- 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
Sayf ol-Dowleh
- Nominator(s): Amir Ghandi (talk) 15:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
This article is about... Soltan Mohammad Mirza, better known as Sayf ol-Dowleh, an Iranian prince of the Qajar dynasty and thirty-ninth son of Fath-Ali Shah, king of Qajar Iran. He was the governor of Isfahan, a city in central Iran which through the constant wars was damaged greatly. He contributed to its restoration with rebuilding the Safavid pavilions and even building a palace of his own design. His governorship was short-lived, and through a series of civil war between 1834-1835, he was removed from his position. He spent many of his years travelling and writing poetry, and died in 1899 in Malayer. Amir Ghandi (talk) 15:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "better known by his honorific title Sayf ol-Dowleh". Is it known what this means in English? Similarly in the main article.
- 'Sword of the Dynasty' is a literal transilation.
- "He was the governor of Isfahan" When?
- Added the years.
- "banditry along the roads". Roads within the city?
- No, roads to, and from the city.
- "Mohammad Bagher Shafti". Perhaps a one or two word introduction?
- Done
- "a famine followed, worsening the situation." The last three words are arguably redundant.
- Amended.
- Second paragraph of the lead - could some (or all) of the events mentioned be dated?
- "Mohammad Shah ousted him". Who is Mohammad Shah? Is there a link? Could he be introduced?
- "Unusually for his time, Sayf ol-Dowleh only married once, and later divorced his wife". Which of these was unusual? And, again, is there a date for either event?
- "divan" is misspelt.
- The Persian spelling is divan while the arabic one is diwan.
This is just from the lead and I am getting the impression that the article has not been adequately prepared for FAC. Has the advice on the main FAC page been followed - "Editors considering their first nomination ... are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor"? Why has the article not gone through peer review prior to nomination?
- I thought that rule is only applied to a nominator's first ever nominee, because earlier this year I had another article first peer reviewed and then FA nominated.
- It is not a "rule", it is a strong recommendation. Apologies for having missed your previous nomination. The bit I missed out of the quote above is "... and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion ..." The recommendation is there to try and avoid the situation which has arisen here - a nomination which has had a lot of work put into it, but which clearly isn't up to FAC standards. I appreciate how a barrage of negative comments can be demoralising to a first or second time nominater. (Or, for that matter, a fiftieth time nominator.) I would suggest withdrawing, and either getting a mentor to go through this with you, or running it through PR, or both. (You may also consider GoCER.) Gog the Mild (talk) 17:10, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Well, I guess I better withdraw then, thanks for the review, in any case. Amir Ghandi (talk) 17:15, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- It is not a "rule", it is a strong recommendation. Apologies for having missed your previous nomination. The bit I missed out of the quote above is "... and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion ..." The recommendation is there to try and avoid the situation which has arisen here - a nomination which has had a lot of work put into it, but which clearly isn't up to FAC standards. I appreciate how a barrage of negative comments can be demoralising to a first or second time nominater. (Or, for that matter, a fiftieth time nominator.) I would suggest withdrawing, and either getting a mentor to go through this with you, or running it through PR, or both. (You may also consider GoCER.) Gog the Mild (talk) 17:10, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Currently I am leaning oppose. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Old Head coinage
This article is about... the last issue of coins of Queen Victoria, with the well-known portrait of her as an elderly woman. It received mixed to positive reviews at the time, which was an improvement from the previous Jubilee coinage anyway.Wehwalt (talk) 16:38, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- File:Queen_Victoria_proof_double_sovereign_MET_DP100383_(cropped).jpg: where is that licensing coming from and what does it cover? Ditto File:The_Ashantee_Medal,_granted_by_the_Queen_for_the_Expedition_of_1873–74_MET_DP-180-162.jpg, File:Queen_Victoria's_Diamond_Jubilee,_1897_MET_DP-180-010.jpg
- File:Victoria_1837-1901_coin_pic12.JPG is missing a tag for the original work. Ditto File:British_threepence_1899.jpg, File:Victoria_1837-1901_coin_pic19.JPG
- File:1893_half_crown_obverse.jpeg: are the duplicate tags meant to cover the photo and the coin? If so, could that be clarified? If no, what's the status of the image? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "was immediately gilded to make it appear to be the more valuable coin". By whom?
- "attributes suggests that". ?
- "the committee recommended that the double florin not be further struck". Is it known why?
- "using a different portraits". Delete "a".
- Link mantle.
These fiddling suggestions are all I have. Great work. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:57, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Leonard Neale
- Nominator(s): Ergo Sum 15:43, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
This is another article in the Georgetown University presidents series and the last necessary to promote its topic from Good to Featured status, an uncommon event! This article is a GA and I believe it meets FA standards. Plus, the subject's brother, Francis Neale, is already a FA. Ergo Sum 15:43, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Leonard_Neale_portrait.jpg: is there a source indicating pre-1927 publication? The copyright info provided at the source is self-contradictory
- File:Leonard_Neale.jpg includes an 1891 published source but also a claim of unpublished - these seem to contradict each other. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:16, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Battle of Van Buren
After Battle of St. Charles and Marmaduke-Walker duel, here is another Confederate failure in Arkansas. Of the three primary Southern figures at Van Buren, you have department commander Holmes who was kicked upstairs for incompetence elsewhere, army commander Hindman who has managed to completely alienate the state where he was once a popular politician, and outpost commander Crump who drew guard duty despite past poor performances in that area. Hog Farm Talk 16:23, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
As I supported this at ACR less than ten days ago I imagine that I will be doing the same here. But I will have another read through to see if I can find anything to pick at. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:41, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe "Disease, lack of supplies, and desertion had forced Hindman to previously begin withdrawing" → 'Disease, lack of supplies, and desertion had previously forced Hindman to begin withdrawing'?
- Done
- "the Union troops struck at an outlying Confederate cavalry unit". Consider deleting "at".
- Done
- "He was then replaced by Major General Theophilus Holmes". I'm not sure that "then" is necessary.
- Done
- "Hindman decided that it would be impractical to keep most of his force north of the Arkansas River in Van Buren given the condition of his army, and pulled most of his men south of the Arkansas to Fort Smith". "... most of his ... most of his ..."
- Rephrased the first one
- "had to travel through cold weather". Can one travel through weather?
- Went with "during"; the other is a bit of a midwesternism (Missouri's half south and half midwest, so the English is a bit on the sketchy end)
- Is there anything to link "commissary" to?
- No great one unless it's well hidden. A specific military function in US armies at the time (the Confederates copied large swathes of the US Army structure)
- "One of the Union mountain howitzers fired on the ferry at Van Buren, killing the horse powering it". The horse was on the ferry?
- Yes (see horse ferry)
And that trivia is all I have. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: - Thanks for the review! I've actioned or responded to all of these. Hog Farm Talk
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- File:Abraham_Lincoln_-_a_history_(1914)_(14583544379)_(cropped).jpg: is a more specific tag available?
- Yes, the book it's from was published before 1927, so I've added that tag
- File:Flag_of_the_Confederate_States_of_America_(May_1861_–_July_1861).svg: why is the uploader believed to hold copyright to this image? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not sure what exactly to do with this - the design has been published since it was created in 1861 so it's clearly pre-1927 PD, and Confederate copyright would have expired in 1889 because there would have been no way to renew after 1865 for ... reasons. Hog Farm Talk 03:03, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, so it can be tagged as PD due to copyright expiration? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:10, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not sure what exactly to do with this - the design has been published since it was created in 1861 so it's clearly pre-1927 PD, and Confederate copyright would have expired in 1889 because there would have been no way to renew after 1865 for ... reasons. Hog Farm Talk 03:03, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Toa Payoh MRT station
This article is about Singapore's oldest MRT station, and this is my 5th FAC nomination. I hope for a successful review, and to have it passed and featured on 7 November. ZKang123 (talk) 07:21, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Image review Licensing looks fine but source is needed in the image description of File:SGMRT-LRT (zoom) map.svg for the location of the transit lines. (t · c) buidhe 07:41, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- "this station is integrated" - I would just say "the station is integrated". It's clear that in the article you are only going to be talking about this station.
- It looks ever so slightly odd to have two images floating above the text in the first section but I guess there is nowhere else for them to go
- "A plaque at this station" => "A plaque at the station"
- "the contractor requested for an extension of eight months and additional claims" - I don't think this makes sense. What were the "additional claims"?
- "It was later announced in September 1987 that the section will open on 7 November that year" => firstly, this should be "It was later announced in September 1987 that the section would open on 7 November that year". And secondly, in the previous sentence you said it was set to open in 1988. Do we have any info on why they were able to open it ahead of schedule?
- "About 44,000 people visited the station" - this is an extremely short sentence, I would combine it with the previous one
- "But many expressed excitement and curiosity" - can't start a sentence with "But". Just remove the word completely, it will still make sense
- "with plenty others" => "with plenty of others"
- "On the day itself, the emergency button was activated at this station" => "On the day itself, the emergency button was activated at Toa Payoh"
- "On 8 January 2006, this station" => "On 8 January 2006, Toa Payoh"
- "The station has two underground levels: The upper" - the second "the" does not start a new sentence so should not have a capital letter
- That's what I got on a first pass! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Back to the Future
- Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Dun dun dunnnnnnnn dun dun dun dun dun dunnnnnnnn da da da dun dun dun dun dun da dunnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn
You should now hopefully have the song stuck in your head for a while. This article is about Back to the Future, possibly the greatest family film ever made about a kid going back in time and almost accidentally having sex with his mom. Pure family entertainment with an enduring legacy, it is now your turn to go feel the power of love and supply the 1.21 gigawatts of electricity needed to elevate this article to FA status. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:55, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
Let me do an image review for this. Images used are either under public domain or have Creative Commons licenses. The poster, while non-free, is being used appropriately under fair use (illustrates the article). No other image copyright issues. Just a few ALT issues (see):
- Missing alts for File:Michael J Fox 2020.jpg, File:Christopher Lloyd May 2015.jpg, File:Lea Thompson by Gregg Bond (2008) (cropped).jpg and File:Crispin Glover 2012 Shankbone.JPG
Other alts are pretty descriptive enough.--ZKang123 (talk) 07:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Done, thanks ZKang123 Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 10:51, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Wehwalt
- "Doctor Emmett "Doc" Brown (Lloyd). " I might omit the "Doctor"
- "Trapped in the past," I might change "Trapped" to "While". Marty may not yet know how he's going to return to 1985, but he's not trapped in the past.
- "inadvertently prevents his future parents' meeting" I wish I could come up with a better way of expressing this. It probably isn't their first meeting. George certainly knows who Lorraine is, and when Marty is urging Lorraine to go out with George, she knows who he's talking about. Maybe "inadvertently prevents his future parents from falling in love"?
- " Biff has been bullying him since high school" perhaps "Biff was bullying George even then"
- "Lorraine was supposed to meet George instead of Marty after the car accident" perhaps "George was supposed to be hit by the car, and tended by Lorraine"
- "Back to the Future features a 1985-era cast that includes" Maybe "Also featuring in the 1985 portion of the film" or similar. I similarly suggest changing the "1955-era". I might even mention Strickland last, after detailing the 1985 characters and the 1955 characters.
- Some of the cast members, for example Tolkan, are double-linked.
- "serves as the Twin Pines ranch where Marty lands in 1955 and Puente Hills Mall in Rowland Heights is the Twin Pines mall that replaces the ranch in 1985." Do you want to footnote that Marty's killing of a pine causes these names to change?
- "and Griffith Park, where Marty begins his drive to the courthouse to return to 1985, crossing by a lamp post, situated outside of the Greek Theatre.[80]" What does "crossing by" mean here?
- "The flying DeLorean used a combination of live-action footage" I might throw in an "in the final scene".
- "Even so, Marty's future is enriched at the expense of others." Anyone else besides Biff?
- "Where most people can only know their parents, Marty is given the opportunity to see his parents as his peers, when they were his age and shared the same ambitions and dreams as him." The first part of this sentence doesn't really say what you want it to. Really, this is saying the same thing as what Thompson says in the Legacy section about kids and dreams and it might be good simply to replace the above with what she said.
- That's pretty much it.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Wehwalt, thanks for taking the time to review this, these are the changes I've made, I think I've hit everything. Thank you again. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
1989–90 Gillingham F.C. season
- Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:40, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Here is my 14th nomination of a season in the history of my beloved Gillingham F.C. This was the club's first season for 15 years at the fourth level of English football, which is timely as they have just been relegated to the fourth tier once again - sad times....... As ever, feedback will be most gratefully received and promptly acted upon..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:40, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Peter_Heritage.jpg: the description states this was previously published on the town website - is there evidence of permission for republication? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:07, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - I hadn't noticed that one line on the Commons page. Switched for a different image to be on the safe side -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - BTW, not that it really makes any difference, but for 100% clarity when it says the picture had been previously published on the Eastbourne Town website, it means the website of the football club Eastbourne Town, not that of the actual town of Eastbourne :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nope, doesn't matter
New image is fine though. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:29, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nope, doesn't matter
- @Nikkimaria: - BTW, not that it really makes any difference, but for 100% clarity when it says the picture had been previously published on the Eastbourne Town website, it means the website of the football club Eastbourne Town, not that of the actual town of Eastbourne :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - I hadn't noticed that one line on the Commons page. Switched for a different image to be on the safe side -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:19, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Galeb-class minelayer
- Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
This hardy class of mine warfare vessels were made by Imperial Germany in the last throes of and immediately after WWI. Disarmed, they were sold to the fledgling Yugoslav navy as "tugs", but were quickly re-armed and used initially as training ships and for "show the flag" cruises to introduce the populace to the new navy. They laid mines in the immediate lead-up to the Axis invasion of Yugoslavia, resulting an a couple of "own goals" with friendly merchant ships. Captured by the Italians, they were put into commission as submarine chasers, and escorted merchant ships supplying the forces in North Africa. Subjected to air and submarine attacks, the six had been whittled down to one by the end of the war. The survivor was used to help clear the thousands of mines that had been laid in Yugoslav waters during the war, and wasn't disposed of until 1962. Good to be back at FAC. Have at it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Image review licensing looks ok but the claim "virtually identical to the Galeb class" needs citation (t · c) buidhe 08:35, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, I tweaked the caption and added a cited sentence to the body to support the new caption wording. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "The M 1 class comprised 137 ships built between 1914 and 1918". Should "1918" → '1919'?
- Yep, fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The Regia Marina (Italian Royal Navy) also acquired two M 1 class M1916 sub-class ships in 1921. These sister ships were M 120 and M 121" M 121 is shown in the list immediately after this as being the Yugoslav Kobac.
- Doh, typo. Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "to drive two three-cylinder vertical triple expansion engines driving two propeller shafts". "... drive ... driving ...". Optional: "to drive" → 'to power'.
- Sure, fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "In RM service". In full at first mention.
- Fixed, actually KM... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yeah, I thought it might be.
- Fixed, actually KM... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "In Yugoslav service" section: suggest moving the third sentence to the end of the paragraph, so all the information on armament is together. Optionally move the first sentence up to the information on design speed, so all of that is together.
- It is intentionally in chronological order, so that the first para is "as they were initially set up" in 1921, the second reflects the armament changes in 1931, and the last reflects the post-war changes to the remaining ship. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "a maximum range of 12,300 km (7,600 mi)". Extraordinary!!
- LOL! Yep. Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "They were renamed ... respectively." Why "respectively"?
- Good point, a "pre-table" hangover. Deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Gog the Mild (talk) 19:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking a look, Gog! I think I've got them all. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:32, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Indy beetle
Let me know when you're done with Gog's comments, then I'll review. -Indy beetle (talk) 17:52, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- GTG, Indy beetle. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- For "Description and construction" part, it might be worth qualifying the first part with an "Original configuration" subheading. For the part of the "Service history" section where you delve into each ship, it might be worth to qualify this as "Italian service history", and the first half as "Yugoslav service history".
- In 1938–39 Jastreb was refitted for oil-firing only. I presume you mean oil-fired boilers? Would be good to specify.
- The part about the two ships attempting to join the NDH Navy is not represented at Navy of the Independent State of Croatia. Not cirtical for this article, obviously, but I think should be mentioned there.
- She was renamed Zelengora in 1955, and was finally disposed of in 1962. Is the nature of the disposal known, or was it simply struck from the register?
- When the Italians withdrew from Benghazi on 18 November 1942, they scuttled her wreck in an attempt to block the entrance to the harbour. Was the wreck ever raised?
-Indy beetle (talk) 09:12, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Nadezhda Alliluyeva
- Nominator(s): Kaiser matias (talk) 16:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
The second wife of Joseph Stalin, Nadezhda Alliluyeva had a tragic life. Though quite a driven person in her own right, she was forced to temper her goals to appease Stalin, leading to an unhappy life. She died at an early age, and while she likely committed suicide there is some questions about that. Her death had a profound effect on Stalin, who once again lost a wife at a relatively young age. The article went through GA some time ago, and a peer review, and now I think it's ready for here. Kaiser matias (talk) 16:35, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- File:Stalin_in_exile_1915.jpg: the given tag relies on "known author" for Russian copyright and pre-1927 publication for US - is there evidence for either of those?
- Is there no image of the subject available? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:35, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- For the Stalin image, nothing I can reliably confirm at this time. And honestly with the lack of an image for the subject, I feel it may be better to not have one of him only (I feel it diminishes Alliluyeva's standing as an individual, rather than just being someone's wife). As for Alliluyeva herself, there was one image used previously but it's since been deleted on Commons as it's availability has not been confirmed (I've certainly tried). Kaiser matias (talk) 04:18, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have added an image. It is non-free, but it should satisfy all license requirements. MarcusTraianus (talk) 14:19, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Judith Resnik
This article is about Judith Resnik, one of the original six American women astronauts who died in the Space Shuttle Challenger disaster. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 05:05, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "in military intelligence and aerial reconnaissance in the Pacific Theater and the Occupation of Japan." Possibly some commas, or a mild rephrasing, would avoid the reading that he worked in "aerial reconnaissance in ... the Occupation of Japan"?
- What's the problem? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- As it stands it reads that Resnik served in both military intelligence and aerial reconnaissance during the occupation of Japan. I am assuming, possibly incorrectly, that there was little call for aerial reconnaissance during the occupation of Japan.
- What's the problem? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "and with whom she became quite close." Why the qualifying "quite"? It seems wishy washy and I can't find where this is in the source given.
- "one of six women selected out of over 8,000 male and female applicants". Is it known how many men were selected?
- Twenty-nine. Added. There is a detailed breakdown in the NASA Astronaut Group 8 article. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "During the second attempt the following day". 'The following day, during the second attempt' would avoid the possibility of a misreading.
- "Space Shuttle Main Engines". Why the upper case M and E? I note that the source - NASA - uses lower case.
- "Discovery landed back at Edwards Air Force Base on September 5, after a flight lasting 6 days and 56 minutes." This jars a little as a single sentence paragraph and I don't think it necessary.
- "a trouble bolt on the Space Shuttle Challenger's door." What is "a trouble bolt"?
- Thanks. Also, was it a threaded bolt or part of door latching/locking mechanism?
- "reminding the cockpit crew of a switch configuration change". What is "a switch configuration change"?
- Gee, I don't know that either. Looking it up on StackExchange:
A primary flight instrument for the shuttle pilots was the Attitude Direction Indicator (ADI). In the STS-51L days this was a electromechanical instrument. Pre-launch, the ADI ATTITUDE switch is set to the REF position, although LVLH is the desired frame of reference for flying the Orbiter in "airplane mode". This means that shortly after liftoff, the switch must be moved to LVLH to set up the instrument for a possible ascent abort. Although it was desirable to avoid switch throws during ascent, the switch could not be pre-positioned to LVLH by the Astronaut Support Personnel (ASPs, or "Cape Crusaders") who set the cockpit switches, because there was a singularity in the calculations of LVLH attitude at pitch of 90 degrees (which the Orbiter was at on the pad). [1]
- Resnik was reading from the launch checklist. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:01, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "three of the crew members' Personal Egress Air Packs were activated for pilot Michael J. Smith and two other crew members." You don't need "three of the crew members" and "pilot Michael J. Smith and two other crew members." (Suggest deleting the former.
