facial" here is redundant because that part of the sentence is talking about their faces
- Mention of their different heraldic shields is not needed since the prior paragraph is about that
- Picture caption beginning "Left-hand view" is a little hard to understand, rewording it so it doesn't rely on parentheses would be better
Provenance
- Could a job title or description for Louis Boudan be added so the reader knows his significance?
- "French State" is capitalized at the end of para 1 but "state" is lowercase in paragraphs 2 and 4
- The external link labeled "33 rue Berbisey" can be converted to a wikilink by linking to the file like this:
[[c:File:Hôtel de Ruffey.jpg|33 rue Berbisey]]
- "The Vesvrotte's" → this plural doesn't need an apostrophe
- The photo caption for Au Solei does not include the accent on the "E" in "Édouard"
- "In August that year" → "In August of that year"
Condition and restorations
- "has been cleaned...in the 19th century" → tense doesn't match
- "Some the letters and words" → missing word
- "C2RMF" abbreviation isn't necessary since it's not used again in the article
- "and the bare stone was cleaned, and additions" → repetition of "and"
Imitations and replicas
- "The monuments's innovations" → is "monuments" here talking just about Pot's tomb?
- "depicted" seems appropriate for the 19th century painting (assuming it was a painting of the tomb) but it seems like the wrong word for the sculpture since it's more of a parody or homage
That should do it for my comments for now - I will go back for another readthrough and look at references soon. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 01:39, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
Second pass-through
Lead
- "room 210" information doesn't appear in the body
Life and death
- "Philip the Good (reigned 1419 -1467) and Charles the Bold (reigned 1467 - 1477)" → need unspaced en-dashes for both date ranges (MOS:RANGE)
- "During this period, he rose to become a knight of the Golden Fleece and lord of the La Rochepot and Thorey-sur-Ouche communes" → I'm not sure that there's something grammatically incorrect about this sentence but rewording to avoid repetition of "and" would be good (maybe ...and lord of the communes of... and ..."?)
- "and Charles' cousin" → plural is "Charles's" in the start of the next paragraph, should be consistent and I believe the "apostrophe-s" is correct here (that is, "Charles's")
- Is there a reason that Isabella's birth year is needed here, since we're not talking about her birth and her page is linked? Same question to Maximilian of Austria in para 3
- "King of France" → since "lord" is lowercase in para 1, should "king" be lowercase here?
- "Because of this, and on charges of perjury, Charles's and Isabella's daughter and heiress, Mary of Burgundy (b. 1457), expelled him in June 1477 from both the court at Lille and her realm." → sentence seems misordered and rather clunky, especially the first bit; my recommended rewording would be as follows:
- "Mary of Burgundy, daughter of Charles and Isabella, expelled him from her realm and the court at Lille in June 1477 on perjury charges and because of his change of allegiance."
- If you want to keep "heiress" in there, I'd specify what she was heir to; same birth year question applies here as above; and did the perjury charges come about because of the change of allegiance? If so that repetition can be avoided.
- "the King's death" → I think "king" should be lowercase here too
Commission
- "mourners (pleurants) began" → "pleurants" is not italicized in the lead; I'm not sure which is correct but I would be consistent
- "built by the sculptors Jean de Marville and Claus Sluter from 1381" → "in 1381"?
- This may just be a reading comprehension problem on my part, but I am getting a little confused by the timeline. The infobox states that its creation began in 1477, but the body says it was first mentioned in historical record in 1480, the lead says the record mentions its completion in 1480, but the body says it may have been as late as 1483.
- "Pot commissioned his tomb some 14 years before his death" → the lead says "some 13 years before his death"
- "prosperity, and explain his change in allegiance to Louis XI" → don't believe this comma is necessary
Description
- "mourners, are painted in a relatively limited palette" → comma unneeded
- "they have different poses" → "they" is ambiguous as to whether you're talking about the mourners or their faces
Provenance
- "The antiquarian and collector François Roger de Gaignières made a number of drawings" → specify that these are drawings of the tomb (I assume)
- "It is next mentioned" → present tense; switches to past tense later in the sentence
- "Lord of Ruffey-lès-Beaune" → lowercase "lord" as above
Condition and restorations
- "shows Pot's fingers as badly damaged" → I would either remove "as" or change to "as being badly damaged"
Reference formatting
- Ref 46, ""Début de la restauration du tombeau de Philippe Pot", needs "language=" parameter
After a second read-through, this is what I found. Grammar and prose itself is much better. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 02:00, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- PCN02WPS, thanks, all points now addressed. Ceoil (talk) 21:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- A few comments; one above and one in the "Commission" section: "The motif of its pleurants" → does "its" refer to Pot's tomb or that of Charles the Bold? PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 16:52, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- Just checking, the "Tomb" is not actually a tomb, but a funerary monument?
- "Knight of the Golden Fleece". Why the upper-case initial letters? Similarly in the main article.
- "Dukes of Burgundy". Ditto for D.
- "Battle of Nancy". And B.
- "he served under both Louis XI and Charles VIII". And Charles VIII would be? Perhaps 'and his son ...'?
- "Philippe Pot was born in 1428 near Beaune in eastern France, as a godson of Philip the Bold." No, he wasn't born as Philip's godson. And Philip needs introducing.
- "He served under the two last Dukes of Burgundy" → ' He served under the last two Dukes of Burgundy'.
- "in eastern France". So it wasn't in Burgundy?
- "his long-term enemy Louis XI". Introduce Louis.
- "Philippe was expelled from the Citadel of Lille". Without context, this doesn't really mean anything.
- After defecting to he French, he was expelled from the court at Lille by Mary of Burgundy. Clarifying. Ceoil (talk) 01:34, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- Now clarified. Excellent point. Ceoil (talk) 03:23, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- "placing mourners around effigy". Not grammatical. Perhaps 'effigies'? Or 'an effigy'?
- "The tomb follows the style of". Which/whose tomb?
- "Philip the Bold's tomb was commissioned in the late 14th century as the first of the Burgundian-style tombs ... Philip the Bold's, which was commissioned in the late 14th century as the first of the now well-known Burgundian tombs".
- "Philippe Pot's monument was the last major tomb of the Burgundians". Do you mean that Pot was the last Burgundian to have a tomb? Or that his was the last in the Burgundian style? Or something else?
- "Philip the Bold's tomb was commissioned in the late 14th century as the first of the Burgundian-style tombs."; "was designed in a style that dates back to the tomb of Philippe Dagobert (d. 1235)." There seems to be a contradiction there.
- "The tomb was first recorded on 28 August 1480". But you go on to say that it may not have been constructed by then. How can it be first recorded if it didn't yet exist?
- Caption: "Donor portrait of Philip Pot, unknown artist, Church of Notre-Dame of Dijon". Should that be Philippe?
- Why is he referred to as Philippe rather than Pot?
- "the chapel of Saint-Jean-Baptiste"; "Philippe's motto "Tant L. vaut, était" was painted in several locations within his chapel." The second statement implies that it was Philippe's chapel, rather than Saint-Jean-Baptiste's.
- "but erroneously gives the year of death 1494 (rather than 1493)". Suggest 'but erroneously gives the year of death as 1494, rather than 1493'.
- "Moiturier (active 1482–1502) is often suggested as". Do you mean Antoine Le Moiturier. If so, give his name in full and link it. And are you quite sure that he was active after 1495?
- "the similarity of their facial types". What is a "facial type"?
- "the variation of degree in the quality of sculpture". What?
- "parts of the sculpture are so vaguely described". Described by whom and in what document(s)?
- "a symbol of fidelity in most Burgundian tombs." "most" - so what does it symbolise in the remainder?
- "Unusually the effigy does not contain any of the angels usually seen". You don't need both "Unusually" and "usually seen".
- "contemporary Northern European tombs". Why the upper-case N?
- "The eight mourners on average measure between 134 cm (53 in) and 144 cm (57 in)". You can't say "on average" and then give a range. An average is a specific figure.
- "They are carved in black stone". Is anything further known about the nature of this material?
- "positioned in the lower register". What does that mean?
- Register (art), but removed. Ceoil (talk) 01:34, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- "that are mostly covering their faces" → 'that mostly cover their faces'.
- "playing a ceremonial rite". One does not play a rite. Perhaps 'participating in'?
- "that lasted in the region". that took place, or that is recoded in, or similar.
- "do not often appear in contemporary sculpture or painting, they appear in well known works". Is it possible to avoid "appear" twice in eight words?
- "Kinship tomb". Why the upper-case K?
- "mourners 1–5 and his right mourners 5–8." So mourner 5 appears twice?
- "Their weighty and austere poses". "weighty"! What does the source say?
- Is the article written in UK or US English?
- "Other potential sources include". Do you mean 'influences'?
- "on a short side of the tomb". What is a short side of a tomb?
- "The tomb's passed though" → 'The tomb passed though'.
- "The tomb was nationalised during the French Revolution". Could a date be given? If necessary a rough one.
- "count Richard de Vesvrotte". Upper-case C.
- "He placed it in the garden of the Hôtel de Ruffey, under trees at his townhouse". So it was both in the garden of the Hôtel de Ruffey and under trees at Vesvrotte's townhouse?
- "The tomb has been cleaned and restored a number of times in the 19th century" → 'The tomb was cleaned and restored a number of times in the 19th century'.
Break
There are a startling number of basic grammar issues in this article, to the extent that I do not believe it is ready for FAC. It would certainly have benefitted from a longer stay at PR than the 15 days it received. A trip to to GoCE would probably also have been helpful. @SchroCat and PCN02WPS: I would be interested in your opinions. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:44, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild I am on the newer side to FAC but I would tend to agree with you - most of my comments were about grammatical or prose issues, and we found a lot of the same errors (mourner 5 listed twice, "his" chapel, etc). Some of the other stuff I found (transposed or missing words, misspellings, etc) indicates that a little more time copyediting or proofreading would be beneficial. PCN02WPS (talk | contribs) 18:49, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- to note most of the issues were resolved this afternoon. The maimed will be done in a few hours. Ceoil (talk) 18:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Love the Freudian typo. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- The irony (and double meaning) re spelling on an FAC I'M being called out for spelling is not lost on me. Anyway, I do appreciate all the effort and help you and PCN02WPS have given, and take you point re PR/GOCE. All up to date except re the point on the Philip the Bold stuff, which will address in
morningevening, afterwhich can do a full proof read, and then ping for a revsit from ye both. Ceoil (talk) 03:50, 18 February 2023 (UTC)- Re irony: Indeed, God will know her own. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- Gog, I'm butting in and will probably embarrass Ceoil. This is the first FAC I've read in a year, perhaps two - can't honestly remember. The long list of nitpicks isn't really how FAC should work or used to work, and doesn't actually set a great example coming from a coord. All that said, given the that the spelling issue has been a known issue for well over a decade the thing to do is help, not hinder. I'm willing to assist. I can attempt to address what you refer to as "basic grammar issues". There are a few walls of text above, so if you and PCN02WPS could please strike what you consider resolved, and please highlight what still needs to be done in that area. Ceoil can address any substantive comments that are posted. Does that work for you all? Pinging Ceoil, Gog the Mild and PCN02WPS. Victoria (tk) 18:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- No, it doesn't. That is not how FAC works, dumping responsibility for high lighting details of issues back on the reviewers. If Ceoil, and any other editors they would care to have assist them, could iron out the issues above and any other similar ones, then let me know, I will relook at the article and make any fresh comments which then seem appropriate.
- Uh, just to reiterate, again, the lists above were mostly focused on very trivial items (a lot of preferences re caps, commas etc), and were fixed with in minutes. I diont want perception to be that the article was flawed, and maybe a withdrawal, as Gog suggested, or at least a refresh, is best at this time. Ceoil (talk) 19:11, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- 1. No they're not. 2. I cannot see where I have suggested withdrawal.
- Gog, I'm butting in and will probably embarrass Ceoil. This is the first FAC I've read in a year, perhaps two - can't honestly remember. The long list of nitpicks isn't really how FAC should work or used to work, and doesn't actually set a great example coming from a coord. All that said, given the that the spelling issue has been a known issue for well over a decade the thing to do is help, not hinder. I'm willing to assist. I can attempt to address what you refer to as "basic grammar issues". There are a few walls of text above, so if you and PCN02WPS could please strike what you consider resolved, and please highlight what still needs to be done in that area. Ceoil can address any substantive comments that are posted. Does that work for you all? Pinging Ceoil, Gog the Mild and PCN02WPS. Victoria (tk) 18:49, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- Re irony: Indeed, God will know her own. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:00, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- The irony (and double meaning) re spelling on an FAC I'M being called out for spelling is not lost on me. Anyway, I do appreciate all the effort and help you and PCN02WPS have given, and take you point re PR/GOCE. All up to date except re the point on the Philip the Bold stuff, which will address in
- Love the Freudian typo. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:53, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- [1] Actually yes they are with two exceptions re Philip the Good as pointed out!! Ceoil (talk) 20:55, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, when I read this FAC this morning that was exactly the perception I had. But when working through the article last night found only a few minor mistakes that were quickly resolved. If copyediting is what's wanted you've done a lot and I've done some and frankly were I reviewing I'd support. If they still want more I'm happy to address the trivial issues only because I think the tone is a bit snarky and I'm disappointed to see that from a coord who sets an example. If you're good to carry on, I'll happily rescind the offer and happily step back away from Wikipedia. It should be fun, which it is when stuck in a small corner, but there are definitely some unwelcome edges that I'm happy to avoid. Victoria (tk) 19:21, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- From my pov, the review has been *most* beneficial, I just dont want to be tarred with a SNOW quick fail.[8][9] Ceoil (talk) 19:34, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- Good. I am pleased if it has helped; that, obviously I hope, was my intention. Ping me when you're ready for me to have another look. As an experienced nominator you will be aware that a (unrecused) coordinator will only even consider archiving a nomination if there is a formal oppose coupled with a recommendation of withdrawal, so crack on. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:06, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm working on the Philip the Good stuff, took long as had to gather hardcovers. To note Vic did a top to bottom ce today, which I think solved a lot, incl the brit vs us spelling thing, highlighted above (something I dont have a clue about except adding a "u" is always good. Ceoil (talk) 22:26, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
- Gog, I'm cracking on - your specific points have been met, but some expansion, relating to your points, are coming from Borsoka's review below - will ping when ready for your further points / ay or nay. Ceoil (talk) 23:20, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- As update, am not ignoring, have addressed major points (yours and others), going to give it a day or too before asking you to pull the trigger, which will hopefully be a "go" shot in the air rather than a bullet through my head )!! Ceoil (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- You mean I can't have a two-fer? :-) Gog the Mild (talk) 00:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not unless you run for RFA. Then you can do what the hell you want. Ceoil (talk) 00:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not likely - I have a fear of responsibility. Mah wa ha ha ha ... Gog the Mild (talk) 00:20, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not unless you run for RFA. Then you can do what the hell you want. Ceoil (talk) 00:18, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- You mean I can't have a two-fer? :-) Gog the Mild (talk) 00:14, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- As update, am not ignoring, have addressed major points (yours and others), going to give it a day or too before asking you to pull the trigger, which will hopefully be a "go" shot in the air rather than a bullet through my head )!! Ceoil (talk) 00:11, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm happy enough now for you to look over again. Am somewhat embarrassed by the earlier spelling/MOS stuff, and take the point re a longer PR, but would appreciate a 2nd view from you. Ceoil (talk) 00:32, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- PCN02WPS - What are your thoughts on the status of the article as it now stands? Both you and Gog brought up significant concerns with prose, although later reviewers appear to view the problem as having been abated. I'm trying to gauge what the consensus of the prose concerns here are. Hog Farm Talk 02:39, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
- to note most of the issues were resolved this afternoon. The maimed will be done in a few hours. Ceoil (talk) 18:51, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Break II
I have done a little copy editing. If any of it causes concern, could you flag it up here.
- "Philippe served under the politically fraught years ..." This doesn't work, grammatically.
- "at the battle of Nancy he had waged against". One cannot wage a battle. Perhaps 'fought'?
- "Pot commissioned the tomb when he was around 49 years old, some 13 years before his death in 1493." and "Pot died in ... 1493 aged around 49 years, having already made detailed plans for his burial place, funeral monument and epitaph."
- "Pot's monument was the last of the Burgundian tombs". Do you mean that Pot was the last Burgundian to have a tomb? Or that his was the last in the Burgundian style? Or something else?
- "Pot's monument was the last of the Burgundian tombs". What were the defining features of a "Burgundian tomb"?
- "On average they measure between 134 cm (53 in) and 144 cm (57 in)". You can't say "on average" and then give a range. An average is a specific figure.
- If the first Burgundian tomb was built in 1381 and the last in 1480 the the style of its pleurants cannot have developed over "centuries". This may or may not become moot depending on your response to the comment immediately above.
- "Pot's effigy is moulded in the round". Is it known what it is made of?
- "Le Moiturier is often suggested as". Goive his full name and link it at first mention in the main article.
- "a filing eventually rejected". I think this would read better if "filing" → 'claim'.
Gog the Mild (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2023 (UTC)#
- Ceoil, I am somewhat confused by your posts and deletions. However, it seems clear that you have lost faith in me as a reviewer. So I shall take you at your word - "I cant be bothered to engage with anymore" - and step away. This is my 375th FAC review and I believe that I have carried them all out to the same standard and using a consistent and widely accepted interpretation of the FAC criteria. The large number of MoS non-compliances I picked up in my first run through were not "very trivial" and of the 11 comments I make above, 10 are IMO where the article fails to meet one of the criterion (the last is indeed "based [on my] preferences", which is why it is phrased "I think this would read better if"), not "nitpicking to an excessive digree" nor "trivial" issues.
- To delve into my comment which caused profanity, in my first run through I commented ' "The eight mourners on average measure between 134 cm (53 in) and 144 cm (57 in)". You can't say "on average" and then give a range. An average is a specific figure.' To which you responded "Done." In fact you had changed the article to "On average they measure between 134 cm (53 in) and 144 cm (57 in)", which clearly failed to address my point. Ah well, we all have our moments, I certainly do; so, AGFing, I reraised the issue, as neutrally as I could. Which drew a "FFS". When I first read this I honestly thought that you were chastising yourself, but no - apparently it is aimed at me for having the temerity to check whether the issue was actually "done".
- In spite of your invitation - "Its fine to oppose" - I am instead going to just leave the comments open for the closing coordinator to make of what they will, just noting that despite 207 edits since it was nominated, the article is still a work in progress. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:41, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
A few things
- You review came off as off-hand, dismissive, mocking, high handed (now you say "is my 375th FAC review", FFS). My style is to fix obv stuff before I post a review, not use as a tool for humiliation.
- I deleted the post within minutes, well done in resurrecting, nice power move. Wouldn't stand even on AN/I.
- The nom is 19 days old with two supports. Many of yours and PCN02WPS grammer issues were duplicates.
- It tend to save a lot (epc when moving images), so edit count is not an indicator of substantial changes to the integrity of the page.
- The "average" thing was a genuine mistake...I had resolved the first instance, in the infobox.
- I do (once again) take your point re a longer PR would have been wise. At this point you are haunting my dreams - see 2nd word, gulp!!!
For the record,your new points are met. But I do think characterising as a work in progress is unfair.Ceoil (talk) 01:45, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
A few other things:
- I regret the deleted comments. They were unfair. A combinational of mental deficiency and an unwillingness of primary educators in late 1970s ILR to even pretend that EnglisH grammer exists, ie its all the Irish governments fault...and I "may" have been a bit defensive, and so....
- ....in future I'll beforehand put through FAC noms though GOCE and (extended) PR, and maybe GAN, there by reducing the burnded on reviewers and coors Ceoil (talk) 23:20, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Off-handed" as complained above could also be interpreted as "sharp and witty".
- Your review has been most beneficial wrt the article's quality. Ceoil (talk) 23:23, 3 March 2023 (UTC)
CommentsSupport by Borsoka
Philippe Pot was born in 1428 near Beaune in Burgundy and was a godson of Philip the Bold. Consider mentioning the Duchy of Burgundy instead of Burgundy (because Burgundy is ambiguous). Philip the Bold is actually Philip the Good.Consider referring to him as "Duke Philip the Good" to introduce him.You could also link the Duchy of Burgundy.Delink "Burgundian court" since the court is not identical with the duchy.Why "seigneur" instead of lord, why "a seigneur" instead of "the seigneur", and why "La Roche" instead of "La Rochepot"? You may also want to mention that his possessions were located in Burgundy.- The use of the term "commune" and the reference to Cote-d'Or is anachronistic in context.
Philip the Bold is actually Philip the Good. Philip the Good and Charles the Bold were not the last dukes of Burgundy although they were the last dukes of Burgundy who actually ruled the Duchy of Burgundy (I refer to Philip the Fair, and Louis, Duke of Burgundy who both held the title of Duke of Burgundy). Perhaps you could introduce Charles the Bold as Philip the Good's son and successor.Borsoka (talk) 13:39, 19 February 2023 (UTC)Charles the Bold was not defeated by Louis XI in the Battle of Nancy.The dynasty did not die out with the dead of Charles the Bold as he was succeeded by his daughter Mary of Burgundy in most of his realms.The Battle of Nancy did not weaken the Valois dynasty as the Valois Louis XI of France could claim Burgundy as a consequence of Charles the Bold's death in the battle.