- "Landmarks and buildings being named for her include". Why do you use the word "being"?
- "verified by flight experience (include launch date)". I don't understand what is meant by the words in parentheses.
- "The goal of the center is to increase science, technology, engineering, and mathematics interest in children." This seems a little clumsy, even ungrammatical. Perhaps 'The goal of the center is to increase the interest of children in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics'?
- No publisher for Wayne?
Gog the Mild (talk) 21:46, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Addition thought: "Occupation of Japan"; why the upper case O? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Just the Occupation query immediately above left, but that doesn't stand in the way of my support. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:52, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Addition thought: "Occupation of Japan"; why the upper case O? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Wehwalt
- I find the first sentence a bit unwieldy. Can we not cut it off after the disaster and put the other links somewhere else? This leads into my other comment re the lead, that the discussion of her NASA service should be expanded, after all, you use only two paragraphs for the lead. I note that the discussion of her time at NASA is the lead is small in proportion to that in the body of the article.
- "His family had emigrated to Israel in the 1920s," It wasn't Israel yet. Perhaps "British mandatory Palestine" or some such?
- It might be worthy of note (or might not) that in 1962, it was quite unusual for girls to mark their Bat Mitzvah.
- While I suppose it is unusual for the child to be initiator, it's not at all unusual for a court to place custody where a mature teenager prefers, since such a person is the 800-pound gorilla of custody law, that sleeps where they want to.(probably no action required).
- Good to hear; back then the interests of the child were not paramount in the US. I have seen this happen: a teenager decides that they would rather live with their father and just moves out. When the Child Support Agency finds out, they cut the mother's child support payments. But no court action is required. What I've noticed is that most astronauts have good relationships with both their parents, but tend to be closer to their fathers. The only exception I've come across so far has been Scott Carpenter, whose father was absent. But of six biographies of women astronauts, three had bad relationships with their mothers. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "In her second year she developed a passion for electrical engineering, discovering her interest in "practical aspects of science" after attending lectures with her boyfriend and future husband, Michael Oldak, who was on the engineering course.[1] " What do you mean by "who was on the engineering course"? Doesn't sound like AmEng to me. If he was taking the same class, that is already implied; if he was an engineering major, I would phrase it in terms of that.
- "Georgetown University law school," I would cap throughout, and possibly say and link "Georgetown University Law Center"
- "Jordan later regretted doing so." I might come out and say "After her death, Jordan regretted doing so"
- Was she recruited or did she apply? There apparently was a process, since she dated other candidates.
- Yes, there was an elaborate process, which I have written up at great length in NASA Astronaut Group 8. Changed to "selected". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Discovery landed back at Edwards Air Force Base on September 5, after a flight lasting 6 days and 56 minutes." Why "back"? It hadn't launched from there.
- "Space Shuttle Challenger's door." The door spoken of is perhaps one of the payload bay doors? Then shouldn't "door" be plural?
- Is it worth mentioning she's commemorated on the Space Mirror Memorial?
Support from Kusma
I reviewed the article for GA and am happy with its sourcing. I am also pleased to see that it has been further improved based on the comments above. I only have some small things:
- "She piloted the Northrop T-38 Talon." a rather short sentence that perhaps could be clarified by saying that this was part of her astronaut training, not her civilian fun (which isn't obvious if you don't know what type of plane it is).
- The "In popular culture" section is a bit short. Is there a way to merge it into "Legacy"? (A well justified "no" would be fine).
- I'd also like to hear that your decision not to talk about Franz Strambach here (author of the most comprehensive Judith Resnik website) is deliberate. I think that arguments could be made in either direction.
- I'd never heard of it. It seems fairly trivial and incidental, but added a footnote about it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I had mentioned it while making conversation during the GA review. The footnote strikes the right balance for me (I find it borderline worthy of inclusion in a comprehensive treatment).
- I'd never heard of it. It seems fairly trivial and incidental, but added a footnote about it. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
That's all from me. —Kusma (talk) 12:45, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Shannen Says
Hello everyone! This article is about an American reality television series that documents the preparations for the wedding of actress Shannen Doherty and photographer Kurt Iswarienko. It aired for an eight-episode season on We TV from April 10 to May 13, 2012. Shannen Says had low viewership and ranked below most other programs when it premiered, despite its popularity among women between the ages of 25 and 54. Critics had mixed reviews for the series and Doherty's role on it. The show was released on the iTunes Store and Amazon Video.
I created this article in July 2016, and that year it received a GAN review from @Miyagawa:. In 2018, I opened a peer review for the article and I also participated in a FQSR workshop. In 2020, I initiated a FAC for this article, which I withdrew due to lack of actvity. Recently, I have opened a second peer review, in which I received very helpful feedback from @MaranoFan:, @FrB.TG:, @Pseud 14:, @SNUGGUMS:, and @ChrisTheDude:. As always, I would greatly appreciate any feedback. Thank you in advance! Aoba47 (talk) 16:41, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
NØ
- Image review—pass, no licensing issues and there are succint captions and alt texts.
- Support for promotion on the strength of my comments at the peer review.--NØ 16:45, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
SNUGGUMS
- Support all my concerns were already addressed at the peer review. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:54, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
FrB.TG
- Source review—pass
- I don't like the use of US Weekly but I see this was already addressed in the PR so no issues here.
- What makes IrishCentral a high-quality reliable source?
- Source 35 redirects to the main website.
- "Miller approved the show's pitch because he believed Doherty would be an appealing candidate for reality television." The source says that Miller found the pitch portrayed Dohetry as "unfiltered, honest and vulnerable" and that "I would watch her go to a supermarket...She’s insanely compelling." It doesn't mention her being an appealing candidate for reality TV.
Pseud 14
- Support on prose based on my comments addressed during the peer review. Pseud 14 (talk) 18:44, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support - as mentioned above, I PR'ed the article and don't really have anything further to add...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:51, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "It was Doherty's third wedding since her previous marriages to actor Ashley Hamilton and poker player Rick Salomon ended in 1994 and 2003, respectively." The use of "since" indicates that this is Doherty's fifth marriage. Is that correct?
- "They purchased a RED camera to film the series since they wanted it to be ..." I think this needs an in line explanation as to how a RED camera would help achieve the desired effect.
- That is a good question. Doherty did not really get into the specifics of this choice. From my impression of the interview with Doherty, she wanted to make sure the show looked as nice as possible from a visual/cinematography perspective by having what she viewed as better equipment. I tried to include the "you do want it to look spectacular" quote in the previous sentence to convey this sentiment, but I am more than open for ideas on how to better represent this information. Aoba47 (talk) 23:24, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- "wedding and divorce from". Perhaps 'wedding to and divorce from'?
- "Promotional materials emphasized her conflict with Iswarienko." Is more detail known as to the nature of the conflict?
- This sentence was pulled from the following quote from the source: "two busy career-focused individuals with strong and often conflicting viewpoints". When looking at it again, I do not my sentence in the article accurately represents the source as it does not explicitly say that the promotional material hyped this part. I was referring more to the personal conflicts between the two as they prepare for the wedding, but this part does not seem entirely useful so I removed it. Aoba47 (talk) 23:24, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Like the series premiere, the second episode aired on Tuesday night at 10 pm EST". The same Tuesday or the following?
- "after a week-long gap, two episodes were aired every Sunday night". From Tuesday to Sunday isn't a week - it is either 5 or 12 days.
- "Shannen Says ended on May 12, 2012,[1] and a writer from The Futon Critic reported that it was cancelled after being "on hiatus for longer than 12 months – without any news about its future"." This puts two not very connected points in the same sentence. I first read this as meaning it was cancelled on May 12 after 12 months on hiatus. Perhaps move the cancellation point to a separate sentence at the end of the paragraph?
Gog the Mild (talk) 18:27, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- That is understandable. I have moved the cancellation sentence to the end of the paragraph per your request. Aoba47 (talk) 00:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Thank you for your review. I greatly appreciate it. I believe that I have addressed everything, but let me know if either I missed anything or if there is anything else in the article that would benefit from further revision or work in general. I hope you are having a great start to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 00:18, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Looking good. Only a come back re the camera from me. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Thank you for the suggestion and I have used it in the article. Aoba47 (talk) 13:50, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Looking good. Only a come back re the camera from me. Gog the Mild (talk) 09:59, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Shepseskaf
This article is about Shepseskaf last pharaoh of the Fourth Dynasty, who ruled Ancient Egypt for 4 to 8 years in the late 26th to mid 25th century BC. Shepseskaf's relations to his predecessor and successor are uncertain and very few activities are known from his reign. Strikingly, he broke with the tradition of his forebears who had built the great pyramids of Giza, and chose instead to have a (relatively) small mastaba tomb built for himself in a remote corner of the Saqqara necropolis. The reasons for and significance of this decision continue to be debated in Egyptology.Iry-Hor (talk) 12:57, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Query by Support by WereSpielChequers
Interesting topic, thanks for writing it. I've made a few tweaks, hope you like them. "He reigned most probably four but possibly up to seven years in the late 26th to mid 25th century BC." (my emphasis) Is a good sentence to have in the lede, but I'd expect a couple of sentences in the body of the text explaining that the chronology of early Egyptian history has not been precisely linked to our modern calendar. ϢereSpielChequers 08:20, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Done WereSpielChequers Thank you for your comment, I agree with you so I have updated with the following (at the beginning of the "Reign" section):
“ | Shepseskaf's rule is difficult to date precisely in absolute terms. Indeed, an absolute chronology referring to dates in our modern calendar is estimated by Egyptologists working backwards by adding reign lengths—themselves uncertain and inferred from historical sources and archaeological evidence—and, in a few cases, using ancient astronomical observations and radiocarbon dates.[64] These methodologies do not agree perfectly and some uncertainty remains. As a result Shepseskaf's rule is dated to some time around the late 26th to mid 25th century BC.[note 1][26] | ” |
In addition, all exact dates estimated for Shepseskaf's reign are detailed in the footnote [note 1], which is also available from the infobox. Also, did you know that in the infobox if you click on the [show] button next to "Royal Titulary", the full titles of Shepseskaf will appear in hieroglyphics with translation ? I ask this because often people don't notice this button. Iry-Hor (talk) 18:57, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
"A causeway led to a valley temple which has yet to be located" Would it be more correct to say "A causeway is assumed to have led to a valley temple which has yet to be located" or even "based on similar complexes, archaeologists expect that there would also have been a causeway leading to a valley temple. Neither the expected causeway or valley temple have yet been found, and it is unknown whether they were demolished and the stones reused, or they were not built in his short reign and not built by his successors".- Done WereSpielChequers so the causeway is there alright, at least its beginning is there as it is visible on archeological maps (e.g. in Lehner's book). I wrote "Remnants of a causeway have been found, it is supposed to have led to a valley temple which has yet to be located" which is very close to what you proposed.Iry-Hor (talk) 12:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Family relations between the Pharoahs and queens of this era seem uncertain. We know that at a much later time the pharoahs were a very incestuos bunch, and a daughter could also be a grandaughter is there concensus among Egyptologists that this wasn't a feature of the fourth dynasty?ϢereSpielChequers 10:52, 10 June 2022 (UTC)- I guess it was a feature of the 4th dynasty as well since e.g. at least one of Menkaure's wife was his sister. But I wrote "daughter and grandaughter" because that is exactly what the source says, I guess Kozloff wanted to say some close female descendant. I have not yet found a source discussing incestuous relationship in the 4th dynasty royal family in particular and in Shepseskaf's case we do not know for sure what relationships he had with his wives since we don't even know for sure who they were.Iry-Hor (talk) 12:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- OK, we can't go beyond the sources. I have my suspicions that this may have lead to much more complex interrelationships than whether three Pharoahs were a father and his two sons or two brothers and a nephew, and we have plenty of historic examples of monarchs whose claim of descent from their predecessors was a tad sketchy, but the official line was that the current guy was the legit heir of their predecessors. But if the Eyptologists aren't saying that then we can't. ϢereSpielChequers 11:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Well some Egyptologists do say that perhaps Shepseskaf didn't have such a perfect claim to the throne: perhaps he took power only by marriage. There is, however, no trace of struggle at the time so he must have been relatively legitimate, at least enough to be accepted as a king but perhaps not enough to be given a pyramid as explained in the article. This is only one hypothesis among many though.Iry-Hor (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- OK, we can't go beyond the sources. I have my suspicions that this may have lead to much more complex interrelationships than whether three Pharoahs were a father and his two sons or two brothers and a nephew, and we have plenty of historic examples of monarchs whose claim of descent from their predecessors was a tad sketchy, but the official line was that the current guy was the legit heir of their predecessors. But if the Eyptologists aren't saying that then we can't. ϢereSpielChequers 11:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- I guess it was a feature of the 4th dynasty as well since e.g. at least one of Menkaure's wife was his sister. But I wrote "daughter and grandaughter" because that is exactly what the source says, I guess Kozloff wanted to say some close female descendant. I have not yet found a source discussing incestuous relationship in the 4th dynasty royal family in particular and in Shepseskaf's case we do not know for sure what relationships he had with his wives since we don't even know for sure who they were.Iry-Hor (talk) 12:20, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Niches I understand, but magazines? Is this a meaning of magazine that is jargon within Egyptology? I'm pretty sure this era won't have had gunpowder.ϢereSpielChequers 11:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)- WereSpielChequers Yes this is Egyptologic jargon, it essentially means storeroom or storage-space. I have changed it so it is clearer.Iry-Hor (talk) 15:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments Support from Tim riley
I hope to have a thorough perusal and then look in with a full review over the weekend, but from a quick canter through just now I notice that the spelling is a mish-mash of English and American: favour, favourite, hypothesises and recognised but center (twice), honoring and unrivaled. Either the Queen's English or Amerenglish is fine, of course, but it should be all one or the other, I think. (And I think Shepseskaf has got himself misspelled Shespeskaf in the penultimate para of the lead, though I didn't dare change it.) More anon. I'm looking forward to this. Tim riley talk 21:17, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
These are my suggestions for tweaking the prose. I have no comments on the actual content – which seems to me comprehensively authoritative, and hugely interesting – and I can only salute the author, with admiration and envy, for such mastery of a language not his/her own.
- Lead
- This is merely a suggestion, but as a layman I'd have found it helpful to have "mastaba" given a very brief gloss at first mention: " – a burial mound – " or whatever the correct description is. And failing that (or even as well as that) there should be a blue link to mastaba.
- Parents
- "Shepseskaf was Menkaure's son based on a decree" – doesn't quite say what you want it to say. It was the hypothesis, not the parentage, that was based on a decree. You could smooth this over by rejigging on the lines of "hypothesised from a decree showing that Shepseskaf completed Menkaure's mortuary temple that Shepseskaf was Menkaure's son".
- Done I wrote : "George Andrew Reisner who proposed that Shepseskaf was Menkaure's son. Reisner based his hypothesis on a decree showing that Shepseskaf completed Menkaure's mortuary temple.".Iry-Hor (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "In stark contrast with these hypotheses" – I might lose the slightly editoral "stark".
- Queens and children
- "Egyptologist Lana Troy" – a false title has crept in here, which we could do without.
- Done I wrote "Lana Troy, an Egyptologist," let me know if this is suitable.
- Reign
- "Indeed, an absolute chronology" – this is the third "indeed" in successive sections. Admittedly there are only two more, later, but one does just begin to notice them, and I might lose this one: the prose works just as well without it.
- Relative chronology
- "Archaeological evidences seem to indicate" – one can see why you go for a plural noun here, but I don't think it quite works in everyday English. I think "evidence seems" is probably safer.
- "Three historical sources go directly or indirectly against this order of succession however" – I'm not a foaming-at-the-mouth opponent of "however", which has its place, but I don't think it adds anything here, and I'd delete it.
- "Unfortunately, the five cartouches between those of Khafre and Userkaf are now illegible" – no doubt it is unfortunate, but that isn't for Wikipedia to say.
- Duration
- "The duration of Shepseskaf's rule is uncertain but it is generally taken to have lasted likely four but perhaps up to seven years" – BrE has the peculiarity (among countless others) that "likely" in this construction isn't idiomatic, and "probably" is normal. (Quite why we prefer the woollier Latinism to the crisp Middle English word I have no idea, but there it is. Americans have more sense than we English do on this point.)
- Done thank you I will try to keep this in mind. This is also somewhat closer to how we say this in French with "probablement" taken to mean that there is more chance for than against something.Iry-Hor (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "L'anglais, ce n'est jamais que du français mal prononcé" (Clemenceau). Tim riley talk 16:12, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Done thank you I will try to keep this in mind. This is also somewhat closer to how we say this in French with "probablement" taken to mean that there is more chance for than against something.Iry-Hor (talk) 15:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Two historical sources report Shepseskaf's reign duration" – "reign duration" sounds alien to a speaker of the Queen's English (to this one, at any rate). I think we'd normally say "the duration of Shepseskaf's reign.
- "Although such a reign length" – I think this variant just about passes muster as idiomatic BrE, and I shan't quarrel if you want to leave it as is.
- Activities
- "The Palermo stone reports that the year of his accession" – could do with "in" after "that".
- "Finally Shepseskaf likely decreed" – another case for "probably" instead of "likely"
- "This material allows for rapid constructions" – "construction" singular, I suggest, here.
- End of Dynasty
- "they likely belonged to the same family" – as before for "likely"
- Location
- "This remains unverified as no palace of Old Kingdom king has been located" – would benefit from "an" or "any" before "Old", I think.
- Decision to build a mastaba
- "Hassan has put forth the idea" – "forth" is rather an antique term and "forward" would perhaps look more natural.
- "if Shepseskaf really did intend for his tomb to be a mastaba" – we don't want the "for" here: "did intend his tomb" would be normal BrE.
- Architecture
- "Remnants of a causeway have been found, it is supposed to have led to a valley temple which has yet to be located" – comma splice. Replacing the comma with a semicolon will do the trick.
- Middle Kingdom
- "The stele uncovered by Jéquier likely originated" – et encore
- "as pavement for the temple floor" – I think "as paving" (without the definite article) or else "as the pavement for the temple floor" would be usual.
- "the deads of the surrounding necropolis" – again, I see why you have the plural, but I think a singular "the dead" is wanted here (twice).