Perhaps you want to mention that after Charles the Bold's death Louis XI claimed the duchy against Mary and occupied it to add a context for Pot's "involvement with Louis". You could also mention that Mary otherwise retained much of her inheritence to give a context. I assume Pot's "involvement with Louis" was related to the fact that his patrinomy was located in the Duchy of Burgundy, occupied by the French soon after Mary's ascension.- My bio sources are only art historical...haven't found anything in English covering his change of allegiance. However Jugie 2019 mentions that after Nancy, La Rochepot came under French control, but unfortunately doesn't make explicit that he may have had no choice. Ceoil (talk) 21:27, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
I assume Pot was expelled not only from the court but from Mary's realms as well.I assume Louise is Louis.Maximilian was also Mary's co-ruler, which is relevant in the context of the sentence referring to his negotiations.That August?Alternatively you may want to summarize Pot's life without mentioning much of the history of Burgundy.The truce was signed on 8th September, and from its success Pot eventually served under Louis's son Charles VIII. I do not understand "from its success" in the context. Furthermore, Charles VIII was king from 1483 (not from 1477).Consider mentionning when Pot died to complete his short biography, perhaps also mentioning the cause of his death.The Burgundian-style tombs began with the late 14th century tomb of Philip the Bold, designed by the sculptor Claus Sluter. It's distinctive mourners were often copied over the following centuries.[6][7] Pot's monument was the last of the important Burgundian tombs. Consider changing the sequence of the three sentences, because the reference to Burgundian-style tombs came without any introduction. Consider moving the three sentences to the following section (section "Attribution").Consider also moving the last paragraph of the section "Life and death of Philip Plot" to section "Attribution" because the first sentence of the latter section seems to repeat previously mentioned information.Pot paid the abbot of Cîteaux Abbey, Jean de Cirey, one thousand livres for a burial place... Where?Use the "lang" template when mentioning Pot's motto and consider translating it.Borsoka (talk) 08:46, 19 February 2023 (UTC)
Borsoka, this is an excellent content review. Most points addressed [10], and will let you know when fully complete, but it may be the weekend - want to do more on the bio (weaving Mary and Maximilian in more) and evolution of the style of the Burgundian tombs. Ceoil (talk) 21:29, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Can you revisit pls - have fleshed out the life and death section, although mainly indirectly via art historical sources on Isabella's and Mary's tombs. I'm not finding much direct bio info. The Philip the Bold stuff should be clear enough now but willing to listen to complaints. Ceoil (talk) 00:04, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Pot was raised and educated at the Burgundian court and is known to have been a scholar and bibliophile. As an adult, he served... Was he a scholar before reaching adolthood?- Dunno. Its not a bio, but the (art historical) sources indicate he was highly educated, accomplished warrior, diplomat and warrior. Those openions are the best we have in english, far as I can see. Ceoil (talk) 04:02, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
The two sentences are disturbing for they suggest together that he was a scholar and bibliophile before reaching adulthood. I think they should be rephrased. Perhaps: "Pot was raised and educated at the Burgundian court. He was a scholar and bibliophile, and held important offices during the politically fraught years..."
I think the fact that Mary of Burgundy inherited her father's realms in the Low Countries should be mentioned because for the time being we are informed that Burgundy was lost to the French.- I believe this is already implied, and anyway this is not bio or broad sweep hist article. Ceoil (talk) 04:33, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I added a link to Burgundian Netherlands.
- ...it is generally assumed to have been between 1480 and 1483 given that the inscriptions mention events after the January 1477 death of Charles the Bold... Why not between 1477 and 1483?
They range in height from 134 cm (53 in) to 144 cm (57 in), slightly less than life-sized... Slightly?...described by the publishing house Ediciones El Viso as "masterful...in its technical audacity". Can we refer to a publishing house as a source? I assume the publishing house borrowed this statement from Sophie Jugie's book.
... a ceremonial rite... What kind of ceremonial rite? Perhaps burial rite?- ...mourners ... can be found on the tomb of Philippe Dagobert (d. 1235)... We were previously informed that mourners are the characteristic elements of Burgundian-style tombs, and Philip the Bold's tomb built in the late 14th century is the first example of the style. Now, we are informed that a tomb with mourniers had been built already in the early 13th century.
Who is Guillaume Chandelier?Do we have to know in the article's context that Count Richard de Vesvrotte was lord of Ruffey-lès-Beaune?Borsoka (talk) 03:43, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure what you are asking re "in the article's context"? Ceoil (talk) 04:12, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, removed. Some people complain about too little context some about too much eg [12]; this review has been a sea-saw : Ceoil (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Only two of my comments have not been addressed. I think my comment about Philippe Dagobert's tomb is still to be addressed because two sentences seem to contradict each other in the article. I assume that Burgundian-style tombs may have had other features than the mourniers. As soon as this issue is clarified I am ready to support the article's promotion. Borsoka (talk) 02:17, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, good point. Added "...the Burgundian-style tombs, whose characteristics include the deceased having naturalised faces, open eyes and angels above their heads.[10] However the portrayal of the mourners (pleurants) is their defining motif. The style began with the tomb of Philip the Bold (d. 1404)..." Ceoil (talk) 21:07, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- All my major concerns were addressed. I am happy to support the article's promotion. Thank you for this interesting article. Borsoka (talk) 01:31, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- Ok, removed. Some people complain about too little context some about too much eg [12]; this review has been a sea-saw : Ceoil (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments Support from Tim riley
A lovely article. Just a few comments, mostly proofreading:
- Life and death of Philippe Pot
- "signed on 8th September" – the MoS bids us write "8 September" and not "8th September".
- "Louis's son Charles VIII" – after a silent s as in "Louis", the customary possessive form is a plain apostrophe rather than s-apostrophe-s.
- Commission and attribution
- "customary for a secular burial" – I'm unsure what a secular burial is: if it means the burial of a member of the laity rather than of a cleric it might be clearer to say so.
- Effigy
- "Pot's effigy is molded" – as the article is in BrE (armour, emphasise, nationalised) it would be as well to use the BrE "moulded".
- Pleurants
- "a panted and gilded heraldic shield that referring to specific members" – two things here: "panted" should be "painted", presumably; and the "that" is not wanted.
- "the de Montagus' and de Nesli's" – for the plain plurals of names, possessive apostrophes are not wanted.
- Inscriptions
- "l’an mil"" – curly inverted comma should be straight (MoS). This is the only one I spotted, but it might be as well to check for any others.
- Provenance
- "the French state too ownership" – "took" rather than "too".
- "was employed to relocated it" – "to relocate" and not "to relocated".
That's all from me. This article makes me long to see the tomb, and I shall make of point of doing so when next in Paris. Tim riley talk 10:39, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
WereSpielChequers
Support. I still have a couple of pedanticisms, but I think it meets FA standards. Interesting read, it has given me some ideas for my own idealised funerary monument. I have made a few tweaks, I hope you like them, if not, well this is a wiki.
If he was born in 1428 and died in 1493 he would have been about 65 years old not 49. The lede has him commissioning the monument when he was 49 and then living for another 13 years, this adds up to 62 which is a lot closer to a 1428 birth and a 1493 death, but still looks anomalous. Later it says "His year of death is erroneously recorded as "l'an mil ccccxci[v]" (in the year 1493)" which contradicts the 1493 death, though MCCCCXCIV is actually 1494, which would indeed be erroneous if he died in 1493. So I've changed that to "in the year 1494"
- I see you have this already fixed. Ceoil (talk) 12:36, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Re: "Philippe Pot was born in 1428 near Beaune in the Duchy of Burgundy. He was a godson of Philip the Good and was raised and educated at the Burgundian court. Philippe served under the politically fraught years of the last two Valois Dukes of Burgundy, Philip the Good (b. 1396) and Charles the Bold (b. 1433). During this period, he rose to become a knight of the Golden Fleece and lord of the La Rochepot and Thorey-sur-Ouche communes in Côte-d'Or, north-eastern France" Beaune was then in the Duchy of Burgundy and is now in France, La Rochepot and Thorey-sur-Ouche are indeed now in France but whether they were then in France or Burgundy is probably relevant to this article. There are a couple of ways to describe these sort of historic changes in an article, but consistency is key, and I don't think we want the reader to think that in this era Beaune was in Burgundy but La Rochepot and Thorey-sur-Ouche were in France.
- Yes, good point. I think I'll go with xxx loc (in today's France). Hold on. Ceoil (talk) 12:50, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Re "The coats of arms on his shield and on those of the mourners, are painted in gold, red and black, and represent the insignia of his ancestral families" Are they just paint, in which case it would be interesting to know how the various restorers came to the current choices of colour and shapes, or are the designs carved onto the stone as one photograph seems to show? In either case, three colours is a very limited palette to cover 8 heraldic shields, has anyone commented on that and is this part of the reason why two designs are now unidentified? ϢereSpielChequers 08:17, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Excellent point, but the sources I have don't expressly mention that the pallet was particular limited, though from looking at this (pre-restoration) pic, it clearly was. Presumably because, like flags, the colours in heraldic shields are symbolic, and tend to be in three's and we are taking about a dynasty here. All the other paint is black (assuming the faces are exposed limestone). The restoration notes don't comment specifically, although I only have the exhibition catalogue, presumably there is a dry technical paper out there, no doubt only in French. Also; tonally you wouldn't expect a funerary monument to be bursting with a rainbow of colours, especially as the sculpture is so heavy and austere. Ceoil (talk) 12:42, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Re "know how the various restorers came to the current choices of colour and shapes"...the paint was damaged and faded but largely still intact. Also..only the shields are coulourised so they had obvious reference points. Ceoil (talk) 14:37, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- See [13]. I cant go into further speculation, alas. Ceoil (talk) 18:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Well we can't go beyond the sources, but if these are the various families he is descended from, (the eight families of his great grandparents?) then I would expect pretty much every common heraldic colour. However I can see that an artistic choice may at some point have been taken, possibly in a restoration as by then this has become an art object rather than a personal statement.ϢereSpielChequers 13:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)I don't have access to the Jstor sites you used, But I have read the Louvre description and looked at the photos in it. There are clearly more than three colours used on the Mourners shields,and the design isn't just painted on, the photos show scallops and other designs clearly carved on the shields. ϢereSpielChequers 23:58, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- See [13]. I cant go into further speculation, alas. Ceoil (talk) 18:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Re "know how the various restorers came to the current choices of colour and shapes"...the paint was damaged and faded but largely still intact. Also..only the shields are coulourised so they had obvious reference points. Ceoil (talk) 14:37, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
I'm not sure what material the face is moulded from. Are you sure it wasn't carved from the same limestone as the slab? ϢereSpielChequers 00:03, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
Re: "Pot is buried underneath his monument, located to the left of the altar." I think is buried should be was buried, as my reading of the article and the Louvre write up is that when the funerary monument was moved the body remained buried below the floor of the Abbey. Unless I misunderstand, his monument is no longer in the abbey but his tomb still is.... ϢereSpielChequers 00:27, 28 February 2023 (UTC)
WereSpielChequers, have changed to "is buried". Both the effigy and crest patterns are from limestone. Re colours, have added
- His skin: "vermilion and lead white
- "The coats of arms: "painted in a variety of colours including gold, white, red, blue and black"
- Mourner's cloaks: "four shades of black paint". Ceoil (talk) 20:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
Just to clarify; the monument = "tomb" (per sources above ground), which has moved, but his "grave" (below ground) is still in situ. Ceoil (talk) 00:40, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- I think the confusion here is that we have a funerary monument that is called a tomb but has become separated from the part of the tomb that contains the body. I think the lede gets this right, and would suggest referring to it as a monument rather than a tomb whenever we are referring to just the monument. I.E. He commissioned the tomb in 1480 but from the late nineteenth century the monument has moved several times. ϢereSpielChequers 18:47, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
WereSpielChequers can you revisit pls. Ceoil (talk) 00:56, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
"are not common in contemporary sculpture or painting" perhaps were if we are talking about contemporary with him as opposed to contemporary as in our era?Re "hoods that mostly cover their faces" - "Although their faces are covered and thus do not have individualised features" - "likely to have designed the pleurants, given the similarity of their faces and the solid and rigid rendering of their clothing to the Mourners of Dijon which are often attributed to". Either these faces are mostly or fully covered, or presumably only observable up close.ϢereSpielChequers 16:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)- it’s mostly…you can see a few chins, jaw lines. Ceoil (talk) 17:12, 13 March 2023 (UTC)
I suspect the monument is carved from 9 separate pieces of limestone, it would be much more fragile and difficult to transport otherwise. Is this documented in any of your sources? If so it would be worth mentioning.As would any detail re assembly and disassembly. ϢereSpielChequers 18:54, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Johnbod
Support Has been pretty well chewed-over, & I don't have anything to add. Nice article. Johnbod (talk) 22:49, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Victoria
Support as per Johnbod. Made some edits and may have made some mistakes to the text in the process - am happy to fix or be reverted.
One point: it might make sense to explain to the lay audience that the pleurants in the other Burgundian tombs were quite small, placed in niches, detached, removable. The file, File:Dijon Philippe le Hardi Tombeau6 (cropped) (cropped).jpg shows pleurants from another tomb but it's hard to tell that they're tiny. I'm not suggesting the image be removed; rather that the text explains that the earlier preceding tombs w/ pleurants weren't as gigantic as Pot's, and that the tombs preceding the Burgundian's i.e Dagobert had relief carving not removable or almost walking pleurants (personally I'd get rid of Dagobert altogether b/c it's just too confusting). Panofsky's Tomb sculpture] gives a good two or three sentence summary overview that might be helpful.- Yes & a very astute observation. The difference here vs earlier tombs is that the weight of the slab and effigy is -physically and structurally- carried by the very narrow shoulders of the 8 mourners, where as before the were, as you say, tindependent and free standing. Thinking about how to convey. will add. Ceoil (talk) 15:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Try Moffitt pp. 75-76. Page 75 explains Sluter's niche weepers, which can go to the section re Philip the Bold. Page 76, see the long quote (bottom of first column onto the next column) which explains that the procession itself became fundamental to the ritual for the Burgundians. I think you can slip that in, before the description of carrying the slab on the shoulders. If that makes sense?Victoria (tk) 16:58, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yup, thanks. Give me 24 hours to properly address (out with bothers and sister :)). Txs v much. Ceoil (talk) 17:24, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
- Yes & a very astute observation. The difference here vs earlier tombs is that the weight of the slab and effigy is -physically and structurally- carried by the very narrow shoulders of the 8 mourners, where as before the were, as you say, tindependent and free standing. Thinking about how to convey. will add. Ceoil (talk) 15:39, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
Another point: in the sources, Panofsky or Panofski? Or both? (Looks like it's two authors).
That's all. It's an absolutely astounding monument for a person who was essentially no more than a top level gov't official. Nice job. Victoria (tk) 15:03, 4 March 2023 (UTC)
John Manners (cricketer)
- Nominator(s): StickyWicket (talk) 12:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
I got this article to GA class in April 2020 and decided, with some time on my hands in the next few months, to see if it could reach FA status. I have previously listed this for a peer review, but had no input, but I did list it on the cricket project talk page for feedback, which was received and actioned. John Manners was a Royal Navy officer and first-class cricketer, most notable for being the oldest living first-class cricketer ever, until his death in 2020 aged 105. All told, his life was a fascinating one! Looking forward to hearing what comments people have. StickyWicket (talk) 12:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Coordinator note
Hi StickyWicket, just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Don't use fixed px size
- Fixed - I have removed the px size in the infobox StickyWicket (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Suggest adding alt text
- Added alt text to the three pictures in the main body of text StickyWicket (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- File:Lt_Cdr_John_Errol_Manners.png needs a more expansive FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- I have expanded the FUR for this image StickyWicket (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "With his first-class career further interrupted by the war, Manners returned to first-class cricket in 1947" - maybe just say "With his career further interrupted by the war, Manners returned to first-class cricket in 1947" to avoid repetition?
- Done. First mention of "first-class" in that sentence removed. StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "after securing a shore based position" => "after securing a shore-based position"
- Fixed. StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "thus narrowly falling short of becoming the first Hampshire batsman to make a century on their first-class debut" - was the miss really "narrow"? It's not like he scored 98 or 99.....
- Done. I've removed "narrow". StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Prior to the United Kingdom's declaration of war on Germany in September 1939, Manners had been saving his leave in order to have a full summer playing county cricket in 1940, but the subsequent declaration would mean it would be more than ten years before he played first-class cricket again" - this contradicts the lead, which says he played first class cricket in 1947, only eight years after war broke out.
- Fixed. I have clarified that Manners last played first-class cricket prior to the war in 1936, with his next first-class appearance coming in 1947. StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Manners was recalled back to Britain" => "Manners was recalled to Britain"
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Six months later, with Eglinton based at Harwich, Manner's and his wife" - shouldn't have an apostrophe in his name
- Fixed, well spotted! StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "although unscathed, four other occupants of the house were killed" => "although they were unscathed, four other occupants of the house were killed" (existing wording indicated that the four people killed were also unscathed)
- Fixed, thanks for pointing that out, definitely does read that way looking at it again! StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "a third depth-charge set to “deep”, which caused a prolonged explosion and brought more oil to the surface" - first part has no verb. Maybe reword to "a third depth-charge set to “deep” caused a prolonged explosion and brought more oil to the surface"
- Done, I have reworded per your suggestion. StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "where he received the German surrender there" => "where he received the German surrender" ("there" was redundant to "where")
- Fixed. StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "Manners entertained himself by playing in cricket matches against Sydney's leading public schools" - do we know who he played for? Currently it almost reads like he was playing "1 vs 11 matches"......
- I've had a trawl through Trove and couldn't find any coverage of his cricket while stationed in Sydney, there's normally basic scorecard coverage from club matches around that time, but nothing. Seems the matches were not covered by the local press. So just his Daily Telegraph obituary and memoirs by Yardley-Latham to go by there. StickyWicket (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- How about "Manners entertained himself by playing in cricket matches involving Sydney's leading public schools"? Removes the slight implication that he took on an entire school XI by himself..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- Done. Flows better as well. StickyWicket (talk) 09:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- How about "Manners entertained himself by playing in cricket matches involving Sydney's leading public schools"? Removes the slight implication that he took on an entire school XI by himself..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've had a trawl through Trove and couldn't find any coverage of his cricket while stationed in Sydney, there's normally basic scorecard coverage from club matches around that time, but nothing. Seems the matches were not covered by the local press. So just his Daily Telegraph obituary and memoirs by Yardley-Latham to go by there. StickyWicket (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "in a first-class match apiece for each" => "in a first-class match apiece" (again "for each" is redundant to "apiece", which means the same thing)
- Fixed. StickyWicket (talk) 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- "who Manners would visit each Christmas" => "whom Manners would visit each Christmas"
- Done. 22:28, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:50, 26 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
Coordinator comment
Three weeks in and just the single general support. Unless this nomination makes significant further progress towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:51, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- I have posted this to the talk pages of the MILHIST and cricket projects. Do you know of any FAC contributors who might be willing to add to the discussion? StickyWicket (talk) 15:56, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- AssociateAffiliate, I appreciate that real life exists, but this has been open for six weeks and you have not responded to open comments for six days. If some of the outstanding queries are not resolved soon the nomination is liable to time out under "actionable objections have not been resolved". Gog the Mild (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Addressed a few more points this evening. StickyWicket (talk) 00:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: I've addressed all these points now. StickyWicket (talk) 22:35, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- Addressed a few more points this evening. StickyWicket (talk) 00:13, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- AssociateAffiliate, I appreciate that real life exists, but this has been open for six weeks and you have not responded to open comments for six days. If some of the outstanding queries are not resolved soon the nomination is liable to time out under "actionable objections have not been resolved". Gog the Mild (talk) 13:59, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Comments by From Hill To Shore
I'm placing this here as a holder. I may not be able to make an in depth review before the weekend. From Hill To Shore (talk) 12:49, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- I am a little concerned that Yardley-Latham (2010) is a primary source written by the subject. It is slightly redeemed as having been edited by Yardley-Latham but the majority of the content is presumably in Manner's own words and with any associated bias. Are there any alternative sources that we can use either to replace Yardley-Latham or to insert as supporting citations? From Hill To Shore (talk) 00:57, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Surprisingly, for someone who died so recently and was the holder of a notable longevity record, besides his long RN career, there isn't a great deal written about him that goes into detail about his life. Yardley-Latham (2010) seems to be the only one, and is of course a collection of his memoirs. Possibly some of his obituaries might be able to support the references from Yardley-Latham. StickyWicket (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately that is likely to mean we either trim out the potentially contested statements supported by Yardley-Latham or this fails the FA nomination. I'll have a look through the statements later but the line about the court martial of the King George V lieutenant is a bit much to be supported by a primary source that may be speaking from rumour rather than fact. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:00, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- With the statement about the court-martial and the relieving of her commander, I am finding it difficult to find any official documentation. I presume by "commander" Manners' would have been speaking about an officer with the same rank as him, as her overall commanding officer remained in place throughout October 1945. I have searched in Trove for any headlines about it, but nothing thus far. StickyWicket (talk) 16:01, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Unfortunately that is likely to mean we either trim out the potentially contested statements supported by Yardley-Latham or this fails the FA nomination. I'll have a look through the statements later but the line about the court martial of the King George V lieutenant is a bit much to be supported by a primary source that may be speaking from rumour rather than fact. From Hill To Shore (talk) 14:00, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Surprisingly, for someone who died so recently and was the holder of a notable longevity record, besides his long RN career, there isn't a great deal written about him that goes into detail about his life. Yardley-Latham (2010) seems to be the only one, and is of course a collection of his memoirs. Possibly some of his obituaries might be able to support the references from Yardley-Latham. StickyWicket (talk) 13:07, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
I have concerns with several statements that are only supported by the Yardley-Latham primary source. Primary sources can only be used to support statements directly about the source of primary information. In other words, uncontroversial claims about Manners can be supported by Manners but not claims relating to wider subjects. From Hill To Shore (talk) 23:56, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- "It was reported at the time to have been the second largest unexploded German bomb to have been recovered during the Blitz." - that is quite a big claim and we should have a secondary source to support it. All we can really say at the moment is "Manners heard it was the second largest."