Those are my few suggestions. I'll look in again shortly and – I confidently expect – add my support. – Tim riley talk 15:24, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Tim riley thank you for your comments, all addressed so far!Iry-Hor (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Good grief! That didn't take long. All my minor quibbles about the prose have been thoroughly dealt with, and I am happy to add my support for this article, which seems to me comprehensive, balanced, well and widely sourced, admirably illustrated and a really good read. Meets all the FA criteria in my judgement, and I look forward to seeing it on our front page in due course. Tim riley talk 16:03, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Tim riley thank you for your comments, all addressed so far!Iry-Hor (talk) 15:52, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
BTS
- Nominator(s): ErnestKrause (talk), Wehwalt (talk) 23:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
This article is about the contemporary music group BTS from South Korea. It is a co-nomination with Wehwalt and a renewed FAC with updated text and sources. The previous successful GAN nomination was done as a co-nomination with Btspurplegalaxy who is also on the top 10 editor list for the article. ErnestKrause (talk) 23:41, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose similar reasons as last time, I don't feel my concerns were fully addressed. The sourcing can still be improved with the books that are now minimally cited; journal articles I brought up were not included at all. Some of the citations now lack page numbers, eg. " John Lie, "BTS, the Highest Stage of K-pop". In Youna Kim, Ed. The Soft Power of the Korean Wave. "Chapter 7". Routledge Press. 2022." I don't know exactly how many pages there are in a chapter, but this is not ideal for verifiability. Another book is listed in bibliography and cited using sfn referencing, so I would cite all book sources the same way for consistency. The nominator is the author of 4.7% of the article, so concern about how he can guarantee the accuracy of the remaining 95% remains. (t · c) buidhe 18:53, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- You seemed to say it was "an improvement" on your talk page here: [2]. Also, all three of the editors listed as nominators are listed by Wikitools on the top 10 list of editors for "authorship" out of over 1500 editors for the article: Wehwalt is #7, Ernest is #6, and Btspurple is #4. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:38, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- The page numbers in the Soft Power book have now been added, and I'll go through the refs and see what can be done. More learned sources have been added. Again, I'll do more on this.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:56, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Most of the sources cited in the opposes in the two FACs are now included, as well as other scholarly sources. Much of the article is basically about facts, the group's activities in the years since its founding.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Buidhe we have, I believe, addressed your concerns. A number of scholarly sources are now used, sfn has been adopted for the book and article sources where it was not present, and I'm assured by ErnestKrause that the sources (which were gone through when the article was pared down from the sprawling mess it was) do reflect the sources.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:59, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've repeatedly been asked to change my oppose, but sourcing issues remain in the article such as citing self-published medium and forbes contributors. Some citations are broken with the message "Harv error: this link doesn't point to any citation". The question of how people who wrote a minority of the article have verified the sourcing and accuracy of the remaining 90 percent or so remains. (t · c) buidhe 16:17, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Your comment about authorship appears not to know about the long edit history of the BTS article. Previous editors from the last 10 years had bloated the article to over 400Kb in size. Those 'authors' of the article made a sprawling mess of the old version of the BTS article, and GAN was successfull only because the article went through an extensive bulking down process to get it through a successful GAN. You appear to keep wanting to give credit to the old previous editors who caused it to become bloated at over 400Kb in size last year which detracted from the article being able to get to GAN. The GAN succeeded due to bulking down the article and not super-adding text to a article that was already over 400Kb.
- Your comment about Forbes must refer to the one citation to Forbes in the entire article to document the release of their song "Dynamite". That citation is written by a Forbes staff member which is acceptable to Wikipedia policy; only non-staff Forbes article are excluded by Wikipedia policy. If you see any SPS problems in the article, then state them by name since the article has had an extensive review of citations at its successfull GAN.
- The Harv-cite error you mention appears only for the one book by Kim Young which was added by a previous editor, and which Wehwalt is in the process of converting to sfn; it is already in the sfn section of the Bibliography. The print-out of the article on my screen shows no other Harv-cite issues at this time. If you see any other Harv-cite issues, then you can them list them here, since none of them are coming up on my screen print-out at this time. ErnestKrause (talk) 17:40, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- There were several sfn errors, but I've gone through everything now and they're fixed. As for the assurances of accuracy, there's ErnestKrause's assurances on this front and I think both ErnestKrause's comments just above and FrB.TG's just below respond to that. At this point, this seems to be an oppose where everything either has been addressed or (in the case of the concern about accuracy, there's nothing that can, or so far as I can tell, should, be done.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've repeatedly been asked to change my oppose, but sourcing issues remain in the article such as citing self-published medium and forbes contributors. Some citations are broken with the message "Harv error: this link doesn't point to any citation". The question of how people who wrote a minority of the article have verified the sourcing and accuracy of the remaining 90 percent or so remains. (t · c) buidhe 16:17, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Buidhe we have, I believe, addressed your concerns. A number of scholarly sources are now used, sfn has been adopted for the book and article sources where it was not present, and I'm assured by ErnestKrause that the sources (which were gone through when the article was pared down from the sprawling mess it was) do reflect the sources.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:59, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Most of the sources cited in the opposes in the two FACs are now included, as well as other scholarly sources. Much of the article is basically about facts, the group's activities in the years since its founding.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:54, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by FrB.TG
The additions of academic sources have definitely improved the article. I partially disagree with the oppose above, i.e. with the part that the nominators not being major authors of the article could mean there are unsupported/misinterpreted claims there. Unless a spot-checker specifically identifies issues on this front, it's just an assumption that these exist. (Note I'm not saying that these don't exist, but only saying the possible issues would first need to be confirmed to warrant an oppose on that ground.) Some of my comments regarding sourcing can be found here on my talk page. My comments here will mostly focus on the prose and MoS issues.
- "By 2017, BTS crossed into the global music market, leading the Korean Wave into the United States" - the Wikipedia article does not capitalize "wave" in Korean Wave.
- Should be lower case and changed to lower case. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:19, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "They are the first Asian and non-English speaking act to be named the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry's (IFPI) Global Recording Artist of the Year (2020–2021), to chart on Billboard's Top Touring Artists of the 2010s (placing at number 45), and to headline and sell out Wembley Stadium and the Rose Bowl (Love Yourself World Tour in 2019)." Too many and's here.
- Rewrite long sentence as two sentences. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:24, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- File:Bangtan Boys at the Incheon Music Center in September 2013 02.jpg appears in between two sections; either place it at the beginning of Name or Career section.
- Mirror flip image with quote box in Career section. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:34, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "This extended their name to mean "growing youth BTS who is going beyond the realities they are facing, and going forward."[10]" Per MOS:LQ, the full stop should be placed outside the quotation mark.
- Correct period location. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "BTS was originally supposed to be a hip hop group similar to YG Entertainment's 1TYM,[13] but soon after the group was created, Bang Si-hyuk decided to create an idol group similar to Seo Taiji and Boys, a group which was popular in the 90's." Usage of group four times in one sentence and I would change '90's to 1990s.
- Divide long sentence into two sentences, and rewrite. ErnestKrause (talk) 00:46, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Here was a musical act that wasn’t pulling any punches." Avoid using curly apostrophes (’) and use a straight (') one instead (per MOS:'). There are other ones throughout the article and you would need to go through them.
- "Their subsequent single, "We Are Bulletproof Pt. 2", failed to chart
at all." Prose redundancy.
- "The release topped the Gaon Album Chart,[37] and
it alsoappeared on Billboard's World Albums Chart for the first time, peaking at number three." Prose redundancy.
- "Following Skool Luv Affair's release" - the possessive ('s) should not be in italics.
- "In July 2014, BTS hosted a free concert in West Hollywood, their first show in the United States" - the article randomly switches between using United States and US. Stick to one.
- Changed all to "US" for consistency throughout article. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 01:51, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The band released their first Japanese studio album, Wake Up (2014), that December; the release" - release used in twice in close proximity.
- Copy edit wording. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:18, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "BTS wanted to express the beauty and anxiousness of youth and settled on the title" - whose title are we talking about here? Addendum: it's only clarified in the next sentence.
- Rewrite first two sentence of that paragraph. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:26, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The album's second single, "Dope (Korean: 쩔어; RR: Jjeoreo)," peaked at number three" - place the quotation sign before the comma.
- moved to the proper place Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 02:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- File:Bangtan Boys at KCON France 2016.jpg and File:BTS win first Daesang (Grand Prize) at Melon Music Awards, 19 November 2016.jpg are placed too closely to each other in opposite directions, creating a WP:SANDWICH issue.
- Pull KCon image up one paragraph to avoid image sandwich. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- ""Spring Day"
laterwon Best Song of the Year at the 2017 Melon Music Awards." It's obvious that one wins awards for their work later on so it's uneeded.
- Drop extra word. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:33, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Commercially, BTS continued to hit new career heights" - "hit new career heights" sounds too informal.
- Expand their artistic successes, sounds more on point. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- "In December, they also became the first K-pop group" - unnecessary use of "also".
- Removed. Btspurplegalaxy 🗩 🖉 02:02, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- WP:NBSP needed in a lot of places e.g. "300 million" and "September 2017". Check thoroughly.
Down to the end of 2014–2017: Mainstream and international breakthrough. This should keep you busy for a while. I'll return with more comments later. FrB.TG (talk) 18:59, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've added another dozen to two dozen nbsp additions to improve readability on this. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the comments. I've addressed a few of them and will return tomorrow to get more of them.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:13, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- It should be up to date as to the above comments. Ready for next set of edit comments when available. ErnestKrause (talk) 14:53, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Oscar Isaac
Oscar Isaac has been part of Marvel films/shows, Star Wars sequel trilogy and several high-profile films, yet it's the underrated gems like Inside Llewyn Davis, A Most Violent Year and Ex Machina where he truly shines. I have given his article a major expansion in the last few weeks. Kind reviewers, help me get Isaac the bronze star on Wikipedia. FrB.TG (talk) 10:39, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Aoba47
- I support this FAC based on the prose. All of my concerns have already been addressing as part of an informal peer review on the article's talk page, and I could not find anything further to add after reading the article another time. It is a shame that there is not more specific information about Isaac's college experiences (i.e. his degrees), but I also could not find any further information from reliable sources. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 15:30, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Pseud 14
Placeholder. Will review and provide comments soon. Pseud 14 (talk) 18:46, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Isaac has been credited with contributing to a change in the -- would be better if it’s stated as “credited for his contribution to a change…”
- in his view not "a flourishing place for the arts" – “in his view it was not“
- his bandmates performed Nirvana's "Rape Me" at a talent show and lost. – perhaps add the citation at the end of this statement, I understand it’s supported by either the King or Crelin sources.
- Strangely enough, it's supported by none. It was the Esquire2017 source that I also used elsewhere in the article. I've added it there as well.
- ("a gangster movie without the gangsters" in Isaac's words[33]) -- I think having the parenthetical in that place is awkward and could be reworked or reworded
- Chandor agreed with her after meeting with Isaac, finding him to be "precise, wild and alive" – and found him to be..
- Isaac agreed to play villain Apocalypse in the film – to play the villain
First pass, have reviewed down to 'Mainstream Success'. Will finish off the rest and read again after. Hope these comments are helpful. Pseud 14 (talk) 16:05, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Satisfied with above. My final batch:
- In the former, the final film in the Star Wars sequel trilogy -- I'd wikilink "Star Wars sequel trilogy" as you did in the lead.
- Isaac trained in a New York hall where one can decrease oxygen and increase pressure -- perhaps you can link either "trained" or the latter phrase to altitude training
- he resemble Raul Julia -- resembled
- I was trying the subjunctive present tense but it's more commonly used for verbs like suggest, insist, advise etc. Not sure if it goes for "claimed" like I have used so changed to resembled as per your suggestion.
- he drew from his time as a high-school graduate -- should it be he drew inspiration from?
- In the Marvel Cinematic Universe series Moon Knight (2022) airing on Disney+ -- perhaps you could tweak, since that show has concluded.
This concludes my review. A very solid work to another high-profile BLP. Pseud 14 (talk) 15:48, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
My comments have been addressed and I am happy to support on prose. Pseud 14 (talk) 19:18, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- Wikilink Latinos? Although a commonly-used term in the United States I don't think it is as well known elsewhere
- "His first major role was of Joseph" => "His first major role was that of Joseph"
- "He has an older sister, climate scientist Nicole and" => "He has an older sister, climate scientist Nicole, and"
- "Isaac studied acting at the Juilliard School in New York City" - complete sentence so needs a full stop
- "It was the first film to hold its world premiere in Vatican City" => "It was the first film to hold its world premiere in the Vatican City"
- "For much of rest of the 2000s," => "For much of the rest of the 2000s,"
- Wikilink space opera?
- "Caryn James of BBC" => "Caryn James of the BBC"
- "Isaac debuted as a producer in the historical drama" => "Isaac debuted as a producer with the historical drama" (the producer role isn't "in" the film)
- "he intended to take a prolonged acting sabbatical until he was cast" - makes it sound like he always intended to take a long sabbatical until such time as this casting would occur. Maybe "he intended to take a prolonged acting sabbatical, however he was cast"
- "Roktim Rajpal of Deccan Herald" => "Roktim Rajpal of the Deccan Herald"
- That's what I got - a great read overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:42, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:37, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Dear Future Husband
This article is about Meghan Trainor's song "Dear Future Husband", which is Trainor's list of things a potential suitor needs to do if he wants to "get some... kisses". Its accompanying music video attracted the wrath of cancel culture for depicting her as a domestic housewife, and the song itself received mixed reviews with criticism directed towards its backward portrayal of gender roles. This nomination marks a full circle moment for me as this was one of the first proper articles I created, way back in 2014, and I have seen it through DYK, GAN, and now an FAC! Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.--NØ 09:16, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Lee Vilenski
I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.
- Lede
- extended play Title (2014)- could we reword to avoid back-to-back links? Perhaps
from Title, her debut extended play, released in 2014.
Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Kevin Kadish produced the song and wrote it with Trainor, could we mention Trainor first, perhaps say that Trainor wrote the song alongside Kadish, who also produced the song? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm a bit surprised the lede doesn't mention the British charts. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Prose
- Old-timey doo wop is such a weird double link, does she specifically call it "old timey"? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Croon" might need explaination. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Title is introduced and linked twice in background. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Additional comments
- I have no idea how this actually works, but it looks like the title of the song is "Dear Future Husband" with speech marks, is this not also suitable for the article title? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe not all that important, but the audio sample states it is 19 seconds long, not 18. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- The sentence with the instruments probably needs a colon and some semi-colons. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- baritone saxophone and tenor saxophone - could we not say "baritone and tenor saxophones?" Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- named it one of the two best songs on the album - bit of a weird thing to be happy about. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Can we link rom-com? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Formats and track listing seems completely pointless. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why isn't charts a subsection of commercial performance? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:04, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'm not sure about the reason but I would point to FAs like "Shake It Off" and "Blank Space" as examples.--NØ 18:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:35, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you, Lee Vilenski.--NØ 18:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi LV, since you already indicated that was the conclusion of your review in a summary, I wanted to ask if the concerns have been addressed to your satisfaction. Thanks!--NØ 13:43, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sure. I'll probably have another squint over the article in a bit and confirm there's nothing else that pops out and then support. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:46, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Aoba47
- For File:Meghan Trainor - Dear Future Husband (Official Single Cover).png, I would try to find a source link that is not Amazon if possible.
- I have a suggestion about this part, it lists things a potential romantic suitor needs to do to win Trainor's affection. I think it would be better to say something like: in it, Trainor lists things a potential romantic suitor needs to do to win her affection. I think attributing listing to the song itself reads a little weirdly, but that may just be me.
- I do not think piano needs a link since a majority of readers are likely familiar with the instrument already and it would cut down on the amount of links in that particular section. I have a similar comment for the sailor link.
- This may just be a personal preference, but I do not think it is necessary to include this part, awarded the song an "A−" grade, I would only this kind of grading in the prose if it is notable in itself, but that does not appear to be the case here. I think it would be better to use this space to focus more on what the reviewer says in the article. However, I know other editors appreciate so it is up to you. I just wanted to raise it to your attention.
- I have a question about this part: when he brings her a carryout pizza. Maybe it's because I'm an American, but I've not really heard "carryout pizza" before. I think it would be simpler to say, when he delivers her a pizza.
- I think it would be worthwhile to mention that was not the first time Trainor was accused of antifeminism and sexism as it would give more context to the way that the music video was reviewed. I would make it clear that this did not come from nowhere and was not the first time that this conversation was being had about Trainor's music and image (and not the first time she denied it either).
- I would re-examine the first paragraph of the "Reception" subsection in the "Music video" section. It has solid content, but I think it could be structured better. There seem to be two common ideas: 1) the retro and domestic image present in the video and 2) how it is more frightening or more concerning than other music videos. I think this section would benefit from a more solid transition from one idea to the other because it is rather abrupt right now.
These are my comments from my first read-through of the article, and once everything has been addressed above, I would be more than happy to look through it again so I can do my due diligence as a reviewer. If I am being honest, I am not a fan of this song, and I actually prefer "Title". I enjoy Trainor's music, but whenever I think back to this time period, I am more so surprised that no one from her team or label did a better job at getting in front of or responding to the antifeminism and sexism criticisms. But that is another story. I hope this review is helpful. Aoba47 (talk) 19:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot, Aoba47. Looking forward to your read and subsequent comments! I do think a lot of Trainor's early decline can be attributed to a bad PR team and managerial decisions. I'm currently working on the Title album article so I guess the song of the same name might eventually be on my radar too, lol.--NØ 01:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I am glad that I could help. I will read through the article again tomorrow if that is okay with you. Best of luck with the peer review. I always have respect for editors who work on very successful and/or widely-publicized albums/songs as it does required wading through a lot of resources. Have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 16:04, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Ippantekina
I heard this song back in the day and I thought, wow, what a cheesy song. I did not expect a doo-wop song to gain such attention in the 2010s, but I guess some trends do receive revived interest... Either way, here are my first comments after glancing at the article, will go through the prose in-depth in the upcoming days.
- Per Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs#Single track listings track listings for singles are generally omitted.
- Per WP:PERSONNEL we don't generally include studios; mention them in the prose instead.
- I can't find any quote specifically asking not to mention the studios, so I've always considered it a matter of personal choice. Personally I find this information useful.--NØ 10:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I guess it's really down to personal preferences. Ippantekina (talk) 08:18, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Are there better sources to replace YouTube, Instagram etc.? Ippantekina (talk) 09:49, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- There was no secondary reportage of those developments, no. I think the director is essential to include though so I deferred to primary sources.--NØ 10:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Glad to have a review from you, Ippantekina. I regularly refer to the 1989 articles for inspiration. Looking forward to your comments :)--NØ 10:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I really admire the work some Swifties put into the 1989 articles as well! I am currently nominating "Out of the Woods" at FAC to save the status of 1989 as a featured topic (with the recent addition of "This Love" as a non-FA...), and I hope you could give some feedback there.
- Lead—"her debut extended play, which was later included on her 2015 debut major-label studio album of the same name"; dangling modifier
- I suppose you meant I should remove it. Removed.
- A link to music critics would be helpful
- Added.
- "fellow Trainor songs" sounds off; "other" is more straightforward
- Since "other" was causing repetition I went with "various". I'm open to ideas here, really.
- "and attained multi-platinum certifications" can a song "attain" a certification?
- Changed to "received".
- Done.
- Background—"and reached number one in 58 countries, selling 11 million units worldwide" these two clauses are unrelated
- Hopefully my revision fixed this.
- "was included as a B-side on the digital release of "All About That Bass" in Austria,[13] Germany,[14] and Switzerland," I think these three sources are not exhaustive, so a general statement (in some European countries) could do
- Done.
- "and serviced it to contemporary hit radio stations" can a label "service" a song to radio? "send" would be a better and simpler word choice
- Agreed.
- Music and lyrics—I am unsure if Stereogum qualifies as a FA-worthy source, but I will leave this up to the source reviewer.
- I have qualms about Stereogum as a site too but DeVille is considered an expert in the field and is admissible for critical commentary.
- I think the Rolling Stone sources do not require paid subscription for some first reads, so set the url-access parameter to "limited" instead of "subscription"
- Thanks for pointing this out!
- I don't think "bounce" in "girl-group bounce" refers to bounce music, which is an 80s hip hop subgenre
- I could see it either way but removed the link just to be safe.
- Critical reception—"betrayal of conventional gender roles" I am unsure what this means
- Hopefully "alternative take" gets the point across? What I'm trying to convey is it differed from them.
- "poetically and sonically similar" "poetically" is a little POV (?) would "lyrically" do?
- Causing slight repetition but I changed it.
- the Chicago Tribune
- Revised.