- I have removed this, I can't find any news reports from the time to corroborate this. StickyWicket (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- "In the same month, Eglinton was chosen to take part in Operation Lucid, a plan to use fire ships to attack German invasion barges in ports in German-occupied northern France, however while escorting an oil tanker to Boulogne the command ship HMS Hambledon struck a mine, resulting in the cancellation of the operation." - there should be secondary sources available that describe the operation.
- I have added a secondary source which names Hambledon as having struck an acoustic mine, leading to the end of the operation. StickyWicket (talk) 11:16, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- "Manners served as a lieutenant aboard Eglinton until February 1942, after which he held a brief command aboard HMS Fame which was being repaired at Chatham. After a few weeks commanding Fame, Manners was sent to HMS Eskimo at Falmouth, after her first lieutenant had fallen overboard and drowned." - I'd expect some secondary source material for the drowning, at the very least.
- I wonder if this might be Lieutenant Edward Peregrine Stuart Russell, who drowned in May 1942 whilst attempting to save a comrade aboard Eskimo? I'll see if I can do some digging, but do have a dissertation deadline to meet this coming week, so might take me a week or two to address these!!! StickyWicket (talk) 21:28, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- Have found some newspaper reports of the time of the drowning of the first lieutenant of Eskimo, which confirms the above. StickyWicket (talk) 23:27, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I wonder if this might be Lieutenant Edward Peregrine Stuart Russell, who drowned in May 1942 whilst attempting to save a comrade aboard Eskimo? I'll see if I can do some digging, but do have a dissertation deadline to meet this coming week, so might take me a week or two to address these!!! StickyWicket (talk) 21:28, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- "After a fortnight at the sheep station, Manners received a phonecall and was assigned to HMS King George V in October 1945, after her first lieutenant had been court-martialled and commander relieved of his duties." - we need a secondary source for the court martial and relieved of duty claims.
- I have also removed the court-martial and relieving of duty claims, as I can't find anything to back it up on Trove and someone has checked books on the British Pacific Fleet and there was no mention; I'm guessing it just didn't merit press coverage. StickyWicket (talk) 14:33, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- StickyWicket, have you addressed all of From Hill To Shore's comments? If so, could you ping them? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:39, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Not yet, will be slow business over the next week or so, I'm writing up my dissertation for my degree! StickyWicket (talk) 22:17, 1 March 2023 (UTC)
- @From Hill To Shore:. I've addressed your comments, hopefully sufficiently! :) StickyWicket (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Support Comments by Sturmvogel_66
- The phrase "the son of the admiral Sir Errol Manners" reads awkwardly to me. Drop the "the" and simply capitalize and link the rank.
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- "commanding officer aboard" is too wordy. Simplify to commanding or commander of.
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Tell the reader what type of ship each one is on first reference. So in the lede add "destroyer" for Viceroy with a link.
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- I am almost entirely ignorant about cricket so a lot more terms need to be linked. Like batsman, first-class cricket, centuries, etc.
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Mention "county cricket for Hampshire" with links to both terms, and then just mention Hampshire in the post war bit.
- Done. Linked "county cricket", though "Hampshire" is linked prior when mentioning how he impressed its then President. StickyWicket (talk) 13:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think that the info about oldest-living first-class cricketer is trivial and is superseded by becoming the longest-lived cricketer in any event.
- Agreed, have removed the info about being the oldest living first-class cricketer in 2014. StickyWicket (talk) 14:12, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- No single-sentence paragraphs in the lede or anywhere else.
- Amended, now merged with the second paragraph of the lede. StickyWicket (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- "son of the Royal Navy admiral and theologian Sir Errol Manners" I find this awkward, but not so much as the earlier formulation so I only suggest rewriting it.
- Removed 'Royal Navy' from it and linked 'Royal Navy' later in the article. I will see if I can find out if he was a youngest or eldest son, as I think he had a brother. StickyWicket (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Give his actual birthdate
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 19:47, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Is there a link for Ferndown School? If not, should there be? Redlinks are perfectly OK.
- I remember when I expanded this article back in 2020 shortly after his death that I couldn't really find much information on Ferndown School. It doesn't appear to have any link to the three Ferndown School's which operate in the Bournemouth neighbourhood today, so I'm thinking on the balance of probability it probably wasn't all that noteworthy a school. StickyWicket (talk) 20:14, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- OK.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- I remember when I expanded this article back in 2020 shortly after his death that I couldn't really find much information on Ferndown School. It doesn't appear to have any link to the three Ferndown School's which operate in the Bournemouth neighbourhood today, so I'm thinking on the balance of probability it probably wasn't all that noteworthy a school. StickyWicket (talk) 20:14, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Link cadet, royal yacht, torpedo boat, commissioning, oil tanker, mine, anti-aircraft, convoy, bursar
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Is a club & ground different than a county team?
- A county team consists of the playing team, typically qualified back then through residential qualifications, of a county. A club and ground team differs in that it is an unofficial county team, made up of the aforementioned players and ground staff of the county, which back then often consisted of cricketers who were undertaking their residential qualification periods in that said county, but were employed by them in various capacities, typically as ground staff. StickyWicket (talk) 13:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not aware of the RN having any torpedo boats in the interwar period. Can you give some names so I can more accurately classify them for you?
- I can't seem to find any names. This was mentioned in both his obituaries by the Professional Cricketers' Association and The Independent. This site also briefly mentions it. StickyWicket (talk) 14:05, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Change troop liner for troop ship with link
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- In general do not use full stops for picture captions
- The captions for the three images in the body of the article are full sentences so should have full stops, as suggested by the manual of style (MOS:CAPFRAG). The caption for the infobox image is a sentence fragment has doesn't have a full stop. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:13, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- That's what I get for not reading them thoroughly to see if they were complete sentences.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:56, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- "however while escorting an oil tanker to Boulogne the operation command ship HMS Hambledon struck a mine" awkward, especially "operation command ship"
- Have removed "operation" so that it now reads just "command ship". Or would "escort command ship" be better or just as awkward? StickyWicket (talk) 13:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Forming part of the Rosyth Escort Force as an anti-aircraft and anti-E-boat escort to convoys in the North Sea which were carrying supplies from the Firth of Forth to London, Viceroy was escorting a convoy on 11 April 1945, when the tanker SS Athelduke which was carrying 12,600 tonnes (27,800,000 lb) of molasses was hit by a torpedo from the German submarine U-1274 near the Farne Islands, causing two explosions to rock the ship" This is very long and could profitably be split. Use Imperial measurements, not metric, and don't convert them into pounds; use long or short tons instead.
- Sentence split and reorganised. StickyWicket (talk) 20:22, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Changed to long tonne → short tonne, hope that's right! StickyWicket (talk) 20:46, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- "Realising the convoy was under attack from a U-boat, and that the water was too deep for mines" The clauses here seem to be reversed. The water being too deep for mines made the cause of the explosions a submarine's torpedoes.
- I have rejigged this! StickyWicket (talk) 23:01, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- How did returning to the sinking allow him to recover 12 bottles of brandy?
- Have expanded the circumstances behind this. StickyWicket (talk) 15:43, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Change explosion for detonation
- Done. StickyWicket (talk) 13:58, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- I am astonished at the glacial speed of his promotions, especially since his father was an admiral and he was a pre-war regular officer. 1 promotion in 21 years?!! I'd love to know the reason why, but I doubt that it will ever be known.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Come back in about 25-50 years when the personnel files are opened. Buckshot06 (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Sturmvogel 66, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Supporting--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:53, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Buckshot06
Assigning onboard King George V - I believe first lieutenant and commander may be the same officer. What do the sources say exactly? Also, that event needs to be added to HMS King George V (!). Buckshot06 (talk) 19:20, 16 February 2023 (UTC)
- I think you're right, plus the big-boss commanding officer of the ship was Captain Brian Schofield, who was in post from April 1945 to September 1946, so he almost certainly wasn't talking about him! Reading more of his memoirs in Yardley-Latham (2010), it reads: "Her first lieutenant had been court-martialled for drunkenness and the commander had been relieved of his duties. The commander, one Dick White, was pulled out of his destroyer and had just joined. My duties were "mate of the upper deck", which roughly meant looking after the workforce, running the commanders' office, producing the daily orders, entertainment officer and any odd jobs nobody else wanted".
- This event happened in Sydney, but having looked in Trove I can't see any mention of a court-martial in October (or September 1945) making the headlines. Are there any books dedicated to the history of the ship? StickyWicket (talk) 17:44, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- I don't think so. As I understand things from my work on the Hood article, the first lieutenant was a lieutenant-commander's job in a battleship, while the commander was the captain's executive officer in American parlance and had the rank of commander.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:21, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- I have the one book dedicated to the KGVs and it's mostly focused on wartime activities and technical descriptions. No joy in Hobbs' history of the British Pacific Fleet either.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:32, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ah so he wasn't talking about them in inclusive words, the first lieutenant (aka lieutenant-commander) and the commander had had a few too many and were relieved of their positions, with White replacing the commander and Manners the first lieutenant? Shame there's nothing which documents it besides his memoirs, I mean would it be a major controversy which would be newsworthy? StickyWicket (talk) 20:14, 17 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Richard Nevell
It's interesting to see a cricket biography at FAC, especially about someone with quite a colourful story. Writing a biography about someone who has passed away means the source material will largely be static which makes maintaining the article over the long-term easier than someone whose career is ongoing. A range of sources are used, but there are areas for improvement.