- Commercial performance—"initially peaked" I thought the song initially peaked back in 2014?
- It entered the chart in 2014 and its peak as a non-single was on the chart dated January 10, 2015 (which was still 2014 in real time).
- "On the Canadian Hot 100, the song charted at number 22 and Music Canada certified it 3× Platinum" I would say "In Canada, the song peaked at number 22 on the Canadian Hot 100 and was certified 3× Platinum by Music Canada"
- Done.
- Music video—"She premiered the video at Today" on Today?
- Works better imo. Changed.
- (unrelated) "she approves of Puth when he brings her a pizza" why is this so funny
- The whole video is kind of parodic and humorous in my opinion, lol.
- "Some critics directed positive commentary" simply "Some critics praised" to me personally, simplicity is king.
- Changed.
- Live performances—I find information about what the singer wears and what accessories were used for some live performances trivial for a Wikipedia article, unless the performance receives extensive media coverage and a certain degree of "iconicity" to it (like Britney Spears' python use during the 2001 VMAS; but again, who defines what is iconic..?). I am up to discussion with you on this matter though, and the rest of the section is well written.
- I decided to include this commentary because the song only received two real performances outside of the tours, so the section would really be kind of short without it. I could see an argument for omitting it but I don't think keeping it is too harmful, since it is available from reputed sources.
- Those are my comments on prose, and I will leave other reviewers to take care of media/source/spotcheck/MOS reviews if necessary. Please ping me if you have any queries. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 08:18, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
-
- Thank you for addressing my comments. One remaining issue I have is with the opening sentence--can we reword it to something like in the "All About That Bass" article? Including both the EP and the album in one sentence is confusing to me at least.. Other than that I am happy to support this article for promotion on prose, great job. Ippantekina (talk) 01:46, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have split it into two sentences like "Bass". Thank you, Ippantekina!--NØ 04:29, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Happy to support this article on prose. A personal note... when Meghan Trainor released such songs as "Me Too" or "No", I was surprised she could stay relevant reinventing her styles. I wonder what went wrong with her following releases... Brilliant work with the article! Ippantekina (talk) 07:24, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Media review from SNUGGUMS (Pass)
- File:Meghan Trainor - Dear Future Husband (Official Single Cover).png has an appropriate FUR
- With no evidence found to the contrary, I'll assume good faith that File:KK color pic.jpg is indeed the uploader's own work
- There's something weird going on with the duration for File:Dear Future Husband.ogg; while the file description and one part of its embedding here say 18 seconds (the maximum allowed for a 184 second song per WP:SAMPLE limits), a gray bar with white text reads 19 seconds. What's up with that? I don't know for sure how long it is.
- File:Meghan Trainor (15812368967).jpg is free of copyright.
My only qualm right now among files used is the audio length. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 21:18, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hmm, the sample duration thing seems to be happening on a lot of articles. I can vouch for the (original upload's) length being compliant with the limits as the uploader, though.—NØ 21:29, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Source review – Pass
Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 18:42, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Formatting
- I think SongwriterUniverse should be italicized? Isn't it a work/magazine?
- You could consider Scott Simon and Trainor as co-authors for ref 10, but I wouldn't think this is required
- Title case for ref 18? Are you meaning to do title case every time or something else?
- All Title case now.
- Something weird is going on with ref 20's link, it's saying that the link is unsecure
- Ref 21 doesn't have a date
- ref 63 needs an 'in Polish'
- Refs 73 and 74 shouldn't be italicized (should be publishers)
- Reliability
- I'm fine with the use of primary sources as the YT and Insta refs, as long as there's no secondary alternatives available?
- There are none.
- I would say the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel is from a big enough city to warrant inclusion, but perhaps the Knoxville News Sentinel is a bit niche? What do you think about this?—getting at the 'high quality' requirement here
- I had included it because it is owned by Gannett, which publishes several reputed newspapers including USA Today, The Tennessean, and the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (full list in the article), and their extensive staff team didn't give me any pause either. Removed since its inclusion isn't very important here, though.
- Verifiability
- I've spotchecked this nominator before so see no need to do so here. Happy to do so if request by the coords, nominator or someone else. Best – Aza24 (talk) 01:07, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Does the source review pass now, then, Aza24?--NØ
- Yes! Pass for source review. 19:42, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Other comments from SNUGGUMS (Support)
- I'd trim "It was included on Title (2014), her debut extended play, and later on her 2015 debut major-label studio album of the same name." down to something like "It was included on Title, her 2014 extended play, and later on her 2015 studio album of the same name."
- "A doo-wop and pop song, 'Dear Future Husband' has lyrics about chivalry and dating; in it, Trainor lists things a potential romantic suitor needs to do to win her affection." is quite a mouthful! Try splitting the sentence by turning the semi-colon into a period.
- Commonly recognized terms like "music critics", "critics", "single", and "digital" don't need to be linked per WP:OVERLINK
- Something about the use of semi-colons from "He handled drum programming, sound design, and plays the acoustic guitar, electric guitar, bass, and synthesizer; David Baron plays the piano and Hammond organ; and Jim Hoke plays the baritone and tenor saxophone." doesn't feel right. Commas might work better here.
- "rewrote its lyrics to make them less problematic" could use some elaboration on what the changes involved
- Pointed a link to Political correctness which hopefully helps. I'm trying to avoid quoting lines from the lyrics as it may give excessive weightage to this review.--NØ 21:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Spell out International Federation of the Phonographic Industry for ref#7
- When citing Instagram posts, they need to be quoted verbatim in the titles.
- I'm sure you can find something better than Us Weekly to use
- Generally what they are cited for is individually corroborated by other sources (WaPo saying it "[aroused] lots of strongly worded opinions", MTV News saying "Those images sparked quite the backlash, with many calling the clip anti-feminist."), but they just provided the best summary which is the best source to use for that purpose. With the source review passed it's probably not too concerning.--NØ 21:20, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Thankfully this isn't too far off from being FA-worthy. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 20:25, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
-
- Of course, and I support after making just a minor change to focus more on political correctness (which seemed more specific than just saying something was "problematic"). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:11, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
2016 World Snooker Championship
- Nominator(s): Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
This article is about the 2016 edition of the World Snooker Championship. Mark Selby won the event defeating Ding Junhui in the final. Let me know your thoughts.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 09:37, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review. I will do a little copy editing as I go. Let me know if you object to anything.
- What is a "ranking event"?
- It's an event that carries snooker world rankings points. It's probably a bit difficult to spell that out without it being overly detailed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The event was the tenth and last ranking event of the 2015–2016 season." → 'The event was the tenth and last event of the 2015–2016 season that carried snooker world ranking points' doesn't seem difficult to me.
- Apologies GTM, I've been a bit busy with something else. Sure, I've made this change. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:46, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The event was the tenth and last ranking event of the 2015–2016 season." → 'The event was the tenth and last event of the 2015–2016 season that carried snooker world ranking points' doesn't seem difficult to me.
- "All the other players". Which group is made up of who?
- Added to summary. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- "to within one at 10–9." Missing word?
- Done Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- "210 million viewers from China on CCTV-5 in China." I don't think we need both "from China" and "in China."
- Indeed. I've changed. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why is the text on qualifying not in chronological order? Ie, before the text on the first round.
- This is pretty standard - I have asked in the past, but currently there is no consensus to have qualification before the main draw. Probably as it's much less important and can be quite long on these pages. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I am not referring to the rather smart graphics. You write about qualifying in some detail in "Tournament summary#Seeding and qualifying rounds" and then repeat some of it and add information in "Qualifying". This level of detail would be better consolidated in one place, and just a brief summary left to introduce "Qualifying", as you do with "Main draw".
- I get your concern. However, I do feel like it would bloat up the format section to include the names of invited players, for instance. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ho hum. I might be inclined to argue further over this, but checking other, similar, promoted articles this approach has clearly been acceptable to other reviewers. Which I find a little odd, but so be it. Otherwise well up to your usual standard. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- I get your concern. However, I do feel like it would bloat up the format section to include the names of invited players, for instance. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:48, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- I am not referring to the rather smart graphics. You write about qualifying in some detail in "Tournament summary#Seeding and qualifying rounds" and then repeat some of it and add information in "Qualifying". This level of detail would be better consolidated in one place, and just a brief summary left to introduce "Qualifying", as you do with "Main draw".
That's all I have. Nice work. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Gog the Mild. Thanks for the review! Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 10:51, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Sawmill Fire (2017)
Here's some black comedy. The first (I'm pretty sure) wildfire caused by a gender reveal party, which resulted in the incineration of ~47,000 acres of Federal and Arizona state property in April 2017. I started this article in mid-2021 and soon thereafter got it through GAN - now I'm here to collect my first Four Award 😊 –♠Vami_IV†♠ 08:48, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Lee Vilenski and Premeditated Chaos: How are we looking now? –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:13, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Support by Lee Vilenski
I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.
- Lede
- The lede is mostly good - should probably have some info about the total cost of the fire.
- Same is true of the legal action. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Prose
- The article doesn't seem to mention anything about who actually set off the fire, other than it being a gender reveal party. Is this normal? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- about 100 civilians were evacuated and 100 others - what is other than a civilian? Is this military personnel? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- on 24–25 April - on 24 and 25 April per MOS:DATE, but as this is American, it might be April 24 and 25. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- ~600 - can we change this to prose? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- made great progress - can we remove the "great"? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- On May 1, 2017, command of the Sawmill Fire response effort was returned to the Arizona Department of Forestry and Fire Management, U.S. Forest Service (USFS), and BLM,[11][33] and the firefighters were demobilized.[33 - should probably be two sentences as the list has an additional and firefighters on the end. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- In July 2017, lawmakers in Pima County proposed the ban of the possession, creation, and distribution of explosive targets in response to the Sawmill Fire and other fires caused by exploding targets. - this should probably be at the start of the para.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:30, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Additional comments
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:35, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from PMC
Staking my spot out, review to follow. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:10, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- This is orthogonal to the FAC review, but it seems like this should be the primary topic for Sawmill Fire, as the current occupant there is only a redirect to a broad-scope article about 2016 California wildfires in general. (And if not, I think the disambiguation style for dated events is usually year first, as in "2017 Sawmill Fire", no?)
- I think you can trim from "at first contain and then extinguish" to "contain and extinguish", as generally speaking one follows the other.
- "who had shot the tannerite target and then cooperated with first responders" the second clause there feels weird. If his cooperation had anything to do with the charges, that should be explained (something like, "his charge was reduced to X because he cooperated"), otherwise it seems odd to throw into that sentence
- While I agree, I included that to make the article less of a rag on Dickey. There's no way to talk about this even with the knowledge that he felt bad about this and cooperated with the authorities without coming down on him like a ton of bricks. But I didn't think it in the spirit of NPOV or BLP to not mention this. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- You could rejigger lead para 2 a bit, something along the lines of "The fire was started by accident by Dickey, who immediately alerted emergency services and cooperated. US Attorney's Office investigated and charged him with blah blah." That takes the cooperation clause out of the charging sentence where it doesn't belong, and also emphasizes his acceptance of responsibility by putting it at the beginning of the paragraph. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- I think it may be worth briefly explaining, for the lucky few who have no idea what a gender reveal party is, why on earth someone would be setting off high explosives at one
- I am not so sure about this; should I explain why someone would do something dangerous and not entirely thought through at any party? What more can be said clinically here about the circumstances that led to this fire? Moreover the better article for detailing this ridiculous, dangerous, and frankly dumb phenomenon is Gender reveal party, I feel. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 10:35, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Well, I'm not talking about going into detail, but arguably someone who knows absolutely nothing about the concept of a gender reveal party is going to be lost without clicking through to another page. It doesn't hurt to throw in even something like "the target was intended to produce colored smoke" just to give some kind of clue. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:14, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- "but their efforts were further hindered by the addition of the rough terrain" - I think you could trim to "were hindered by the rough terrain"
- Do we know why the Red Cross shelters went unused? It's fine if not, just stood out as an interesting curiosity
- What's a Type-II incident? Was this one? This should either be clarified for the reader or removed as it doesn't add much to understanding
- "allowing the now about six-hundred firefighters present" - this feels awkward but I can't figure out how to reword it
- Also, you have this in text but later use 800 in numerals - should be consistent, no?
- What's a Type I team?
- I'm not going to die on this hill, but I'm not sure the inflation conversions are needed for something that only happened 5 years ago
- "Route 83 was reopened..." this whole sentence is a bit awkward. If the reopening and the evac order lifting happened on the same day, the date should be at the end of the sentence. Meanwhile, it feels like highway repairs belong in Aftermath
- "Wind as fast as 45 miles..." expected when? Came when?
- Honestly you could tighten this down a lot. Something like "Although winds reached up to 45 miles per hour on April Whatever, the fire had been fully contained and evacuation orders were lifted by April 30."
- You explain BLM under aftermath, but it's first mentioned under Fire, so that should be moved
- You could probably merge the firefighters being demobbed to the previous sentence, something like "command was returned to X Y Z and the firefighters were demobilized."
- What's total foliage mortality and how does it differ from an area being burned in general?
- You could ditch "There," in "There, he pled guilty"
- I think "followed" is probably more accurate than "succeeded," as succeeded kind of implies taking the place of
Okay, that about wraps it up. You know me - if you disagree, we can discuss, etc etc. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:24, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Missed one - "public conscience" in the lead should be "public's consciousness" ♠PMC♠ (talk) 12:15, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "Firefighters began to pursue full suppression of the fire". This seems jargony. What does it actually mean?
- "their efforts were further hindered by". Hindered further to what?
- "~600". Use prose, not ~.
- "the fire was fully contained and evacuation orders were lifted". Suggest 'the fire was fully contained and all evacuation orders were lifted'.
That's all. A nice little article. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:20, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Source review by Nikkimaria
spotchecks not done. Version reviewed
- The lead indicates the fire was contained 30 May, the infobox indicates 1 May - which is correct?
- It was not; I meant 30 April. Fixed now. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 22:54, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Okay, so if it was contained 30 April, why does the infobox indicate 1 May? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:18, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- It was not; I meant 30 April. Fixed now. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 22:54, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- FN2: this appears to be a republication and should be cited as such
- FN9: if you're citing the updated version, it has a different publication date
- FN11: source lists different authors. Ditto FN51, please check throughout
- FN44 should be changed to indicate that the original link is now dead
- FN45: see WP:FORBESCON
- FN47 author doesn't match source spelling - please check
- FN52 should credit agency. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
@Nikkimaria: I've addressed your comments and await the spot-check. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 07:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I think you've missed the follow-up on FN11? It still doesn't match the source. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:26, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Support Queries by WereSpielChequers
Interesting story, thanks for writing it, I'm almost tempted to suggest an April 1st FA candidate
Sources make it clear that the shooter was also the father, and presumably the creator of the target. But the wording could be interpreted as blaming the person who fired the shot rather than the person who made a target for explosive not just coloured die. I get that BLP applies, but have you thought of mentioning that the shooter was the father, I haven't checked all sources, I don't have access to at least two of them, but the sources I have looked at state he was the father and imply that he knew what was in the target.
- I'm butting in a little here since I still have this on my watchlist, but the inclusion of explosive in the target was entirely on purpose, and the guy knew very well what he was firing at. The idea was to create an explosion of color that revealed to onlookers the sex of the baby (see for example the Tannerite website - they sell 'em premade and the video shows how they're supposed to turn out). He just didn't realize it was going to ignite the grass around it and turn into a great big conflagration. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:15, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Added that Dennis Dickey was the father. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 06:09, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
There is a minor difference between sources saying that he will pay $220,000 and $200,000 but given that the $200,000 figure was described as $100,000 plus $500 a month for twenty years, I'd be inclined to just go with the $220,000 figure you cite from here.As the fire is now five years old it should be possible to update the aftermath to say how much of the ecosystems have recovered and whether the damaged trees and imperilled fish have come through.ϢereSpielChequers 17:48, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Armadillo shoe
British designer Alexander McQueen was a wild child of fashion, a theatrical mastermind known for runway shows that doubled as performance art. Never was that more true than at his final show, Plato's Atlantis (2009), which featured a number of models walking in foot-tall armadillo shoes that made them look like alien ballerinas. The shoes were both lauded and loathed by the press and the public: many reviews called them grotesque and beautiful in the same sentence. Lady Gaga became famously associated with them after wearing them in a music video and on the red carpet. They remain a subject of fascination for academics and fashion journalists – and me – to this day. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:43, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Support by Lee Vilenski
I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.
- Lede
- (Spring/Summer 2010) - could this not be in prose? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I feel like this format is approximately the same as having the year after an album, which is pretty standard (see the lead of Lady Gaga, for example).
- were ever made - do we need "ever"? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I suppose not
- Prose
- Plato's Atlantis was McQueen's final fully-realized collection; he died by suicide in 2010. - seems like a jump! Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don't see how it's a jump. A bit shocking, yes, but factual and contextually relevant.
- I like the images used in this article. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, me too! The sketch especially was a godsend because I could not get my head around them before I saw it.
- 21 pairs were crafted for the original collection, - it's usually bad form to start a sentence with a number. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed
- sell for US $10,000-$15,000 - no need to link US$ per MOS:CURRENCY. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 12:25, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed
- Additional comments
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:36, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- Spring/Summer 2010 - seasons aren't normally written with capital letters
- Normally no, but in the fashion world "Spring/Summer" and "Fall/Winter" are used as proper nouns denoting seasons of fashion as opposed to natural seasons, the other two being Resort and Pre-Fall (see [3], [4], [5], [6] for a couple of examples).
- Fair enough -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- "suggesting that the models have evolved" => "had evolved"
- Fixed
- "final fully-realized collection" - McQueen was British, so shouldn't British spellings be used per WP:TIES.....?
- Lol yep. I'm a bad Canadian.
- "21 pairs were crafted" - any way to avoid starting a sentence with a digit? It looks wrong to me......
- Fixed
- "Lady Gaga, then his fiancé" - Gaga is female, so it should be spelt fiancée
- Whoops
- That's what I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:52, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I fixed a couple more UK spellings and am now happy to support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Aoba47
- I have a clarification question about this sentence: McQueen admitted in an interview with trade journal Women's Wear Daily that he had never tested the armadillos personally. Would it be normal for McQueen to test out his designs personally (i.e. is this abnormal for him to not do this) or is this pretty standard for him?
- This is something specific to these shoes, rather than something that would normally be expected for a designer to do. I put that quote in because it plays into the feminist critique that comes later in the article, that a man would expect women to wear these heavy, impossibly high shoes that have zero basis in reality, but not even test them out himself.
- This is not necessary for the FAC, but I would archive all the web citations to avoid any future headaches. Citation 29 (i.e. the Glamour citation on Kelis) was what lead me to post this comment. I believe a majority of the web citations are already archived so this may just be the odd one out.
- Whoops yeah forgot. Done now.
- I have a clarification question about this sentence: In 2012, British Vogue called them one of the 20 most iconic shoes of all time. Is it British Vogue or British Vogue? The prose and citation have it both ways.
- The magazine is just called Vogue, but informally calls itself British Vogue to distinguish itself from the original American Vogue. Our article is named on that basis, and doesn't italicize "British" in its title. Unfortunately, {{cite web}} doesn't let you do partial italics in the "website" parameter, so I'm forced to italicize the whole thing.