Could we have a source for Manners being a hard-hitting batter? It's mentioned in the lead without a reference but doesn't appear in the body.- Done. Have found a reference in a recently published book on cricket during WW2 StickyWicket (talk) 20:20, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
In the infobox Manners' career span with Hampshire is given as 1936–1948. Perhaps 1936, 1947–1948 would be a more accurate reflection since it was not continuous.- I believe this was discussed some years ago on the cricket project (10 years at least) and it was decided to apply the same career span style as Cricinfo and CricketArchive, who use 2000–2010. It does bring up some curious spans, say as an example John Bloggs who played for Kent in 1886 and then the MCC in 1910! But as they are both authoritative sources, it was decided to mirror their method. It was 10 years ago now, so can always be re-raised with the cricket project. StickyWicket (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- Adhering to an established consensus to mirror reliable sources is fair enough; maybe something for WP:CRIC to consider again. Richard Nevell (talk) 19:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- I believe this was discussed some years ago on the cricket project (10 years at least) and it was decided to apply the same career span style as Cricinfo and CricketArchive, who use 2000–2010. It does bring up some curious spans, say as an example John Bloggs who played for Kent in 1886 and then the MCC in 1910! But as they are both authoritative sources, it was decided to mirror their method. It was 10 years ago now, so can always be re-raised with the cricket project. StickyWicket (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- There's some conflicting information about brandy and the Athelduke. The vandwdestroyerassociation.org.uk source says the captain sent a single bottle to the First Sea Lord which was then sent to Churchill. The Wisden article also says one bottle was sent as a gift, but has it going from Manners to Churchill; it seems that might have simplified the situation.
- Amended. It seems Manners and another officer recovered the brandy, which was handed in at port, from where a Captain Ruck-Keene sent a bottle to Churchill (in a casket made by the carpenter aboard Viceroy. He then wrote a letter of thanks to those involved. StickyWicket (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
The lead doesn't mention anything between Manners' retirement from the navy in 1958 and becoming the oldest living first-class cricketer in 2014. At the very least I think it should include that he worked at Dauntsey's school for 18 years.- Done. Added about his photography and crafts contributions too. StickyWicket (talk) 00:02, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
"strong Hampshire Club & Ground side": as this is a judgement and relative, it is perhaps worth quoting from the source.- Done. Added the ESPN source. StickyWicket (talk) 20:15, 2 March 2023 (UTC)
- "sufficiently impressed future Test Match Special commentator John Arlott": sufficient to what? It seems like this is leading to something, perhaps the quote about Manners' potential that crops up in a couple of places? It would be a shame not to use it as it is rather a good one.
- Have removed "sufficient" because it's hard to put a value on what is "sufficient", besides Arlott being impressed with his batting, but have added some comments from Arlott about his potential. StickyWicket (talk) 22:07, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Reference #13 (later ref #15) is to the catalogue entry for Manners' private papers at the Imperial War Museum. Is this because the catalogue entry itself is the reference, or were the archival materials consulted? If the latter, {{Cite archive}} would be more suitable.
- I honestly have no idea what that was referencing, it was at the end of a cricket related sentence which doesn't match anything at the reference. So I have removed it, but still referenced his private papers later on. StickyWicket (talk) 00:23, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- The article mentions once that Manners was an amateur cricketer. It would be helpful to give the reader some background on the amateur-professional divide in county cricket at this time, especially as it's an interesting bit of social history. The 2016 Wisden feature, "Last men in", goes into this.
- I have linked to the article Amateur status in first-class cricket, which will provide the reader with more information. My concern about providing what is already available in that article is it might start to content fork? StickyWicket (talk) 22:15, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- While the sporting aspects of John's life are well covered, the details about his family life seem a bit light. In particular:
- It seems a bit odd not to mention any of John's siblings, including his sister who it seems is still alive (she is 105 later this year).
- I've added some info on his siblings. Interestingly, one of them received the DSC on the same page of the London Gazette as Manners'. StickyWicket (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- His parents' deaths are mentioned in parentheses but perhaps they could be added to the article's chronological narrative, especially if there is anything to say regarding the impact of their deaths.
- @Richard Nevell: His mother's date of death was incorrectly recorded as 1967 by an obituary. She actually died in 1926, a year before he attended Dartmouth. In his memoirs, he mentions his mother had been ill for most of his childhood, but he had little memory of her. Is this worth including, given the use of his memoirs as a source is a little controversial (see above)? As for his father, he passed away in 1953 and there is no mention of how this affected Manners, his death post-dating the end of Manners' memoirs. StickyWicket (talk) 14:31, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- Is there nothing more to add about Mary, John's wife?
- Nothing much else really on his wife, which expands beyond her being an actress in Newcastle. I have found a photo of the two of them in 1994, but it has no narrative value. StickyWicket (talk) 00:17, 9 March 2023 (UTC)
- It seems a bit odd not to mention any of John's siblings, including his sister who it seems is still alive (she is 105 later this year).
- I like that the article mentions Manners' photographs and research are archived at MERL. That's a nice addition to the article, and I think shows that his work has value. In a similar manner, I would add to the article that (some of) his private papers are archived at the Imperial War Museum and that he subsequently published his memoirs covering 1938 to 1945. The IWM catalogue entry and the memoirs are both currently used as references, but it would be worth making it explicit for the reader.
- Done. I have added these points to the article. StickyWicket (talk) 23:09, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- The MCC Museum has his caps for Wiltshire County Cricket Club and the Wiltshire Queries Cricket Club in their collection. That is worth adding as well, but may also be a thread to pull on as the article doesn't currently mention his involvement with either club but if the MCC is holding onto his caps there must have been a link of some sort to include.
- That's interesting about a Wiltshire County Cricket Club cap, I wasn't aware he had any playing connection with Wiltshire and it doesn't look like there's any record of him playing for them on CricketArchive. I wonder if this was an honorary thing, will look into that some more. StickyWicket (talk) 22:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I have added that he played club cricket for the Wiltshire Queries Cricket Club and said he was issued a cap by Wiltshire CCC. Still a mystery on the Wiltshire CCC part, not even some Wiltshire based publications reporting on his death mention any playing association with the club, which lends me to think he was involved on an administrative basis with them. Hopefully I can find out if he was. StickyWicket (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- That's interesting about a Wiltshire County Cricket Club cap, I wasn't aware he had any playing connection with Wiltshire and it doesn't look like there's any record of him playing for them on CricketArchive. I wonder if this was an honorary thing, will look into that some more. StickyWicket (talk) 22:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- Manners' maritime career between 1953 and 1958 is dealt with in a sentence. Did anything of note happen? Can this time be linked to particular ships?
- I can't seem to find any appointments listed for him during that period. Nothing on the Gazette or any listings publications. StickyWicket (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- It seems likely he continued his appointment at Sandhurst during this period, but nothing to prove that. StickyWicket (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- I can't seem to find any appointments listed for him during that period. Nothing on the Gazette or any listings publications. StickyWicket (talk) 22:53, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
- According to the Wisden feature, the quote from Arlott originated in the Hampshire 1990 county yearbook. Has it been checked to see if there is more information that could be added?
- Sadly, I don't have a copy of Hampshire year books going that far back, and I don't know anyone on the cricket project who might. There's no open access online version avaliable either. StickyWicket (talk) 22:34, 8 March 2023 (UTC)
Overall, it's a reasonably well detailed article about an interesting character, but there are some gaps that need to be addressed. Richard Nevell (talk) 23:05, 21 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comments. I'll try and address these over the next week or so :) StickyWicket (talk) 10:37, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Richard Nevell:. All addressed :) StickyWicket (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
- I'll take another look, it will probably be Monday evening before I get to it. Richard Nevell (talk) 16:58, 11 March 2023 (UTC)
- @Richard Nevell:. All addressed :) StickyWicket (talk) 14:21, 10 March 2023 (UTC)
Source review by Hawkeye7
Sources are of good quality.
- fn 3, 38, 39, 40, 42 is a website, not a publisher
- fn 11 is a magazine. Change citation to {{cite magazine}} and publisher to magazine. Add date.
- fn 12 should be 179-180 (MOS:PAGERANGE)
- fn 12 formatting of ISBNs is inconsistent with fns 2 and 20. Suggest removing the hyphen.
- fn 21, 22 formatting is inconsistent- use the {{cite news}} template
- fn 21 cite the city of publication (if not included in name of newspaper) (WP:HOWCITE)
- fn 21, 22 Access date required
- fn 26 Add via Trove
- fn 17-19, 23-25, 30-32 - use the {{cite book}} template
- fn 36 ISBN?
- fn 36 should be pp. 264-265 (MOS:PAGERANGE)
- fn 38 is a website, not a publisher
- fn 41 I'm getting a 502 error on access. Suggest substituting https://www.reading.ac.uk/adlib/Details/archive/110168957
- fn 42 Suggest using Royal Navy as publisher
- fn 49 Use {{cite news}} template. Remove website and publisher and replace with newspaper Wiltshire Times
Spot checks: 5, 9, 12, 20, 43, 44, 46, 49 - okay
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:35, 14 March 2023 (UTC)
Badge Man
Of the myriad figures spotted in Dealey Plaza during the assassination of John F. Kennedy —the Babushka Lady, the black dog man, the three tramps, and the umbrella man (we almost had Captain Kirk and Spock as well)—the Badge Man may be the least bizarre. With the 60th anniversary of the JFK assassination coming later this year, this could be the first of a small series of relevant articles. Cheers, ~ HAL333 20:19, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments
- "with the Badge Man often firing the fatal head shot from the grassy knoll" - if he did exist and fire a fatal shot, he only did it once, so maybe "with the Badge Man often said to have fired the fatal head shot from the grassy knoll" would be better.....?
- "which feature's White's work" - first comma should not be there
- "Bugliosi also emphasized that Mack has stated the he" => "Bugliosi also emphasized that Mack has stated that he"
- That's all I got :-) Thanks for an interesting read. As a Brit I didn't know about any of this (although I obviously knew that there are conspiracy theories about the assassination, I didn't know anything about all the various mystery people in the area.....) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:40, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Ian
Recusing coord duties to review... As it happens I saw The Men Who Killed Kennedy on its Australian premiere, so quite familiar with this "character". I look forward to going over this in due course... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Copyedited so let me know if you feel I've misunderstood or -- as would be entirely appropriate in the JFK assassination area -- misrepresented anything.
- Not really anything else to add re. prose aside from the tweak SC proposes below with which I've added my concurrence.
- Seems appropriate detail for this alleged individual; despite its brevity I don't think it neglects any major facts but you could perhaps slightly expand on one point: In 1988, White also claimed that a person wearing a white shirt is visible behind the Badge Man -- in The Men Who Killed Kennedy our investigators posited a fellow wearing a hardhat behind/beside Badge Man; since you mention Arnold, also discussed in that show and also somewhat peripheral to the Badge Man claim, perhaps you could add a tiny bit on "Hardhat Man" or whatever they call him...