Wonderful work with the article. My comments are rather nitpick-y so apologies for that. Once everything has been addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FAC for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 15:56, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Aoba, thanks as always for your commentary, which is always thoughtful! I've responded to your comments, let me know if you feel anything remains unaddressed. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:52, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your responses! I support the article based on the prose. I greatly appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia and I had a lot of fun reading about this article. It was a huge blast of nostalgia for that period of Gaga's career lol. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 01:00, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Katana Zero
One of my favorite video games of the last few years has been this 2019 indie platformer, which blends the tone and themes of neo-noir cinema with fast-paced, insanely difficult side-scrolling gameplay and a killer synthwave soundtrack. Katana Zero was an intense labor of love for its creator Justin Stander, who developed the game almost entirely by himself over the course of six years. It was delayed repeatedly and switched publishers at one point, but was finally released in April 2019 to high sales and rave reviews.
I've spent a substantial amount of time since last year building this up from a mere stub to a fully comprehensive good article and I believe that it meets the criteria to earn a bronze star. Hope you enjoy the article! JOEBRO64 18:18, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- File:Katana_Zero_Gameplay.gif needs a stronger FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:55, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: added alt text and expanded the FUR. JOEBRO64 13:52, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Older nominations
Ed, Edd n Eddy's Big Picture Show
For your consideration, I give you the series finale to Ed, Edd n Eddy. I've taken the page from this to what it is now since the start of 2022. Unless one counts a review from Steve Pulaski, the reception section has been expanded to include all the reviews I found from trustworthy publications. Hopefully it's comprehensive enough to meet FA standards. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 22:55, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Image assessment from Buidhe
Aoba47
- What is the current structure for the "Reception" section? I think it would be more helpful to give this section more structure so readers could get a better sense of how critics viewed this film. I believe this essay, WP:RECEPTION, is very helpful for working on these types of sections as they can be difficult to write. I just do not think have this information presented in a long, single paragraph is ideal or as engaging as it could be. To be clear all the information in this section is good. My concern is about it is structured.
This is my only comment. I believe all of my concerns were already addressed in the peer review so I do not have too much to add. Once my above comment is addressed, I will support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. I hope this is helpful and have a great week! Aoba47 (talk) 02:35, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- To be honest, Aoba47, I didn't have a particular order/structure in mind when compiling the reviews and am not sure how to rework them. If it wasn't limited to five sources who all felt it did a good job of ending the series, then I might have a better sense of what to do. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:51, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- That is fair, and I completely understand your point. I will read through that section more thoroughly either today or tomorrow to see if I could get a better handle it to give more direct feedback or suggestions. It could be a case where this is the best way to present this information. I hope that it is okay with you and apologies for the wait. Aoba47 (talk) 03:14, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for your patience. Upon further review, this section looks good to me. The paragraph begins with a clear overview of what critics discussed (i.e. how it was a strong conclusion for the series). I appreciate how the reviews are presented in a chronological order and I do think that helps keep the prosing engaging because of the transitions in place around that. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 15:24, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Of course, and I appreciate the support :) SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:53, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- I am just glad that I could help and I was more than happy to read the article. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback for my current peer review, but I completely understand if you are busy. Bust of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 03:15, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from FrB.TG
Source review from NØ (Pass)
I really like this article's size so I hope it's okay if I grab it for my first-ever source review!
- What makes this a high-quality source? I wasn't able to locate an About Us page and it appears to host a forums section.
- All of the other sources appear to be reliable for the purposes they are used.
- The MovieAddictz ref is not working for me but the archive appears to be ok so it should be marked as dead.
- Ref formatting appears to be consistent with how individual articles on the agencies italicize.
- Spotchecks show nothing of concern.--NØ 02:03, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- For whatever it might be worth, MaranoFan, here you can find an "About Us" page for ToonZone before it got renamed to Anime Superhero. That's much more detailed than what you'll find on the current incarnation. What I can safely say is that (under both names) this is a place dedicated to animation with news pieces and isn't just limited to forums. It's not being used for any particularly contentious claims (season 5 being completed along with announcement for future movie) and only seems to be recapping what participants discussed at Comic-Con in 2006. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:47, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- From that page: "Toonzone is an animation news and information web site run by a group of devoted animation fans. [...] What originally began as a small discussion area on old Prodigy service", unfortunately this doesn't give me a lot of confidence. RSN seems to have been divided (1, 2, 3, 4, 5), with some allegations of WP:SPS. A bit unsure this is passable for FA.--NØ 04:26, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- I see what you mean. If anything better comes up in my searches (or somebody else finds a good substitute), then I'll be sure to add it. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 04:29, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- UPDATE: No luck with replacements so far, but I did find published interviews they've conducted with people who worked on animated movies, with samples including these pieces. Is this enough to help build credibility? SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 04:55, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
How do TheThings and Tom Holland's Terror Time look in comparison? Regarding credentials, you can look here for the former while the latter is from a site by the famous director Tom Holland, often focusing on horror-related works. It also stitches together tweets from Erin Fitzgerald (a member of this show's voice cast), though if you'd prefer linking to one or more of the tweets themselves, then I could probably dig them up. Another option is a video from Akeem Lawanson aka GeekHeavy, a content host for IGN. Before making replacements, I'd like your thoughts please on what would be ideal to use. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:15, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I can see TheThings has an editorial team so that one should work. Don't think I would use the other one.--NØ 06:39, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- TheThings has now been implemented, and I was able to use a 2008 interview with Danny Antonucci to establish how this would mark the debut of Eddy's brother :). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Quick question, MaranoFan: do you know how to manually archive links without a tool? My three tries earlier today to run IABot for adding them to newly inserted URLs somehow did nothing at all (which surpised me when this previously worked for other links), and adding these to Wayback Machine also failed :/. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- TheThings has now been implemented, and I was able to use a 2008 interview with Danny Antonucci to establish how this would mark the debut of Eddy's brother :). SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Guerillero
Oppose
- Sourcing issues
- PatricCaird.com
- ToonZone
- Use of databases such as the LoC and the Big Cartoon DataBase
- UWIRE
- Animated Times
- Prose issues
- "It can be purchased on the iTunes Store and runs for 89 minutes"
- Plot is overly detailed
--Guerillero Parlez Moi 08:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Except for maybe Toon Zone per above comments, Guerillero, I cannot see any issue with the sources used. In particular, Caird's site feels fine when he composed this film's score. Not sure how much plot to cut when that already has been trimmed down from what it was this past December/January. Each detail included IS relevant. As for the iTunes bit, I hope cutting that to focus more on duration helps in some capacity. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:00, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sources need to be "high-quality reliable sources" not just reliable. I stand behind my review. Guerillero Parlez Moi 13:41, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- You're suggesting the Library of Congress isn't high quality!? That's quite frankly absurd. The least you could do is suggest how to revise the plot or give some useable links. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- The Copyright Office is an example of the use of databases for basic facts instead of secondary sources. (It's use doesn't support the statement it is used for)
The role of reviewers at FAC is to provide opinions as to how the article stacks again the criteria, not to find sources. --In actu (Guerillero) Parlez Moi 18:16, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Release/creation dates sound pretty basic to me and they CAN be found in the Copyright Office. You just have to click the link under "Full title" to see more details. I now have revised that link accordingly. In all honesty, your assessment of the refs outside of Toon Zone comes off as unfair, especially when mainstream media coverage of animated TV often is limited compared to what one would find for live action series/movies or even theatrically released animations. This means we sometimes have to look elsewhere for the best possible sources to use on things regarding cartoon shows (which is what I did prior to nominating for FA). You'd be hard-pressed to find much better things than what's already been added. Regarding the plot section, it isn't helpful at all too simply call that "too detailed" without elaborating on which parts could be cut without losing essential information. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 23:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- The Copyright Office is an example of the use of databases for basic facts instead of secondary sources. (It's use doesn't support the statement it is used for)
- You're suggesting the Library of Congress isn't high quality!? That's quite frankly absurd. The least you could do is suggest how to revise the plot or give some useable links. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:39, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sources need to be "high-quality reliable sources" not just reliable. I stand behind my review. Guerillero Parlez Moi 13:41, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Lee Vilenski
I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.
- Lede
- animated adventure comedy television film - WP:SEAOFBLUE. You can easily just say "Television film" and put info on genres later. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Indeed, lede sentence says "animated" twice. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Infobox has "A.k.a cartoon" with a cap, but our article suggests it shouldn't have. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- his unnamed (and previously unseen) - could probably just be culled. Just older brother is enough info for lede.Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Participants" - is this the right word for people living in a cul-de-sac? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- team at a.k.a. Cartoon - just say producerLee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Prose
- Credits adapted from The Big Cartoon DataBase.[1] - can we not say anything more helpful here? Like, give the readers an understanding as to what they are reading. I know the topic is "cast", but could easily say "below is a list of voice actors" or similar. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- In The Complete Second Season DVD's "Behind the Eds" interview, he hinted that the film would reveal what is under Double D's hat, though this never occurred. A few episodes, such as "Run Ed, Run", implied that he is bald. - I don't really see what this has to do with this special. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- It was supposed to be a clue of what was under the hat, and the sentence conveys that Danny Antonucci didn't exactly follow through on the implication Big Picture Show would go for a completely unblocked view. His hat does come off, which Eddy and Ed do see, but the head is always covered in some way until he puts it back on. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Certain things are only linked in the lede, and not the body, such as a.k.a. Cartoon. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:01, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Additional comments
- Just a note - I don't really look at sourcing during my FAC reviews (unless something specific pops up), I see there are some comments on this above, so I wouldn't vouch for the quality of the sourcing used. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 13:54, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- The only reasonable objection Guerillero had to sources was Toon Zone, which is no longer used, Lee Vilenski. I wish he provided specific suggestions for changing the article like you did here. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:36, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Looking forward to it, Lee Vilenski! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 00:23, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from NØ
I support this nomination, pending however much importance coords decide to accord to the concerns others raised (I suppose it still being open is a good sign).--NØ 12:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
William Utermohlen
- Nominator(s): Realmaxxver (talk) 21:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
I've spent a long while improving this article (about ten months, seven on FAC). The only reason I am here again is because I want to be finished with this; I'm just kind of tired of this and want to focus on my other projects now.
William Utermohlen was an artist that was active for around four decades. When he was diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease in 1995, he tried to understand what was happening to him the only way he could, art. for about six years, ending in around 2001, he created a series of self-portraits that show the effects of the disease on his art. The portraits show several emotions, but Nicci Gerrard summarised it as "emotional modernism".
This originally started in July 2021 as a hobby, I did'nt originally want to get this to the bronze star or, even GA status. But I felt like it could become an FA after it did become a GA in October. After seven months and three unsuccessful attempts, this is going to be the last attempt. Once I am done with this FAC, I am done with trying to improve this article. Realmaxxver (talk) 21:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hey Realmaxxver! Obviously it's not encouraging not to succeed at FAC, but when I look at the article now versus when it first showed up here, I am wowed by the great improvement that was made. (t · c) buidhe 21:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- ping commentators on previous FAC: Wetrorave, DMT Biscuit, Ceoil, asking if your concerns were addressed (t · c) buidhe 22:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Biscuit
- Publication seems like a misnomer. Maybe explain the relationship between Utermohlen and the journal.
- "He experienced memory loss beginning in 1991" → "He experienced memory loss, which began in 1991.
- Changed to "Utermohlen started to experience memory loss, which began around four years prior to diagnosis." Realmaxxver (talk) 21:24, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- "which included two years in the Caribbean" - relevance?
- "Chris Boicos, Utermohlen's art dealer, said that the subject matter of the lithographs were a metaphor for the forthcoming Alzheimer's disease diagnosis a year later" - admittedly, I am somewhat lost with this. Is it implying that Utermohlen was aware/surmised that he was in falling into the thralls of dementia? If he was aware/foresaw and the metaphor is intentional then that should be reflected by the prose.
- Now restated as the lithographs "...are described by his art dealer Chris Boicos as a seeming premonition of the artist's Alzheimer's disease diagnosis made in the following year.[46] By the time Utermohlen completed the lithographs, he was often forgetting to show up for teaching appointments.[47]" Ceoil (talk) 09:11, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Asking due to her citation in a non-academic text, what is Leslie Millin's credentials. Reflect in prose.
- A generalist journalist. Restated as "Writing for the Queen's Quarterly, the journalist Leslie Millin" Ceoil (talk) 08:05, 11 June 2022 (UTC)u
- "Polini states that the cycle also had elements of war, alongside the cycles Dante and War" - Polini is mentioned by surname before his introduction.
- "created by Rembrandt; describing" - semi-colon to a comma and describing to a more smooth synonym (contending, writing...etc)
- Wikilink neuroimaging.
- Please contine DMT. Ceoil (talk)
- No, I am very much done. If realmaxxer has no objections, I am happy to support on the basis of the above resolutions.
Comments fromSupport by Ceoil
My concerns re comprehensiveness in the last few noms are largely met. Closer look to follow with a week or so. I expect to support. Ceoil (talk) 13:28, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Who are Sherry Irvin and Alan E. H. Emery (ie say for eg the critic Sherry Irvin etc).
- I dont speak citation templates, but things like p 42-43, should be pp. 42-43
- To co-ords, have commentated extensively on the last 3 FACs. Closing out here. Ceoil (talk) 06:27, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
Query from WereSpielChequers
I've made a few tweaks, hope you like them, if not its a wiki..... Re the footnote "He was able to travel through Europe through the G.I. Bill, which he gained from his additional service in the Vietnam War". The article says that he completed his military service, and I think the European travel, before I thought the US got involved in the Vietnam War. Would you mind checking your source on that one? If indeed he did serve in the Vietnam war it would likely have been later and unless he was there as a war artist, an odd digression in a career such as his. ϢereSpielChequers 19:50, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I've removed the note because the source itself just says that the portraits allude to the Vietnam War, not that he was in the was at any point. Realmaxxver (talk) 10:20, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- pinging @WereSpielChequers: Realmaxxver (talk) 20:45, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- WSP doesn't need to respond, although an editor with gravitas, he is not a FAC potential voter; your removal is enough to mark this as resolved. Ceoil (talk) 22:21, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Ceoil, I may not be the most prolific FAC reviewer, but I thought that all wikipedians were potential FAC voters and that my dozens of FAC reviews had counted. As for my taking 24 hours to respond to a reply to a query I made 11 days earlier...... We all take the occasional day off. ϢereSpielChequers 08:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks RealMaxxver, it would make sense that the portraits alluded to the Vietnam War - as an American in London in the late 60s he won't have been able to avoid the biggest topic of the day. But being influenced by the main issue of the day and going to fight in that war are very different things. It is possible that he benefited from the GI Bill, though I think it financed education rather than travel. Are there any other parts of the article as contributed by "Thegreatsoldiers" still in the article where you haven't yet reviewed the content to make sure they reflect what is actually referenced? If so would you be able to check or remove them?ϢereSpielChequers 08:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies WereSpielChequers, to acknowledge that you are an experienced reviewer, and as I mentioned have gravitas, and to be sure you have picked over and helped bring a few of my own noms, it just seemed that the stuff was passing, and didnt want the nom to be held waiting for you to ok an uncontroversial removal. That said, I'll get my coat. Ceoil (talk) 09:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
1920–21 Burnley F.C. season
I originally submitted this article for FAC just over 12 years ago. Sadly, it didn't pass that time and I kind of forgot about it for a decade or so. But the recent FA promotion of Burnley's other title-winning season in 1959–60 prompted me to have another go at this one. Since last time, I've managed to access the archives of an alternative local newspaper, which allowed me to add a bit more detail about the team's playing style and some more context around some of the matches. These kind of articles might not be to everyone's taste, but hopefully I have addressed the main concerns from the first nomination, so here we go! BigDom (talk) 07:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- "Burnley's chairman, Harry Windle, had been elected to the position in 1909, and manager John Haworth was marking his 11th consecutive year in charge." - source?
- Added
- "The team's last competitive match had ended in a 0–2 defeat" - I would say that by far the most common way to report a football score is with the larger score first, irrespective of the outcome e.g. this source says "Liverpool lost 1-0 to Real Madrid", not "Liverpool lost 0-1 to Real Madrid". I would reconfigure any score shown like this one to show the larger score first.
- I thought I'd caught all these to be honest, thanks for spotting this one!
- Shouldn't the bit about Moorwood joining in October and the bit about Bamford leaving in September be in the paragraph starting "Transfer activity continued after the season began"?
- Rejigged
- "Bradford City, who had finished 15th in the league in 1919–20" - source?
- Added
- "Burnley moved to the top of the table on goal average" - link GA?
- Done
- One solitary league attendance is unknown?
- Yep, not given in Simpson. I had a look at the match report in the Burnley Express archive (where I presume Simpson also looked) and the Lancashire Daily Post (Preston's local paper) but no luck. As you probably know, attendances weren't officially recorded in those days so they weren't always reported in the newspapers.
- Fair enough -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:38, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yep, not given in Simpson. I had a look at the match report in the Burnley Express archive (where I presume Simpson also looked) and the Lancashire Daily Post (Preston's local paper) but no luck. As you probably know, attendances weren't officially recorded in those days so they weren't always reported in the newspapers.
- "drawn against Queens Park Rangers at Turf Moor in the Second Round." - no reason for caps on second round
- Or third round
- Have changed these in the prose, left them capitalised in the table (but can also change here if you prefer, I tried it and didn't like the way it looked)
- "the Charity Shield, then known as the Dewar Shield" - are you sure this is true? Our article on the Community Shield makes no mention of it ever having that name, and RSSSF says "The FA Charity Shield was introduced in 1908 to succeed the Sheriff of London (Dewar) Shield"
- Must have been the Burnley Express correspondent using the old name, deleted that subclause.
- The tables need row scopes
- Forgive my ignorance, but what does this do other than just turn the cell grey? (done, by the way)
- It's to do with visually impaired site users who use a screen reader, it makes the screen reader read the contents of the table out correctly....or something..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Forgive my ignorance, but what does this do other than just turn the cell grey? (done, by the way)
- The "Players having played at least one first-team match" table doesn't include the Lancs/East Lancs Cup games, which earlier you categorised as first team games - are the line-ups not recorded for these?
- I will have to go back to the library to check the newspaper reports, might be after the bank holiday before I get chance though.
- Managed to get to the library for an hour last night. I've added the ELCC and LSC apps/goals to the table and updated players' goals totals in the prose where appropriate. Even managed to get the attendances for the two ELCC games from the local papers (double checked the Preston league game though and definitely wasn't reported). BigDom (talk) 06:30, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I will have to go back to the library to check the newspaper reports, might be after the bank holiday before I get chance though.
- In the aftermath section you use the {{inflation}} template in conjunction with {{currentyear}}, but the documentation for the former explicitly says not to do this
- Changed to the way you have used it in 1990–91 Gillingham F.C. season
- That's what I got - great read overall! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:17, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Thanks for having a read through! I've addressed most of these, I think, just need to do a quick library trip to check again for those missing lineups. Cheers, BigDom (talk) 06:28, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - great work! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:31, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
Support from Eem dik doun in toene
I had already posted my thoughts/comments on BigDom's talk page, and the article has only improved since then. It's a well written article which deserves FA status. Well done! Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 11:08, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Out of the Woods (song)
- Nominator(s): Ippantekina (talk) 07:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
This article is about a song by American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift. Ms. Swift may be an overselling musician (her albums sell millions whether critics like them or not) but she is also a gifted songwriter, and this song is one of many testaments to that statement. I believe the article satisfies criteria for an FA, and I look forward to any and all comments. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 07:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Aoba47
- For File:Taylor Swift - Out of the Woods.png, I would clarify that the source link is an archived version of the link.
- Done. Ippantekina (talk) 07:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- In the lead's second paragraph, I'd avoid starting two sentences in a row with "was released". The sentence structure for both sentences are also very similar in general so I'd revise them further to avoid repetition.
- Revised. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- This part, Swift struggling to escape from a magical forest battling against nature, does not really make sense to me. Maybe change it something like, escape from a magical forest while battling against nature?
- Tweaked. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I have a question about this part, Pitchfork ranked it among the best songs of 2014, from the lead. Is this review notable enough to single out in the lead? I do not think it is notable enough to single out in this fashion.
- Removed. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I do not think this sentence, 1989 was released on October 27, 2014, by Big Machine Records., is necessary in the "Background and production" section. I do not think the album's release date really fits in this section.
- Moved to "Release" section. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- In the second paragraph of the "Background and production" section, I'd avoid repeating "1980s sound" in two sentences in a row.
- Tweaked. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- This sentence, The track was produced by Swift and Antonoff, and Swift's vocals were produced by Max Martin., is quite repetitious by repeating Swift and produced twice.
- Tweaked. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Was there any coverage or commentary on why the record label released the music video before promoting the song as a single?
- No media reported on the song's radio release... I guess Swift planned to release the video only, and the radio push was a later move resulted by the surrounding buzz. Ippantekina (talk) 07:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Were there any outright negative reviews for this song?
- Thus far critics seem to love it! Except Rob Sheffield who is quite lukewarm.. Ippantekina (talk) 07:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- The premiere date for the music video is repeated in two separate sections.
- Removed. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I do not think the wolf wikilink in the "Music video" section is necessary.
- Removed. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- I believe this song was included in Miss Americana. Did that receive any coverage to be considered notable (if I am correct that is)? I am basing this off tunefind so it could be wrong.
- It does get covered in Refinery29 but given that it is Swift's documentary, it is pretty natural that the documentary features many of her previous songs. And most media focused on the original track "Only the Young", so I'm afraid there is not enough notability for discussion. Ippantekina (talk) 07:56, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Did this song appear on any year-end charts?
- My search turnt up nothing, unfortunately. Probably by the time it was released, the hype around the album had died down. Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I hope this review is helpful. I have focused my comments primarily on the prose. Once everything has been addressed, I will read through the article another time to make sure I do my due diligence as a reviewer. Have a great start to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 16:02, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for taking time reviewing the article. I have responded to some of your comments and will proceed within the next few days. Hope you have a great week ahead too! Ippantekina (talk) 08:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the responses so far and take as much time as you need. Aoba47 (talk) 15:12, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello, thank you again for reviewing the article. I have addressed to all of your comments. Let me know if the prose needs further work. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 07:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC based on the prose. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback on my peer review. Either way, have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 17:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for taking time reviewing the article. I will look into your PR if I have time. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 03:19, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC based on the prose. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback on my peer review. Either way, have a great weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 17:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
DannyMusicEditor
Thanks for your help on Bleed American. Can't be sure if I'll be amazing help, but I will give this a look! dannymusiceditor oops 01:43, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Your source choices are excellent. I will take your word and allow another to review the content inside them if that must be done.
- Lead: "Music critics praised "Out of the Woods" for its production and narrative lyrics." I understand a lead should be a summary, but this seems too brief even for the lead without some sort of context. Anything in particular you could highlight while still maintaining some generality? Something multiple sources had consensus on?
- When did the song go platinum? A month and year would do fine.
- Background and production: You say that Antonoff chopped his backing vocals - I have no idea what this is. Can I have a link to this technique? Is it Chopping (sampling technique)? If so, that article's awful, and maybe a note should be put somewhere in this article to explain it with the source given.
- I am not very confident that "chopped" hear means chopping (sampling technique), so I reworded it to "edited".
- I would suggest the same for loop to Loop (music), although I know what that is.
- Release and commercial performance: I think "It is track number four" is unnecessarily wordy and though a valid thought for the "brilliant writing" aspect of a featured article, I think you may be trying a little too hard to sell it there. It would suffice to say "It is the fourth track".
- I see "track number four" and "the fourth track" can mean two different things. Speaking of track list order, I prefer the former. Ippantekina (talk) 09:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not my personal preference, but I suppose it works. dannymusiceditor oops 22:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- I see "track number four" and "the fourth track" can mean two different things. Speaking of track list order, I prefer the former. Ippantekina (talk) 09:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Might be important to timestamp when the domestic certification was achieved (RIAA). If you disagree, ignore my corresponding lead suggestion.
- I added a timestamp in prose but not the lead, because I find it a tad detailed for the lead.
- You're on the right track, but I was bold and gave it a shot myself. Let me know what you think. dannymusiceditor oops 22:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Works for me-- Ippantekina (talk) 02:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I added a timestamp in prose but not the lead, because I find it a tad detailed for the lead.
- Critical reception: "contemporaneous" is a mouthful. What are you trying to refer to, exactly? Those around the time of its release?
- Yes, reviews that were published around the time this song was originally released. What other word choice do you have in mind?
- Personally, I would prefer to start the sentence with "Upon the song's release," and so on. dannymusiceditor oops 22:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Link Sam Lansky and Brian Mansfield, and in their corresponding references.
- When you say she "finessed" her country songs, is this the prose equivalent of saying she BS'ed it? I don't know if I love this line, but I admittedly don't know how I would write it instead. That very, very rarely happens to me, mind you.
- I reworded it to "honed", if it makes sense. Ippantekina (talk) 09:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ah, so we're talking about Taylor's overarching evolution of her songwriting ability! This makes much more sense, I like it better this way. dannymusiceditor oops 22:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Music video: I do not see why it needs to be "the snowy mountains" instead of simply "snowy mountains".
- That's all I have. Let me know if you have any follow-up remarks or questions! dannymusiceditor oops 02:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for taking time the article. I'm glad you found my comments at Bleed American FAC helpful, and I have responded to your comments above. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 09:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have a few responses above. Assuming these are responded to, I will subsequently offer support. dannymusiceditor oops 22:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- All done now, I believe :) Ippantekina (talk) 02:59, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have a few responses above. Assuming these are responded to, I will subsequently offer support. dannymusiceditor oops 22:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for taking time the article. I'm glad you found my comments at Bleed American FAC helpful, and I have responded to your comments above. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 09:54, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- That's all I have. Let me know if you have any follow-up remarks or questions! dannymusiceditor oops 02:38, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
I can now confidently support this nomination. dannymusiceditor oops 16:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
NØ
I managed to get some time off so here I am!
- I think it is self explanatory that the release of promotional singles precedes an album, so do we need to mention "Before 1989's release" separately?
- Should the radio formats be mentioned in the lead? I think "US radio" leaves the reader wondering which ones they were.
- Abbreviations need not be included unless used subsequently in the article: RIAA, ARIA, BPI, IFPI.
- Do we need to mention if the other tracks were on the standard or deluxe editions? Seems a bit excessive for the scope of this article. It doesn't seem the Recording Academy source makes this distinction. I would say "Jack Antonoff, who produced "Out of the Woods" along with two other songs for the album—"I Wish You Would" and "You Are In Love""
- I would highly suggest running the bot to add archives to all the references.
- I unfortunately do not have access to the bot; could you refer to me the link to the bot, or help me with this task if possible..?
- "According to the liner notes of 1989, "Out of the Woods" was produced by Swift and Antonoff." - I thought we had already established Antonoff produced the song in the previous paragraph.
- New York is a state and LA is a city so it should be consistent which one you're mentioning after the studios.
- "and echoing "oh-oh" background vocals" - is there a better way of saying this? maybe "and background vocals echoing the words "oh oh""
- Couldn't "inspired by a tumultuous relationship and its resulting anxieties that Swift experienced" just be "Resulting anxieties Swift experienced because of a tumultuous relationship"
- Speculations that Styles may be the subject have drawn coverage in a few reliable sources, do they not deserve any mention? (Billboard, Fuse, The Hollywood Reporter)
- I think any pre-2020 song by Swift can be attributed to a real-life romantic partner, but I choose to avoid including the information unless Swift confirms it herself (per WP:SPECULATION #6 Wikipedia does not include rumors) Ippantekina (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- "premiered a 15-second preview of "Out of the Woods"" - maybe go for "premiered 15 seconds of "Out of the Woods""
- "Big Machine in partnership with Republic Records" -- maybe just "Big Machine and Republic Records"
- A bit nitpicky on my part but you could try to vary the sentence structure in the sentence about its Hot 100 debut and the following one.
- "Swift's lyrical craftsmanship and storytelling, which she had honed on her previous country songs" -- I would remove the "country" bit because I don't see what genre has to do with craftsmanship and storytelling.
- Actually a lot of 1989 reviews commented how Swift was able to retain her storytelling from country music, so I think the genre is significant enough to retain. Ippantekina (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The video was filmed on location in New Zealand" is a weird sentence to me.
- Is embedding the Behind-the-scenes clip necessary? These are pretty standard but I have never seen them being used like this before.
- Is there a reason the individual dates on which the performances happened are not included? I think they are on most song FAs.
- It would be somewhat WP:INDISCRIMINATE; plus we can see the dates in a larger list at List of Taylor Swift live performances. Ippantekina (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- I would link set list.
- "a stripped-down piano rendition" - Since the piano is an instrument and not a musical style, could it be "a stripped-down rendition of "Out of the Woods" on the piano" instead?
- "praised the stripped-down version over the synth-pop production for better conveying the emotional sentiments of the lyrics" - "thought this version conveyed the emotional sentiments of the lyrics better than the synth-pop production" to avoid the repetition of "stripped-down"
- The charts table and Certifications need a caption for accessibility.
- That's all I got.--NØ 06:14, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- @MaranoFan: Thank you for your comments. I have addressed accordingly except where I responded per above. Let me know if the article needs further polishing. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 07:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for addressing most of the comments. Just a few things:
- The abbreviations RIAA, ARIA, BPI, and IFPI are still included even though not used again.
- I think keeping them would make it easier for readers to figure out what they are in the table-- Ippantekina (talk) 08:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- What's the reason we are still separating the standard and deluxe tracks? Is there any proof Antonoff's contributions to the bonus tracks were lesser than the standard ones?
- The deluxe version is sometimes neglected in album reviews (the 1989 reviews speak for itself), so it is sensible to keep the separation so most readers know that the album has two versions. Ippantekina (talk) 08:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- New Zealand is just as if not more known than NYC and LA so it doesn't need to be linked.
- I have added archives.--NØ 08:18, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your help! Ippantekina (talk) 08:38, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Wehwalt
- "Taylor Swift had been known as a country singer-songwriter until her fourth studio album Red (released in October 2012),[1] " I'd get rid of the parentheses and use commas.
- "she had persuaded the tabloid media to not circulate it.[22] " I might say "publicize" rather than "circulate"
- "how the couple has to deal with its aftermath" I might say "the two have" rather than "the couple has" as they are not a couple at that stage.
- "The video's filming locations in New Zealand included the mountains of Queenstown and on Bethells Beach.[59]" There's a problem with the last words, which don't meet up exactly with the earlier part of the sentence. "The video's filming locations in New Zealannd included ... on Bethel's Beach".
- "Swift is seen running through a magical forest that forms around her, being chased by a pack of wolves as she struggles to escape while animate roots constantly follow her." I think you need an "and" before "being" because otherwise it is (taken literally) unclear whether she or the forest is being chased.
- "nature settings" I might say "natural settings"
- That's all I have.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:34, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments, Wehwalt. I have addressed them accordingly. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 16:03, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Source review - pass
- Source 92 should be marked as being in Polish.
- Source 95 is titled "CHART: CLUK Update 8.11.2014 (wk44)" not "CHART: CLUK Update 8 November 2014 (wk44)". Titles should be left as they are and not majorly changed to suit the article's formatting.
- Spot-checked about three or four sources. No issues with accuracy. FrB.TG (talk) 13:29, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the source review. I have addressed your concerns. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 04:30, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Beverly White
This article is about Beverly White, who was the longest serving woman in the Utah State Legislature. During her career she would sometimes be the only woman to chair a committee, held multiple leadership positions within the Democratic caucus, and was awarded as legislator of the year multiple times by multiple groups. She was also incredibly active in the Utah Democratic Party and the national party. Jon698 (talk) 05:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Kavyansh
- "White also held multiple positions in the local, state, and national Democratic Party" — Suggesting "White held multiple positions in the Democratic Party at the local, state, and national levels"
- "She was educated at Tooele High School and married Floyd White" — Does Floyd White has to do anything with the school? If not, suggesting "She was educated at Tooele High School and in 19XX, she married Floyd White"
- "from 1964 to 2004, with the exception of 1976" — suggesting to link the DNCs
- Link Satellite campus in the lead
- "During the 1976 election" — Specify house of rep.
- "She also helped establish" — specify her last name at the beginning of every new paragraph.
- "White wrote Women Legislators of Utah, 1896–1993 which was a book" — "White wrote Women Legislators of Utah, 1896–1993, a book"
- "from 1896 to 1993" — not required, already mentioned in the book's title.
- ", and the university later" — suggesting "; the university later"
- "an honorary doctorate's degree" — Shouldn't "doctorate's" be "doctorate"?
- The "Capital punishment" section needs to be re-written; case titles are italicized, and what does those two decisions have to do with White's positions?
That is on the first read. More to come after these have been resolved. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 07:08, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh: Thank you. I did everything that you asked except for the last part. The reason I mention the Supreme Court cases is to give the context that she wanted to overturn a SCOTUS ruling rather than change existing state law. Jon698 (talk) 13:07, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Continuing:
- Do we need to mention her mother's death in the lead?
- "In 1947, she married Floyd White, with whom she had five children, at the Salt Lake Temple" — Why is specifying 'Salt Lake Temple' important?
- Anything we know about her career from 1947 to 1959?
- "White supported the restoration of capital punishment in Utah and Utah became" — repetition
- "Utah is one of twelve states to have not ratified the Equal Rights Amendment as of 2021" — 'as of 2021' should be in the beginning
- I think 'Write-in' should not be in the party column, Independent might work.
- How are, in some of the elections, both the candidates incumbent? I assume they are incumbent from different districts?
- Do we have no scholar sources discussing her?
- Ref#25: ' United States House of Representatives' should be in the |publisher field
- Ref#42: link the newspaper; same with Ref#54 and few others
- Ref#79 is not via Newspapers.com; is it? And isn't https://www.equalrightsamendment.org/ a primary source?
- Specify that the Merrill Nelson portrait is from 2021
- Suggesting to add ALT text
- "as a part of Utah's twenty-six member delegation to the Democratic National Convention" — pipe 'the' inside the link to avoid MOS:EGG issues. Same with various other instances.
- Check the last para of Later life, for italicization
- Can we get her signature converted to svg file, background removed? Just a suggestion.
That is it. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 17:47, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh: I did most of what you asked. The reason I included Salt Lake Temple is because it is the largest Mormon temple so it seems important enough to mention. It is standard for both candidates to be listed as incumbents if they are redrawn into the same district with 2012 United States House of Representatives elections in Ohio being an example between Marcy Kaptur and Dennis Kucinich in the 9th district. Also they are are listed as incumbents even if they lose the primary with Joe Crowley in 2018 United States House of Representatives elections in New York as an example. I fixed the linking issue for the newspapers with the remaining unlinked ones having no Wikipedia page. Sadly there are no scholarly sources for White as I found nothing on Google scholar or the Internet Archive. I will convert her signature to a SVG momentarily. Jon698 (talk) 20:27, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Also for the information between 1947 to 1959, there were no major mentions of her and I assume it was mainly due to her being a housewife in the shadow of her husband and father-in-law's political careers. Also what do you mean by "pipe 'the' inside the link". Jon698 (talk) 20:29, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have done this as an example. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 06:52, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Kavyansh.Singh: Done. Jon698 (talk) 16:11, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support: Nice article! – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:24, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
Coordinator comment - as this nomination has been open for more than three weeks and has attracted only one general support, it is liable to be archived within the next couple days unless significant movement towards a consensus to promote occurs. Hog Farm Talk 03:57, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Mandrill
- Nominator(s): LittleJerry (talk) 01:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
This article is about the mandrill, arguably the most iconic looking primate and the most colorful mammal. After an extensive GA review by Mover of molehills, I think its showtime. LittleJerry (talk) 01:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- Suggest adding alt text
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 12:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- There is some sandwiching in the layout
- The sandwiching article states that "Multiple images can be staggered right and left. However, avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other;" There's no problem with that there. LittleJerry (talk) 12:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Unfortunately on my screen there is. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 21:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Unfortunately on my screen there is. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- The sandwiching article states that "Multiple images can be staggered right and left. However, avoid sandwiching text between two images that face each other;" There's no problem with that there. LittleJerry (talk) 12:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- File:Mandrill_distribution.png: see MOS:COLOUR
- What exactly is the problem? LittleJerry (talk) 12:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Colour alone is being used to convey important information. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thats how range maps work. buidhe? LittleJerry (talk) 13:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Colour alone is being used to convey important information. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- What exactly is the problem? LittleJerry (talk) 12:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- File:Mandrill_and_flower.jpg: where is that licensing coming from? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Same question on the amended version. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand. buidhe? LittleJerry (talk) 13:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Nikkimaria what exactly is wrong with the image licensing and the map? What do you mean "where is that licensing coming from?" and what's wrong with the color of the map? LittleJerry (talk) 14:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- For the map, because there are other shaded areas in other colours, the use of only colour to convey information presents a problem for users with vision problems. For the image licensing, the image description page includes a source link, but I do not see the licensing claimed at that link. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Replaced flower image. BhagyaMani, could you remove the green stuff on Africa and make it uniformly white to contrast with the purple? LittleJerry (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- I used the wikimedia map as base layer, which is coloured in white + green shades. It is not possible to change this coloration, I'm afraid. The darker green areas represent protected areas, I think. BhagyaMani (talk) 19:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- BhagyaMani can't you use File:BlankMap-World.png or File:World map blank black lines 4500px.gif? Zoom in on middle Africa like File:Distibución gorilla.png? LittleJerry (talk) 19:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- What is wrong with wikimedia map?? I used this as the reviewers for the red panda page agreed with this as base layer. BhagyaMani (talk) 04:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- BhagyaMani, because it has green on it. Our readers may be color blind or have vision problems so they may not be able tell between the green and the range map color. Its better to have one color for the (land) background and one for the animal range. LittleJerry (talk) 23:19, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry for my late reply. Today only I had time to have a look at this : I cannot use a png as baselayer. But see this without any greens, just borders : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1J1lAcu7Hma0deJx8L5DvQPTyhviIm5EA/view?usp=sharing -- BhagyaMani (talk) 13:19, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thats okay. I already got a new map, but thanks anyway. LittleJerry (talk) 13:24, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry for my late reply. Today only I had time to have a look at this : I cannot use a png as baselayer. But see this without any greens, just borders : https://drive.google.com/file/d/1J1lAcu7Hma0deJx8L5DvQPTyhviIm5EA/view?usp=sharing -- BhagyaMani (talk) 13:19, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
- BhagyaMani, because it has green on it. Our readers may be color blind or have vision problems so they may not be able tell between the green and the range map color. Its better to have one color for the (land) background and one for the animal range. LittleJerry (talk) 23:19, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- What is wrong with wikimedia map?? I used this as the reviewers for the red panda page agreed with this as base layer. BhagyaMani (talk) 04:26, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- BhagyaMani can't you use File:BlankMap-World.png or File:World map blank black lines 4500px.gif? Zoom in on middle Africa like File:Distibución gorilla.png? LittleJerry (talk) 19:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- I used the wikimedia map as base layer, which is coloured in white + green shades. It is not possible to change this coloration, I'm afraid. The darker green areas represent protected areas, I think. BhagyaMani (talk) 19:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Replaced flower image. BhagyaMani, could you remove the green stuff on Africa and make it uniformly white to contrast with the purple? LittleJerry (talk) 12:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- For the map, because there are other shaded areas in other colours, the use of only colour to convey information presents a problem for users with vision problems. For the image licensing, the image description page includes a source link, but I do not see the licensing claimed at that link. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Nikkimaria what exactly is wrong with the image licensing and the map? What do you mean "where is that licensing coming from?" and what's wrong with the color of the map? LittleJerry (talk) 14:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- I don't understand. buidhe? LittleJerry (talk) 13:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Same question on the amended version. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Changed range map. LittleJerry (talk) 22:42, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Jens
- Etymology seems a bit incomplete. For example, according to [7] the name was first used by William Smith for the Chimpanzee but later transferred to this animal.