Nice work. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 16:21, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- I expanded on the "Back Up Man" a bit. ~ HAL333 19:28, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Just a note that as the article has been stable for a while now I'm pretty well ready to support but will hold off till after the source review (I could do it but as I've done a fair bit of research into the assassination myself and have my opinions I'd prefer to see someone else take it). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
Image review
- Some images are missing alt text
- File:Moorman_photo_of_JFK_assassination.jpg: the text says this was seen "in world media" - where was it first published? Was the copyright held by UPI or retained by Moorman?
- File:Badgeman.jpg: where and when was this first published? Ditto File:Badgeman_coloured.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've added all missing alt text. Regarding the copyright of the Moorman photograph, I could find no mention of Moorman or the UPI registering for copyright anywhere. For instance, the National Gallery of Art makes no mention of copyright registry. Furthermore, according to the Library of Congress, prior to 1964, UPI rarely ever renewed copyright, let alone even registered for it in the first place. And since the other two images are simply derivatives of the first, I'm assuming that they don't have their own copyright registry, right?... ~ HAL333 04:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- A separate registry, no; a separate copyright, potentially, if the changes meet the threshold of originality. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:20, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've added all missing alt text. Regarding the copyright of the Moorman photograph, I could find no mention of Moorman or the UPI registering for copyright anywhere. For instance, the National Gallery of Art makes no mention of copyright registry. Furthermore, according to the Library of Congress, prior to 1964, UPI rarely ever renewed copyright, let alone even registered for it in the first place. And since the other two images are simply derivatives of the first, I'm assuming that they don't have their own copyright registry, right?... ~ HAL333 04:03, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
Comments by Location
- This article has been on my Watchlist and I've noticed your edits, but I haven't taken time to thoroughly review the article. My first action was to scan the sources and the only one that strikes me as possibly objectionable is the citation to Oliver Stone. As Stone has plunged head first into JFK conspiracy theories, I am hesitant to accept him as a source on anything related to the JFK assassination even when he happens to be correct on some fact. (I will also ping Canada Jack because he might have some feedback on this subject.) - Location (talk) 03:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's a fair point. And especially since Stone sources that material from Jim Marrs, I'll find a replacement. ~ HAL333 04:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I sourced it to Lane, who isn't ideal but is preferable to Marrs. I also attributed it to him and I think his claim (whether right or wrong) is of historical pertinence. ~ HAL333 18:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- The article currently states: "The Warren Commission did not include the Moorman photograph in the volumes of its 1964 report. Mark Lane noted this in his 1966 work Rush to Judgment and claimed that the photo had been "suppressed"." I think Myers[14] is a reliable source for stating that Moorman did not testify before the WC and that her photograph did not appear in the WC report, however, Lane's claim of suppression fails WP:REDFLAG and should be removed unless we have a reliable secondary source reiterating his claim. We certain don't want to go with what Lane claimed without addressing what Moorman herself said: "The Warren Commission subpoenaed me, but I had my ankle turned and I couldn’t come. And they never called me again".[15] Larry Sabato is another reliable source who indicated that Moorman told him that she was invited to testify but asked for a postponement after the ankle injury.[16] (BTW: Here is Moorman's 2011 interview in which she said she turned her angle after being contacted by the WC, but she clarified that she was not actually subpoenaed. [See 11:05.]) Sabato also indicated that Moorman didn't see anything out of the ordinary behind the fence and that she was not convinced there is a second shooter in the photograph. As the person who captured the photo, her opinion is noteworthy and should be considered for inclusion. - Location (talk) 20:23, 23 January 2023 (UTC)
- I sourced it to Lane, who isn't ideal but is preferable to Marrs. I also attributed it to him and I think his claim (whether right or wrong) is of historical pertinence. ~ HAL333 18:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- That's a fair point. And especially since Stone sources that material from Jim Marrs, I'll find a replacement. ~ HAL333 04:12, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Regarding material discussing Mack, should there be a change in tense since he is deceased? - Location (talk) 06:41, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- This is a minor point. Should this article be tagged with Category:Unidentified people because it seems implies this is an actual person who has not been identified? (Long ago I added "This category contains known or alleged witnesses to the assassination of John F. Kennedy" to Category:Witnesses to the assassination of John F. Kennedy because of this article.) - Location (talk) 06:48, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- This article in The Irish Times states "A detailed reconstruction of the photograph confirmed that, while 'Badge Man' would have had a clear shot on Kennedy, the figure would have measured 2.88ft (88cm) in height." I don't see that in the article nor do I see it in HSCA Appendix IV or the snippet of Bugliosi I can see, so I'm not sure if it is usable or if it can be backed up by another source. - Location (talk) 07:00, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Yeah, I don't know where they're getting that from. It sounds like something from Dale Myers, but I couldn't find him saying that. Also, it just doesn't make any sense: the fence itself is five feet tall. ~ HAL333 17:29, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- Myers has a page on this [17] which mentions the original 1982 claim by Mack and subsequent research which shows that the figure, to be of human size, needed to be well back of the fence and hovering over the ground. The specific height from The Irish Times isn't mentioned, but might be worth searching for the research Geoffrey Crawley did on this - as mentioned in Myers' article - as that may be where the height claim comes from. Canada Jack (talk) 19:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- That Myers page is already cited in the article. I tried finding the original Crawley material, but to no avail.... ~ HAL333 20:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think it might be worth adding that Turner/Mack/White said Crawley's findings confirmed theirs, but that he later said that they did not... and that he said that he thought Turner was ignoring what he actually reported. Crawley's obituary touches on Turner's documentary here. From GBooks there is likely more about this on page 4 of the 1988 issue of The British Journal of Photography, but it wouldn't be worth the $18 on Amazon to me. - Location (talk) 01:29, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- That Myers page is already cited in the article. I tried finding the original Crawley material, but to no avail.... ~ HAL333 20:37, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- In the larger photo, is there any chance of getting a circle around or arrow pointing to the area of speculation? This version of Moorman's polaroid photo actually has better detail for this. - Location (talk) 20:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- I agree -- I tried adding a red circle to the current image but it kept turning to greyscale when I tried to export it. I just made a request to the Graphics Lab. I've also actually thought about using that image. It is higher resolution, but holistically I think it's inferior. ~ HAL333 02:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- My understanding from reading the link to Dale Myers is that the one with the thumbprint is the original, but it was photographed before the thumbprint began to show and before the image faded. Apparently all of the images without the thumbprint are reproductions of the photographed photo, which explains the decrease in sharpness. Is it worth putting both with a note in the caption? - Location (talk) 06:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I was under the same impression. I tinkered with having both versions of the Moorman photograph but it didn't work: it was too crowded and there were sandwiching issues. However, the degraded original polaroid has grown on me and I have added it in place of the UPI version. I ended up putting the details from Myers in another footnote, if that works. ~ HAL333 20:15, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- My understanding from reading the link to Dale Myers is that the one with the thumbprint is the original, but it was photographed before the thumbprint began to show and before the image faded. Apparently all of the images without the thumbprint are reproductions of the photographed photo, which explains the decrease in sharpness. Is it worth putting both with a note in the caption? - Location (talk) 06:33, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I agree -- I tried adding a red circle to the current image but it kept turning to greyscale when I tried to export it. I just made a request to the Graphics Lab. I've also actually thought about using that image. It is higher resolution, but holistically I think it's inferior. ~ HAL333 02:46, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- The skepticism voiced seems to only address the evaluation of the photograph, however, I think eyewitness accounts related to this should also be mentioned (e.g. see John C. McAdams here and Michel Jacques Gagné here) especially since the opening sentence does not really make clear that this is a fringe claim. - Location (talk) 20:30, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- I already included that no shooter was found on the grassy knoll when the crowd rushed there, and that Lee Bowers (the best grassy knoll witness) did not see the Badge Man. However, I added a bit more and also mentioned the lack of any witnesses in the lead. I didn't mention any more names as I think Bowers is by far the most notable and don't want to get bogged down in too much detail. ~ HAL333 06:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I would consider adding Abraham Zapruder, too, as he easily has more name recognition that Bowers. This article in Commentary states: "Well, if 'badge man' is an assassin, he fired from a spot right next to, at most fifteen feet below and to the right of, Zapruder and Sitzman. Again, they did not notice." The article also states: "Was Gordon Arnold there? He does not appear in photos, though some find him in the Moorman photo right next to 'badge man.' (Apparently Arnold did not notice the 'badge man' shooting the President.)" This only serves to show that Arnold was fabricating his story, so I'm not sure it would need to be worked into the article. - Location (talk) 17:13, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I already included that no shooter was found on the grassy knoll when the crowd rushed there, and that Lee Bowers (the best grassy knoll witness) did not see the Badge Man. However, I added a bit more and also mentioned the lack of any witnesses in the lead. I didn't mention any more names as I think Bowers is by far the most notable and don't want to get bogged down in too much detail. ~ HAL333 06:30, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- The lede currently states: "Badge Man is a name given to an unknown figure that is purportedly visible within the Mary Moorman photograph of the assassination of United States President John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. Conspiracy theorists have suggested that this figure is a sniper firing a weapon at the President from the grassy knoll." There is something that strikes me a bit odd about the wording of the first part of the first sentence. If "purportedly" means "allegedly", is it the presence of a figure that is alleged or is its visibility alleged? - Location (talk) 21:36, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm not sure there's really a semantical difference... But I'm open to changes. Should I change it to "purportedly present" or something else? ~ HAL333 02:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think we should drop "a name give to". For example, we say "Red Rover is team game..." We don't say "Red Rover is the name of a team game..." Here are a couple ideas:
- "Badge Man is a figure/a shooter/a sniper/an assassin purportedly present within Mary Moorman's photograph of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963."
- "Badge Man is a figure/a shooter/a sniper/an assassin purported/claimed by some conspiracy theorists to be present within Mary Moorman's photograph of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963."
- FWIW, Lisa Grunwald in the December 1991 issue of LIFE described the Badge Man this way: "One of the purported grassy knoll assailants. In a blowup of a tiny section of a Polaroid photograph, some researchers see the image of a man with a badge on one shoulder and a flash of light before him." UPI said Badge Man is "the name given to an image that some theorists say is a second shooter that can be seen in blowups of the photos".[18] - Location (talk) 07:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Fair point. I've reworded it mostly along the lines of your first suggestion. I went with figure in the very small chance that it may just be Arnold with a camera. ~ HAL333 20:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry to come back to this. For those who think Badge Man is a person, AFAIK all of them think he is a shooter/sniper/assassin and none of them think it is Arnold. I think some CTs think Arnold was next to Badge Man, per this unreliable source. - Location (talk) 08:49, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- No problem at all! I appreciate these thorough comments and hope you do this for the rest of my JFK assassination candidates (John F. Kennedy autopsy is in the pipeline). According to the Dallas Morning News, Mack's first theory about the Badge Man was that he was Arnold (i.e. the police uniform is an army uniform and the muzzle flare is a glinting metal camera). Even ignoring that, I just prefer "figure". Is there any chance I could stick with it? ~ HAL333 17:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- I see your rational. Ironically it looks like I had added that bit to the article with this edit in May 2013, but it was eventually removed by another editor with this edit in November 2017 stating that it was not in the citation given. It looks like I had added a hidden note that a citation was needed for the date, so that may have prompted the removal. - Location (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- No problem at all! I appreciate these thorough comments and hope you do this for the rest of my JFK assassination candidates (John F. Kennedy autopsy is in the pipeline). According to the Dallas Morning News, Mack's first theory about the Badge Man was that he was Arnold (i.e. the police uniform is an army uniform and the muzzle flare is a glinting metal camera). Even ignoring that, I just prefer "figure". Is there any chance I could stick with it? ~ HAL333 17:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry to come back to this. For those who think Badge Man is a person, AFAIK all of them think he is a shooter/sniper/assassin and none of them think it is Arnold. I think some CTs think Arnold was next to Badge Man, per this unreliable source. - Location (talk) 08:49, 19 January 2023 (UTC)
- Fair point. I've reworded it mostly along the lines of your first suggestion. I went with figure in the very small chance that it may just be Arnold with a camera. ~ HAL333 20:19, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I think we should drop "a name give to". For example, we say "Red Rover is team game..." We don't say "Red Rover is the name of a team game..." Here are a couple ideas:
- I'm not sure there's really a semantical difference... But I'm open to changes. Should I change it to "purportedly present" or something else? ~ HAL333 02:20, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Consider including something regarding alleged identity of the alleged assassin: "Some conspiracy theorists believe/speculate that J. D. Tippit, the Dallas Police Department office shot and killed by Oswald 45 minutes after the assassination of Kennedy, is the Badge Man."[19][20] According to Bugliosi, The Men Who Killed Kennedy suggest Lucien Sarti is Badge Man.[21] Of course there are a million people named as a grassy knoll shooter, but most reliable sources don't link them in name to Badge Man. - Location (talk) 07:48, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Butting in, well done Location, if any RSs mention Tippett as a possible Badge Man it'd certainly be worth adding -- makes perfect sense of course, he wouldn't even have had to disguise himself...! OTOH I think the way Sarti is mentioned in the article already is fine, don't think "According to Bugliosi" is really needed... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Ooops. I didn't even see that Sarti had already been noted! (FWIW: here and here are two UPI articles reporting that The Men Who Killed Kennedy claims Sarti was disguised as a police officer when he fired a fatal rifle shot. The article doesn't explicitly mention Badge Man, but it does refer to the photo.) - Location (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Butting in, well done Location, if any RSs mention Tippett as a possible Badge Man it'd certainly be worth adding -- makes perfect sense of course, he wouldn't even have had to disguise himself...! OTOH I think the way Sarti is mentioned in the article already is fine, don't think "According to Bugliosi" is really needed... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:01, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- I've added the Tippit claim -- that's a great point and had never occured to me. Although the J.D. Tippit website linked above is a little rickety (I actually sort of miss the times when all websites looked like that.), I think it's an RS as it was put out by Myers. ~ HAL333 20:35, 17 January 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Location, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:00, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Gog the Mild Per my earlier comments in this section, I don't think we should include fringe views without a rebuttal (i.e. "Mark Lane noted this in his 1966 work Rush to Judgment and claimed that the photo had been 'suppressed'."). While I feel that much good work has been done, I have difficulty allowing Wikipedia to put that on its front page. Perhaps I am the outlier here so I can bring this up to WP:FTN. -Location (talk) 14:38, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
SC
- Moorman photograph
- "where some witnesses believed the shots had originated": I'm not sure about AmEng, but in BrEng it should be "from where": I leave it to your judgement
- "which concluded that there was a second assassin on the grassy knoll based on discredited acoustic evidence": I think this is a bit garbled and/or unclear. Maybe it would work better as "which concluded that there was a second assassin on the grassy knoll based on what is now discredited acoustic evidence" (or "based on what was later discredited")?
- Gary Mack
- " In the mid-1980s, White put": "he put"
- Skepticism
- "It has been proposed": are there any names that can be put to this – it's a bit weasely other wise – even if it is along the lines of "Bugliosi states ..."
That's it. A short and nicely put together article. – SchroCat (talk) 13:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "The Badge Man is an unknown figure that is purportedly present". That reads oddly. Should it not be 'The Badge Man is an unknown figure who is purportedly present'? If you don't want to personalise it, then I think "unknown" needs to either go or be changed.
- Image caption: "Enlargement of the Badge Man". From the original or the higher quality photograph?
- "whether or not the Badge Man is a genuine human figure." Why use the word "genuine"? Is there such a thing as a non-genuine human figure? Similarly in the main article.
- "the figure is actually an optical distortion from a Coca-Cola bottle or simply different background elements." To mean what I think you want it to, I suggest a comma after "bottle".
Nice. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:30, 18 January 2023 (UTC)
Source review
I'm going to start taking a look over this now. Harrias (he/him) • talk 18:39, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- Ref #1 – what is the year 2004 based on? It doesn't appear on the webpage in question at all. The copyright notice at the bottom of the page gives 1995-2008. (This differs from ref #10, which does specify 2004.) Also, link Dale K. Myers.
- Ref #5 – the short description is "Warren Report", but "Warren" isn't used at all in the long description, which is quite confusing.
- It's not officially called the Warren Report, but that's it's WP:COMMONNAME. Is it okay if I leave it? ~ HAL333 02:22, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
- Bugliosi, Vincent (2007) – the MOS prefers spaced initials, so the publisher should be "W. W." rather than "W.W." (And link to W. W. Norton & Company.)
- HSCA Final Assassination Report – Add the publisher, "United States Government Printing Office", expand out HSCA to "House Select Committee on Assassinations" and change "Hearings and Appendix Volumes" to "Appendix to Hearings" per the actual report.
- Lane, Mark (1966) – Pipe publisher to Holt McDougal.
- Report of the President's Commission on the Assassination of President John F. Kennedy (Report). 1964. – I would recommend linking to https://www.archives.gov/research/jfk/warren-commission-report and add the publisher as listed there: "United States Government Printing Office".
- Testimony of Clyde A. Haygood. Warren Commission Hearings (Report) – Again, add "United States Government Printing Office" as publisher. The actual title appears to be "Hearings Before the President's Commission on the Assassination of President Kennedy".
- All sources appear to be to high-quality, reliable sources. Although refs #1, 10 and 20 are self-published sources, Dale K. Myers is clearly an established subject-matter expert, and so these are fine.
- Searches in all the usual places did not reveal any glaring omissions.
- Spotchecks reveal no evidence of copyvio or close para-phrasing, and on each check the source was accurately reflected in the article text. Note that I was unable to access the main source used, Bugliosi (2007), but I am content based on the checks I was able to carry out.
Overall, the sourcing on this seems good. My quibbles are mostly related to formatting and consistency. Harrias (he/him) • talk 20:07, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- HAL333 ? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for my lacuna. I'll get at it. ~ HAL333 04:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- HAL333 *cough* Gog the Mild (talk) 15:55, 22 February 2023 (UTC)
- Sorry for my lacuna. I'll get at it. ~ HAL333 04:41, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Added one reply above. It also looks like some additional sources have been added since my previous review. Working through them now.
- Ref #6 – Can "Sabato, Larry J. (2013)" be added to the "Works cited" section, and a short citation be provided, per the other book sources. A publisher location also needs adding, and hyphens added to the isbn for consistency. No access-date needed.
- Ref #7 – The hyphen in the title needs to be an endash.
- Ref #8 – YouTube is generally not considered a reliable source, what are the credentials that make this video/podcast meet our criteria? Also, some formatting issues with the citation: should be "Last, First" for the host.
@HAL333: Thanks for your work so far, now some more for you! Harrias (he/him) • talk 12:27, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: I am responsible for adding those sources, so I attempted to fix those issues with this edit and this one. Although the subject of the YouTube interview is undoubtably Mary Ann Moorman, I am not clear on what the criteria are for including a source of that nature so I removed it. (It was provided as direct confirmation of what Sabato wrote.) Not sure if WP:ABOUTSELF is applicable. -Location (talk)
- One other thing: The citation to Myers that I added (currently #7) does not include "Archived from the original..." in it as do the other three (#1, #11, #21). I am not sure why that is necessary, but I'm noting it here for review. -Location (talk) 17:03, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
Support from S#
- Before and during the assassination
- I wonder if Zapruder film would be a better target that the man himself; can't do both, of course, per WP:SEA.
- "or the nearby Zapruder".
- Fixed.
- Why was this "an impossible position to fire a weapon at the motorcade"? Prsumably because there was no such steep incline at the knoll?
- Clarified.
- Would be cool to extract the img of the infamous cola bottle from somewhere :)
- I wish I could - I can't even find a photo of it, let alone a licensable one. ~ HAL333 04:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Nice article! Cheers! SN54129 14:25, 10 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments. All addressed. ~ HAL333 04:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
Hi Serial Number 54129, just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)- @Gog the Mild: "Spotchecks reveal no evidence of copyvio or close para-phrasing, and on each check the source was accurately reflected in the article text. Note that I was unable to access the main source used, Bugliosi (2007), but I am content based on the checks I was able to carry out." Like the one I carried out in the source review? Harrias (he/him) • talk 13:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Please all ignore that complete nonsense. (More haste, less speed.) Gog the Mild (talk) 13:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: "Spotchecks reveal no evidence of copyvio or close para-phrasing, and on each check the source was accurately reflected in the article text. Note that I was unable to access the main source used, Bugliosi (2007), but I am content based on the checks I was able to carry out." Like the one I carried out in the source review? Harrias (he/him) • talk 13:18, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments. All addressed. ~ HAL333 04:40, 15 February 2023 (UTC)
- Hi Serial Number 54129, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:21, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- Duly ignored, but updated too :) @Gog the Mild: SN54129 13:56, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Harrias: coincidentally I've got an epub of Bugliosi's Reclaiming History if you'd ;like to borrow it? SN54129 13:56, 20 February 2023 (UTC)
Comments and support from Gerda
Interested in a topic I know nothing about. The lead, that I normally skip until the end, makes sense. I'll comment as I read. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:02, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
Lead
- The link to the photograph takes to the person who took it, - could the photograph be bold in the woman's article, as a redirect, to explain that at a glance?
I read through the article without any problems, thank you and those who reviewed before me! Support. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:15, 25 February 2023 (UTC)
- Thanks Gerda! I wasn't confident about whether I could bold "Badge Man" in Moorman's article, but I did add a mention in that article's lead. ~ HAL333 02:23, 26 February 2023 (UTC)