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- the latter meaning "baboon" – Is the meaning really restricted to baboon? This source [8] states "baboon or ape". Please check with other sources.
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- central Africa – capitalise?
- Not nessacarily. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- But see Central Africa and Central Europe. Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think it's okay to use lower case for non-geopolitical articles. LittleJerry (talk) 16:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- But "central Africa" and "Central Africa" have different meanings, see [9]. Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- But "central Africa" and "Central Africa" have different meanings, see [9]. Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- I think it's okay to use lower case for non-geopolitical articles. LittleJerry (talk) 16:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- But see Central Africa and Central Europe. Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not nessacarily. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- and placed in the genus Papio. – is there an "it" missing?
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- This divergence correlates with the split of two known mandrill SIVs – This is too technical and needs more explanation I think. You could spell out the abbreviation, and it is not the virus itself that split but virus species?
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- 2.90 gb – Again, I would spell out the abbreviation.
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- draft genome – What does "draft" mean here exactly?
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Males have a 700–950 mm – suggest to change to cm which appears to be more standard?
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 12:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- red and blues hues – "blue"?
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Rear view of the animal is an important feature, but I miss a picture of it.
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 13:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- The darker and more subdued coloring of female faces is caused by melanin – I think this could be misleading. It reads as if the female coloring is entirely due to melanin, which is not the case; melanin only makes it darker.
- Thats what its saying. It already mentions where the red and blue colors come from and states that females are darker due to melanin. LittleJerry (talk) 13:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- The rump skin of male mandrills also have melanin – But melanin is everywhere regardless (also in human skin, for example)?
- Nope. Not on the face. LittleJerry (talk) 13:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- That would surprise me. Do you have a source for the claim that it does not occur in the face? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Yes cite 33 states that males don't have melanin on the blue facial skin. LittleJerry (talk) 15:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- That would surprise me. Do you have a source for the claim that it does not occur in the face? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Nope. Not on the face. LittleJerry (talk) 13:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Both mandrills and drills are more arboreal than baboons. – This could do with more detail; how much time do they spent in trees? Are there percentages, case studies, or similar?
- There's no information on that. The article already states that they sleep in trees. LittleJerry (talk) 13:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Mandrills may associate or compete with other primates such as – Here, detail is lacking in my opinion. What does it mean "to associate", do they form groups?
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- More later. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 09:58, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- to mark mark enclosure boundaries – word too much
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- ulterior benefit – I don't understand what "ulterior" adds here. Why is it needed?
- Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- The blue facial skin is more consistant in brightness. – "consistent"?
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- The blue facial skin is more consistant in brightness.[32][61] Blue skin is another sign of dominance; – why "another" when it was just mentioned in the previous sentence?
- Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- When a males loses dominance, these physiological changes are at least partially reversed.[32] The blue facial skin is more consistant in brightness.[32][61] Blue skin is another sign of dominance; and higher ranking males tend to have more contrast between red and blue facial coloring. – Information order is confusing and seemingly contradicting: 1) males may loose color, 2) but not in the face, 3) they loose it also in the face. Could be better formulated to show how this fits together.
- I don't see the contradiction. It states the red coloration varies with dominance while blue is more consistent. LittleJerry (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Individuals may cooperative during hunting and share kills – cooperate?
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- nematode loa loa – upper case
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 16:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Another 15-month long study of a 120 member group found that the mandrills had a home range of 8.6 km2 – how does that fit with the previous information that gives much larger home ranges? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Smaller group, smaller home range. LittleJerry (talk) 15:57, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- secondary sexual characteristics – link? (there is an article)
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 21:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- What about the mandrill in culture? Lion King comes to mind, but there must be influences on western African cultures too. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:54, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- No information on that. Cherry-picking examples in popular culture will lead to listcruft. LittleJerry (talk) 21:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support on prose, all comments addressed. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:04, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Tim riley
Place-marker. Comments to follow after close scrutiny of text, but one thing jumps out from a first canter through: "sexual dimorphic" should be "sexually dimorphic", as in our WP article on that subject. The adjective needs an adverb modifier. More anon. Tim riley talk 14:37, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
I found this a most interesting and informative article. A few small points on the prose:
- Lead
- Dominant males have more vibrant colors and fatter flanks and rumps – more and fatter than whom? Non-dominant males, presumably, but it isn't clear. The first part of the sentence is ambiguous: do you mean they have more colours that are vibrant or colours that are more vibrant?
- It states "and have more success siring young" so its comparing them to less dominant males. The colors are more vibrant. LittleJerry (talk) 21:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Etymology
- French naturalist Georges-Louis Buffon … Welsh naturalist Thomas Pennant – are their nationalities relevant? Likewise for Gessner, later.
- They help distinguish between the different naturalists. LittleJerry (talk) 21:00, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Appearance
- The mandrill has a heavyset body – heavyset is a new word to me. Is it an AmE term? Its meaning isn't obvious.
- Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Behavior and life history
- semi-captive females may survive into their early 20s – it would be helpful to have the unexpected term “semi-captive” explained briefly.
- Its pretty self explanatory. Semi = "partly". They are semi-free ranging. LittleJerry (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- I also think that this may be difficult for readers; what about linking to wiktionary? Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:25, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- I also think that this may be difficult for readers; what about linking to wiktionary? Jens Lallensack (talk) 13:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Its pretty self explanatory. Semi = "partly". They are semi-free ranging. LittleJerry (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Social structure
- unaided wild primates – "unaided" is another unfamiliar term, in this context, and could do with explanation for the benefit of non-expert readers.
- Unaided is also obvious. The source uses "unprovisioned". This is the best I can break it down. LittleJerry (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- a 120 member group – would benefit from a hyphen
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- an average travelling distance – as the article is so very obviously in AmE, the BrE "travelling" rather than "traveling" looks odd to me, but perhaps the former is an accepted American alternative.
- leads to less social connections – grammatically you can't have less connections: you mean fewer.
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Reproduction and development
- dominant males are also known as "fattened" males while subordinate males are known as "non-fatted" males – this seems strange. One might expect consistent fattened/non-fattened or fatted/non-fatted, but if the versions we here are the standard terms, that’s fine, of course.
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 21:13, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Those are my few minor observations. Tim riley talk 09:53, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Tim riley, anymore? LittleJerry (talk) 23:27, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Funk
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Is the last photo really worth all the white space it creates by the references? Its pretty poor and doesn't add much.
- Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 12:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- This[10] photo shows the shape and gait of the animal better than many of the current pictures, some of which are blurry and samey.
- There's no room for it. It can't be in the description section, since I'll have three images of adult males in a row (including lead). LittleJerry (talk) 12:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- The photo under ecology is pretty blurry and samey, do we even know if it shows a wild individual, which I assume is why it's there? Could be replaced by something better. FunkMonk (talk) 22:13, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Replaced. LittleJerry (talk) 23:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- The photo under ecology is pretty blurry and samey, do we even know if it shows a wild individual, which I assume is why it's there? Could be replaced by something better. FunkMonk (talk) 22:13, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- There's no room for it. It can't be in the description section, since I'll have three images of adult males in a row (including lead). LittleJerry (talk) 12:15, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- "to be "forest baboons" and placed them in the genus Papio." Add "like the baboons" or "the baboon genus Papio" to clarify this is the genus of all baboons.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 22:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The majority consensus is that mandrills belong to one subspecies (M. s. sphinx)" How does the source phrase this? If there are no subspecies, it's just monotypic, and no trinomial is needed?
- "....while all mandrills are placed in a single subspecies (M. sphinx sphinx). I guess its like modern humans being Homo sapiens sapiens LittleJerry (talk) 22:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "and are distinct haplogroups" They belong to distinct haplogroups, they are not.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 22:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "to have also lead to the splitting" Led.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 22:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The blue ridges on males contrasts both" Contrast plural?
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 22:46, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- These[11][12][13] are superior photos of babies, the one in the article barely shows the juvenile, and is very similar to the grooming photo.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 23:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- It would seem more relevant and interesting to show a male characteristically baring its fangs, instead of the poor photo under ecology, examples:[14][15][16]
- Those images appear to show mandrills yawning. They don't communicate by showing their teeth like that. The skull image shows the teeth. LittleJerry (talk) 23:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Link Alarm signal under alarm call.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 23:16, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Outside the breeding season, males are believed to lead a solitary life and all-male bachelor groups are not known to exist." This makes me wonder about all the photos we have of males with femals in zoos, seems they are kept together all yer around, but do we know how this affects their behaviour? At least male elephants are usually kept away from the females in zoos.
- Doesn't say. LittleJerry (talk) 23:06, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "captive individuals at the Colchester Zoo, England learned to facepalm" Does it have any meaning for them?
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Mandrills may also may grunt" Double may.
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Ovulating females are more likely to allow the brightest colored males near them and inspect their perineum" Who inspects who?
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:06, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- "hunting in Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea appears to have led to smaller group sizes" Hunting for meat, skins, or what? Could go further into human use.
- For meat. It already states so earlier in the paragraph. LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- "and hunting for bushmeat" I see the intro specifies, then the article body should too.
- It does. "Its total population is unknown but is suspected to have decreased by more than 30 percent over the last 24 years. Its main threats are habitat destruction and hunting for bushmeat." LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Why does the common name need a citation in the infobox?
- Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- If fossils have not been found, as indicated by the article, how do we know this species appeared in the Early Pleistocene, as indicated by the taxobox?
- Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- " with which it shares the genus name Mandrillus" Or rather just the genus, seems odd to say they share it as a "name".
- Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- The intro could give a better physical description, none of their distinct facial and posterior features are mentioned.
- It already states "It is one of the most colorful mammals in the world, with red and blue skin on its face and posterior." LittleJerry (talk) 22:43, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Dudley
- Link pith.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Various morphological and genetic studies". I would leave out "Various" as unnecessary and vague.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The current consensus". "Current" will become dated. Better "As of 2022, the consensus"
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Some photos are too small to be useful and would be better enlarged. E.g. you could increase "Male and female mandrills" to upright=1.3
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- What is a chest gland. Can it be linked?
- A gland on the chest? There is no link. LittleJerry (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "feed as high as the canopy." is tautologous. Does you mean they also feed in the canopy? If so, you should say so.
- Its not a tautology, there are different levels to the rainforest and the canopy is the highest. LittleJerry (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Mandrills may aggregate or compete with other primates" This is vague. Do you mean that they mix socially or fight with other primates? Presumably they could expel smaller species from feeding areas?
- It doesn't say. Only that they can be found together and compete for foods. LittleJerry (talk) 18:28, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "unaided wild primates" What does unaided mean here? If it means primates which are not fed by humans I would leave it out as superfluous.
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "The supergroup would occasionally diverge" "split" would be a better word than "diverge"
- That's the word used in the source. I'd rather be as different as possible. LittleJerry (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "try to monopolize access to respective females by mate guarding" What does "respective" mean here? receptive?
- Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:39, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- "Interbirth periods last an average of 405 days" I do not get this. Do you mean that there is a year and 40 days between births, so each birth is on average 40 days later in the year than the previous one? If it is an average with some births after one year and some after two years it should be clarified.
- I have no idea. The source states "Interbirth intervals (IBI) average 405 days (range 184–1159 days, N = 103)" LittleJerry (talk) 18:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe "intervals between births are between 184 and 1,159 days with an average of 405 days". Dudley Miles (talk) 10:18, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Done. LittleJerry (talk) 15:01, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Maybe "intervals between births are between 184 and 1,159 days with an average of 405 days". Dudley Miles (talk) 10:18, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- I have no idea. The source states "Interbirth intervals (IBI) average 405 days (range 184–1159 days, N = 103)" LittleJerry (talk) 18:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- There is nothing in the article about fighting? Is dominance always established peacefully? Dudley Miles (talk) 16:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 18:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Support. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:18, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Added. LittleJerry (talk) 18:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
FunkMonk? Dudley Miles? LittleJerry (talk) 19:50, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Source review - pass
I'll try to take care of this over the next couple days. Hog Farm Talk 03:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sources look reliable enough for what they're citing
- One minor formatting question - I see both PLOS ONE and PLoS ONE are used - recommend standardizing with whichever is more proper
- I saw spot checks were done at the thorough-looking GA review; so I only did a few, issues not noted. Hog Farm Talk 20:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Fixed PLoS ONE. LittleJerry (talk) 20:54, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
@WP:FAC coordinators: : Anything more needed? LittleJerry (talk) 13:19, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
Cliff Thorburn
- Nominator(s): BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
This article is about the 1980 World Snooker Champion, known as "The Grinder", who is generally recognised as the first champion from outside the the United Kingdom. (Sorry, Horace Lindrum!) I've tried to keep the playing career part of the article quite focused on the main points as discussed in sources, rather than provide lots of tournament-by-tournament detail. I can provide relevant extracts from offline sources on request. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:26, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- Does ref 3 source everything from "he left school" onwards?
- No. I've added a page reference for the sentence here that it does support. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- "The 1977 World Snooker Championship was the first to be held at the Crucible Theatre." - probably worth specifying where in the world this is
- Added. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- "Ian Morrison called "unfounded."" - full stop should be outside the quote marks I think
- Not if it was there in the original. See MOS:INOROUT. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:17, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- @ChrisTheDude: Amended back, as the full sentence in the source is "The complaint was unfounded." Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 13:07, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not if it was there in the original. See MOS:INOROUT. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:17, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- "the explosive break-building of Higgins."" - same here
- Amended per the two points above. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 18:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- That's all I got as far as the end of the "1983 world championship maximum break" section. I'll look at the rest later -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- In the "team finals" table, you have notes saying who was in the Rest of the World and Ireland A teams, but not the others (eg Canada) - any reason?
- No reason. Added as notes. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note b to k are complete sentences so need full stops
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Any reason why notes m and q are the only ones not to start with a capital letter?
- None, so amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- That's all I got on the rest -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Many thanks, ChrisTheDude. Let me know if anything else is required. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
Support from Lee Vilenski
- televised 147 break - we linked maximum break, but then say "147" as if we know the reader realises these are the same thing. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- making him the first player to win the Masters three times and the first to retain the title. - I feel like this could be written differently. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Pool pipes to a redirect. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- not sure if the source says, but it's likely eight-ball at that time in Canada that he played Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- That particular source doesn't confirm which variety of pool, but I'll check a couple of other sources. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sources just say pool, as far as I can see.
- Yeah, I didn't expect a game, but it would be nice if the media actually expanded on things like this. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:43, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Spencer recommended Thorburn to the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association,[3] and he was accepted as a member in 1972 - this should probably be reworded to say that he'd be a professional player, not just a member of the organisation Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Changed "member" to professional. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- beat Jim Wych 13–6, having led 5–3, 9–3 and 10–6 - seems like excessive detail. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Amended by removing one of the scores, but it might need another snip as it's not a particularly notable match. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Second para of 1980 world snooker champion is very long. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Split at what I hope is a logical point. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Following his world championship victory, Thorburn bought a house in England with the intention of spending more time in Britain - maybe a personal life thing? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'll have a look at sources and either expand (obviously he did it because the pro events were in the UK), or move this. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Moved to personal life. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- He played for Canada in the 1996 World Cup, where his team reached the quarter-finals.[55] He won over one million pounds in prize money during the course of his career - seems like a long/weird jump! Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:15, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Many thanks, Lee Vilenski. There are a couple of points I need to refer to a few sources on - I should be able to do this in the next day or so. Let me know if there's anything else. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:23, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Lee Vilenski: I've now responeded to all the points above. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 22:01, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
Image use and licence seem OK to me. ALT text passable. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:02, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
C. J. Cregg
- Nominator(s): theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
This is Claudia Jean Cregg, a fictional character on NBC's The West Wing and my indirect namesake. She was a core cast member throughout the entirety of the show's run, and earned her portrayer, Allison Janney, more Emmys than anyone else on the show (justice for Martin Sheen, who played President Jed Bartlet and somehow didn't get any). Her portrayal was—while hampered by the show's misogynistic atmosphere—smart, funny, and assertive. I've been working on lots of West Wing characters articles (not to mention lots of people named Claudia), but I'm proud and excited that this is the first in both categories that I'm submitting for FA. Thanks in advance to everyone who weighs in! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Things that need consensus from new commenters:
- Is three dates in the citations (date published, date archived, date accessed) too many? should the latter be cut?
Comments from indopug
- the infobox should be restricted to real-world information. In-universe information cannot really ever be objective and doesn't belong in an infobox. Especially since this one is so long and contains possibly trivial and uncited (I did searches for the family members and could find no mentions in the article body) information.
- Hmm, I'm not so sure I agree with the idea that all in-universe information is subjective and has no place in the infobox. Looking around other fictional character FAs, lots of them do have in-universe sections (see Bart Simpson). That said, I've limited the in-universe section of the infobox to information relevant and cited in the prose. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Also, can "C. J." be spelt "CJ", which would look less clumsy in the text (especially when used frequently)?
- I'm not wild about it – she is rather rare as a fictional character (the only biography-style articles that refer to their subjects by common name) with an acronym'd first name, but C. J. is a fairly common spelling in the media and my own preferred spelling. "C.J." seems incorrect, and "CJ" feels unprofessional. I have, however, removed the {{nbsp}} tags from in between C. and J., as I think those were a little overkill. It's like asking for US instead of U.S.; up to personal preference. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Three dates in every citation is overkill. The reader doesn't need a retrieval date when he has access to a permanent link.—indopug (talk) 06:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retrieval dates are mandatory under the MOS. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 19:28, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Per WP:CITEWEB, "Citations for World Wide Web pages typically include . . . the date you retrieved (or accessed) the web page (required if the publication date is unknown)". Since pub dates are known here, retrieval dates are not mandatory at all.—indopug (talk) 02:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- let's put a pin in this for now; if there's consensus to remove the retrieval dates, we'll go for it. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 03:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Per WP:CITEWEB, "Citations for World Wide Web pages typically include . . . the date you retrieved (or accessed) the web page (required if the publication date is unknown)". Since pub dates are known here, retrieval dates are not mandatory at all.—indopug (talk) 02:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- I agree with Guerillero; in general, the most important date is at the beginning of the citation anyway. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comments, indopung! I've made some replies :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:54, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- oops, bad ping to indopug theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 00:59, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Retrieval dates are mandatory under the MOS. -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 19:28, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Guerillero
I will do the source review --Guerillero Parlez Moi 15:02, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- One of my favorite characters from one of my favorite shows
- Per WP:SCHOLARSHIP "Masters dissertations and theses are considered reliable only if they can be shown to have had significant scholarly influence." What is the significant influence of Gregg 2009?
- Heisler 2009a and Heisler 2009b need the publication info
- Why is Comic Book Resources a High Quality Reliable Source?
- Why is The Cut a High Quality Reliable Source?
- Is the tweet from AP covered anywhere else?
- Missing author for The Journal News article
- Post-Teen Vouge's 2016 slip into being a glorified mouthpiece of the DSA, I have a decent amount of skepticism of using them for political opinions
- -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 15:27, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, Guerillero! Glad you like her :) Replies: theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'll do my best to replace the information from Gregg...
- Watching and waiting. Let me know when you are finished --Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Guerillero: should be done :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 05:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Added The A.V. Club to the Heisler refs
- Perfect --Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- The Cut is WP:RSP-greenlit as a publication of New York Magazine
- Withdrawn --Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- I asked Pamzeis about CBR a while back, when I was reviewing one of her DYK noms – I'll copy her response here:
Comic Book Resources, on the other hand, is widely regarded as a reliable source for comics, etc. (see discussions here and here) and has been cited by WaPo, Daily News, CNBC, Vox, etc.
- Withdrawn --Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- Couldn't find the AP tweet anywhere else, but I can look again?
- Yes please. Since there is video of Janney, I would assume that someone would have written an article about it --Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- I don't think that WP:BIASed sources are automatically disqualified from FA – I can give it less space, but I don't see it as a fringe viewpoint, particularly when the Psaki–Cregg comparison was criticized in the opinion column of the Los Angeles Times. Plus, Teen Vogue is a subset of Vogue magazine, which is also RSP greenlit.
- Withdrawn --Guerillero Parlez Moi 11:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
- I'll do my best to replace the information from Gregg...
- Thanks, Guerillero! Glad you like her :) Replies: theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
Pass -- Guerillero Parlez Moi 10:37, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments Support from Indy beetle
- Why is the character's first name used in preference to her surname? There is a mix on naming choices in this article generally that should have some logic to it. Simon Donovan is referred to by his last name, for example.
- "Indeed" is used to start sentences four times. It's not really a great word to use, and adds unnecessary editorial emphasis to some statements over others in Wiki voice.
- Indeed, C. J. is widely thought to be an adept, empathetic, confident, witty, and independent character with considerable depth, This is cited to four sources. Unless one of those sources plainly states that these are "widely thought" views of the character, this is technically a WP:SYNTH violation. None of the quotes provided with those citations suggest that this is a majority view, it just happens to be an amalgamation of sources which profess a positive view.
- Since The West Wing frequently mixes the personal and professional, This is somewhat vague. Perhaps be more specific that the show covers both the "personal lives" and "professional careers" of its characters.
- This is realized in the series finale, "Tomorrow"; in the episode, C. J. leaves the White House, choosing Danny instead. No need for the dramatic implication; just say outright, "choosing to pursue a relationship with Danny instead" or something applicable.
- Critical reception of C. J. Cregg has been highly positive, both during and after the show's run. Is this claim directly supported by a reliable source?
-Indy beetle (talk) 09:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Tentative replies: theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 18:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- The characters are referred to by their WP:COMMONNAME – some characters, like the show's core senior staff, are on a first-name basis with the audience (RSes) and each other. Other characters, like the president and side characters with honorifics, aren't generally referred to by first name by reliable sources or the show.
- Cut the "indeed"s
- I mean, I suppose you're right that the "widely thought" isn't in the sourcing, but I'm not sure I agree that that's a SYNTH problem. If every reliable source stated that the Earth was a globe, but none opined that every other source thought the exact same way, would we really not be allowed to say "the Earth is widely thought to be a globe" (that would be relevant in the Flat Earth article)? When we're looking for the common name of an article, do we need sources that say "this is most commonly referred to as A, but it's also B or C"? It seems a strange interpretation of SYNTH to say that editors are responsible for assessing the attitude of reliable sources as it relates to due weight, but aren't allowed to express that in prose. That said, I'd be happy to look for broader sources, or change to "has been described as" to narrow the scope to those for, but I don't know if I take much issue with it.
- Well, since it is the viewpoint of RSes, I just put it in wikivoice.
- Fixed the sentence in the reception section
- Fixed "personal/professional" and C. J./Danny
- Sorry for the delay, Indy beetle! Stuff's been crazy- I think I've got it now. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:50, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Reviewers have praised C. J.'s performance The character isn't performing, they're the one being performed. Maybe "C.J.'s portrayal" or "Janney's performance"? -Indy beetle (talk) 02:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Indy beetle: made a couple moves there :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 01:48, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Reviewers have praised C. J.'s performance The character isn't performing, they're the one being performed. Maybe "C.J.'s portrayal" or "Janney's performance"? -Indy beetle (talk) 02:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Offering my support now. I've added some info from a profile on Janney, move it around as you wish. -Indy beetle (talk) 22:04, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks so much, Indy beetle! :) theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 10:04, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Lee Vilenski
I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.
- Lede
- C. J. is widely thought to be a smart, strong, witty, and thoughtful character, - by whom? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Presumably it's over-emotional? Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- I feel like the awards part is probably more important, and should come before the rest of the lede. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 08:49, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Changed "widely thought" to "portrayed as"
- "Overemotional" is a defined word – I presume it was de-hyphenated?
- These awards tend to be pretty self-involved – other than the occasional reference to support Janney's acting prowess, it wasn't heavily discussed by reliable sources. The bulk of the reporting tends to cover the other stuff – plus, the awards are pretty lengthy and a little boring. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 08:27, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Prose
- Additional comments
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:18, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
- Lee Vilenski ? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:11, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Gerda
I feel invited to another subject I don't know, will comment as I read, looking at the lead last. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:46, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
name
- I am puzzled by C. J. Cregg vs. the full name. If the character is known by the abbreviated form, that should also show on top of the infobox, and be explained with a bold name in the lead. Otherwise the infobox is fine, just "children at least one" tells me nothing at this point.
- In the day-to-day of the show, she goes by "C. J." – if she walked up to you and introduced herself, she'd tell you that she's "C. J. Cregg". If she had to sign a mortgage, that'd probably be "Claudia Jean Cregg". theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
TOC
- Mostly fine, but I don't think I need four entries for Cited sources.
- Not sure what this means? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Oh, I see. Maybe some semicolon headers, then? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:21, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Not sure what this means? theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Creation
- Forgive me, but knowing nothing, not the series, not the actress, I'd like first a bit of what kind of character in what kind of series. Yes, there are links, but three sentences of a general introduction of the context wouldn't hurt. Actress probably last, unless it is completely determined by her - which I don't know yet.
- Hmm... let me brainstorm on this a bit. I'm generally quite averse to putting in-universe information in the real-world section, but there might be some context I can give anyway.
Casting
- Once Sorkin has been introduced, surname is enough.
- I'll say this once up here, because unlike my policy on given names, I do mind repetition on this. I often find that this minimalistic policy of given names/surnames is too restrictive, and harmful in writing an article. Some names are only thrown around two or three times; it's easier to build an impression in the mind of the reader if they can instantly connect these names together, instead of mentioning a full name once in the first body paragraph and then throwing in a last name near the end. That's something I often find annoying in reading others' articles, especially when I'm Ctrl+F hopping for a single section. Having to track down where the author's article felt a single first name mention was enough and putting together who this person is and why they're important is frustrating. Instead, for names that only come up a few times, I prefer to repeat both the given and surname, to keep a clear, consistent identifier. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- I find all the details about the actresses relationship to the character a bit premature, not yet knowing what character that is.
- The image caption repeats much of the prose, while I'd prefer to know when it was taken, and if it is the actress in private, the character, or the character in the other show mentioned.
Appearance
- Once Lyn Paolo is introduced, Paolo is enough.
Character ..
- I think I'd prefer to know that part before the details of casting and appearance.
- more given names that are not needed
Personality
- ref order
- "that a relationship would "hurt my reputation" - I think this doesn't need to be a quote, to avoid third person here, first person there: "that a relationship would hurt her reputation"
- Both fixed :)
Romance
- Why is it C. J. and Danny here, but Donovan there?
- C. J. and Danny (in particular, C. J.) are regular characters on the show without formal titles – so, on the show (and in RSes), they're referred to by their common names. Donovan, however, is a special recurring character for only a season, and since he works for the Secret Service, he's usually referred to as Donovan or Agent Donovan – not Simon. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Sexism
- "Leo, who relayed the staffers' guesses to the president, left out C. J.'s predictions, which she suspected was because she was a woman. In the end, C. J. was shown to have made the correct guess." - I understand not wanting to repeat "predictions" but "guess" sounds wrong if it should be stressed that she had the best evaluation.
- Well, "prediction" is generally more certain than "guess" (a prediction is kind of an educated guess), so I don't see what's wrong with setting up C. J. as the more competent forecaster here. theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- "... she is introduced as the "very lovely, the very talented – Claudia Jean Cregg". He then tells the entire room ..." - who is "he"?
- Whoops! fixed.
Lead
- just general at this point: I think it is too short, but too long repeating all these awards. Will look again tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:41, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Let me know – thanks, Gerda! theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (she/they) 21:19, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Sayfo
This article is about the lesser known sibling of the Armenian genocide. Thanks so much to Ichthyovenator and Hog Farm who reviewed at ACR, Jens Lallensack for the GAN, and Miniapolis for a thorough copyedit. (t · c) buidhe 15:50, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- The shading in the Assyrian percentage map is quite difficult to distinguish - see MOS:COLOUR
- Suggest scaling up the Paris Peace Conference map
- File:Syrian_Women_of_the_Kurdistan_Mountains_in_Flight.png: why is Iranian copyright believed relevant? The given source was published in the US and UK. If it is kept, the tag indicates that the description should specify which rationale applies.
- That comment on Iranian copyright applies to multiple other images
- File:Assyrian_warriors_from_Tergawar,_Iran.jpg: when and where was this first published?
- File:Map_of_southeastern_Anatolia_printed_in_The_cradle_of_mankind;_life_in_eastern_Kurdistan_(1922)_(14576929017).jpg: one of the authors listed died less than 70 years ago
- File:Oramar._Looking_northwards_across_the_gorge_towards_the_crags_of_Supa_Durig_between_Jilu_and_Baz.jpg: can a more specific copyright tag be applied?
- File:Syriac_Orthodox_family_in_Mardin,_1904.jpg: what is the author's date of death? Ditto File:Map_of_Assyria_Paris_Peace_Conference_1919.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Nikkimaria I put Iranian tags because the photographs were taken in Iran, so I figured that would be the source country.
- Okay - tag requires that the description page identify which rationale listed is believed to apply. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:11, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- File:Assyrian_warriors_from_Tergawar,_Iran.jpg —published in US in 1924, details added to image description.
- File:Map_of_southeastern_Anatolia_printed_in_The_cradle_of_mankind;_life_in_eastern_Kurdistan_(1922)_(14576929017).jpg As stated in the deletion request, the man who died in 1935 is credited with the illustrations in the book, while the other guy wrote the text
- File:Oramar._Looking_northwards_across_the_gorge_towards_the_crags_of_Supa_Durig_between_Jilu_and_Baz.jpg Same situation as the previous one, this is PD-old-70-1923, licensing corrected
- File:Syriac_Orthodox_family_in_Mardin,_1904.jpg I'm not sure about the author's death date, but the French source linked in the image description says the author's works are public domain and I have no reason to doubt it.
- As for the map, I don't know about the author's death so removed that claim. But it was definitely published in 1919 or 1920. (t · c) buidhe 05:35, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Nikkimaria, how is this looking now? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:08, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Still concerned about the map shading; image description on Iranian images needs to identify which rationale is believed to apply. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:40, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by GGT
I had worked quite a bit on this article a number of years ago, so am quite familiar with the topic in general. Buidhe's important work on this rather under-researched but important part of history has been exciting to follow and I'll be pleased to read through the article and share some of my thoughts - this is my first FAC review on en.wiki so please do bear with me.
- I'm not too comfortable with the image in the lead. We don't really know where this was taken, we don't know who took it. The only verification we have about the image is the single sentence caption in a 1916 book that seems to have been sponsored by the Assyrian Church. All it shows is a bunch of women wearing the garments of the day and carrying a bunch of bags in a countryside setting. I've just seen too many instances of falsified or out-of-context claimed images of atrocities for this period. Granted, these are mostly from the denialist camp but as the article explains quite well, the Assyrian church had its own reasons for being less than factual. So I'm not comfortable with having this image in the article without a secondary source using it, or at least some attribution.
- Similarly with the image captioned "Cavalry and slain Assyrians at the mission in Urmia". This image is so low-resolution that it's not even very meaningful. The caption in the primary source from which it's taken raises more questions than it answers.
- Removed both images
- "The Syriac Orthodox Church has officially rejected the use of "Assyrian" since 1952, however, but not all Syriac Orthodox reject Assyrian identity." "However, but" sounds a bit clunky.
- Reworded
- "David Gaunt has estimated the Assyrian population at between 500,000 and 600,000 just before the outbreak of World War I, significantly higher than Ottoman census figures." This sentence conveys Gaunt's estimate to be much more confident than it actually is. In fact, Gaunt is very tentative in his calculations in the cited work as well as his more detailed account in Massacres, Resistance, Protectors. His bottom line is that there aren't really any reliable figures for the population, and I don't think that this comes across as such in the article. The sentence also begs the question of what the official Ottoman figure was and why it's discounted, which should be easy enough to add to the article.
- Reworded. There was no official Ottoman figure for Assyrians since they were counted in a fragmentary way by religious denomination; I removed the reference to the census. In his 2006 book, Gaunt says that the 1914 Ottoman census's figures for "non-Muslims were thoroughly misleading and inaccurate. As a token of the confused nature of the official census-taking and the lack of coordination between the local correspondents, the Syriac Orthodox population is shown in three separate categories: Süryaniler, Eski Süryaniler, and Jakobiler"
- I'm hoping to keep posting comments as I read through the article. --GGT (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for the improvements! I consider the issues above to be fully resolved. Moving on...
- "Under the Qudshanis-based Patriarch of the Church of the East, Assyrian tribes ruled farmers in the Hakkari mountains east of Tur Abdin (adjacent to the Ottoman–Persian border) with aşiret status—in theory, with full autonomy." I note that this section, along with a substantial part of the article, relies extensively on Gaunt's work: I won't critique this too much as I'm aware that this is an understudied topic but some of his more general comments should be taken with a pinch of salt, and this is one of those. The sentence doesn't make sense to me as a native Turkish speaker as aşiret isn't really a status. It simply means "tribe" (so the sentence is repetitive) and was integrated into Ottoman administrative hierarchy as such, but it wasn't a status that was bestowed, so to speak, and it also didn't theoretically provide full autonomy. (For a non-Turkish speaker I imagine this sentence also doesn't really clarify what an aşiret is.) This article provides a good overview of what an "aşiret" is its place in Ottoman law. If Assyrian tribes enjoyed full autonomy, that would have been thanks to the remoteness of the region rather than any status.
- Rephrased
- "Assyrian efforts to maintain their independence" - this should probably read "autonomy" rather than independence.
- Done
- "Historians date mass violence against the Assyrians to the 1830s or earlier" - I'd say that the wording here is a bit too similar to the source. Also Gaunt doesn't really cite any historical works to substantiate this statement.
- Reworded
- There is a bit of a chronological confusion here - the Russo-Turkish war precedes the creation of the Hamidiye cavalry; the cavalry should probably be discussed within the context of the Hamidian massacres. --GGT (talk) 12:11, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- Added dates and restored chronological order. The cavalry were not involved in the 1895 massacres in Diyarbekir. (t · c) buidhe 14:58, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- "In particular, the Ottoman Empire wanted to annex Persia's Azerbaijan province to connect with Russia's Muslim subjects in Transcaucasia." I'd say that this is a slight oversimplification of the Ottoman motives, this article provides a better summary than Gaunt for this IMO. At any rate, the aim wasn't necessarily to "annex" to territory but rather to "occupy" it.
- Removed the sentence. I'm not sure exactly what the academic consensus on this issue is, but I would hesitate to cite that source since as far as I can tell it doesn't say anything about Assyrians.
- "Historian Donald Bloxham emphasizes the negative influence of interfering foreign powers in the Ottoman Empire (including plots to annex territory) under the pretext of protecting Ottoman Christians." A very important point - I think one or two sentences about the British involvement with the Assyrians prior to the Sayfo is actually essential background.
- Do you know any good sources on this? I can't find any and Bloxham's book says virtually nothing about Assyrians that's not already covered. I know there were American, French, and British missionaries; is there a reason the British were most important?
- "According to Gaunt, the Sayfo should be considered among other settler genocides that sought the elimination of the original inhabitants to redistribute land to a different population." I'm unable to verify this I think. It's not in Gaunt's chapter (p. 245 onwards) and it's not on p. 331, which is cited. In general, I find the focus on Turkification and settler colonialism as a motive for Sayfo in this paragraph a bit bizarre and undue. The areas populated by the Assyrians weren't really very "desirable" areas and unlike the properties of the Armenians, they mostly weren't repopulated by Turks. Yalçın (2009) quotes Dündar in a comment that is general about the repopulation of Christian villages with muhacirs, that shouldn't be understood as specifically applying to the Assyrians. And again I don't think Gaunt really substantiates his resettlement argument in the 2015 paper either, the whole paragraph is vague ("The order to resettle the Nestorians of Hakkari was one step within this greater scheme"), and as I said I think the article relies a bit too much on Gaunt's analysis of events already - this might be a good place to cut down on it unless other researchers explicitly agree with him on this.
- --GGT (talk) 17:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- It does show up on page 331 of the version I consulted. The argument is more that they were mostly killed by other locals (not primarily Turks) with less involvement from the government. Although their land wasn't the most desirable, my understanding is it was indeed taken over by other people (although mostly not muhacir) after the Sayfo. Locally driven violence and land appropriation is typical of settler genocides (eg. see Civilian-Driven Violence and the Genocide of Indigenous Peoples in Settler Societies.) However, I don't feel strongly about including this particular language, so removed
Comments by Ovinus
Will get reviewing in a moment. Thanks for your important work as always. Ovinus (talk) 23:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
- First sentence – I'm pretty sure MOS says to avoid slashes. (Sorry to be the obsessive/pedant.) Is it because of the controversial terminology? I think that's a perfectly valid exception, but just want to make sure
- Yes, it's because the people may be called either Assyrians or Syriacs
- "irregulars" (twice) – too technical for a lead. perhaps "guerillas" or "paramilitaries", but I'd even prefer "independent fighters" or something
- Changed to "Ottoman forces" referring to both soldiers and irregulars
- "were not part of the genocide" – Clarify whether they were not part of his order specifically or the ensuing genocide in practice
- The latter, clarified
- "Local actors played a larger role for local actors than the Ottoman government" – I do not understand this sentence
- "Local actors played a larger role than the Ottoman government", fixed
- "this is rejected by Turkey" – Also say that Turkey denies the Armenian genocide, which is quite relevant I think
- "collective identity such as the Armenian national movement" – maybe "analogous to" ?
- "similar to"
- "There were no accurate estimates of the prewar Assyrian population" – were or are?
- The source is discussing past estimates
- "The first mass violence targeting Assyrians was in the 1940s ... killing several thousands during the 1840s" – I assume you mean 1940s, and probably remove the second date
- 1840s, fixed
- "During intertribal feuds, most violence was directed at Christian villages under the "protection" of the opposing tribe." – I assumed "most" was considered over Christian villages, so I rephrased, but rv if that's not right
- Not sure what you mean
- Never mind, I confused myself
- Not sure what you mean
- "realize Pan-Turanism" – define or remove
- Removed
- "Turkify" – I remember this word was used in Armenian genocide, but just to confirm, RS use this word?
- Cited source says "Talât developed a scheme of demographic engineering that would also enable the Turkification of those refugees who were not already Turkish speaking."
Really sorry to do this, but I'm too tired to get through the rest of the article atm. It's pretty dense stuff for someone who has trouble following key events and people. Back with Armenian genocide there were just a lot less people and places to remember, plus a very helpful map. But I'm not sure if this is something that can be fixed without degrading the encyclopedic quality of the article. Ovinus (talk) 05:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Ovinus yeah I understand and thanks for reviewing what you did review. Unfortunately the Sayfo is less centralized than the Armenian genocide and therefore more people and places to keep track of. (t · c) buidhe 05:22, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Funk
- Marking my spot. FunkMonk (talk) 16:09, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- At first glance, there are a lot of WP:duplinks throughout, which can be highlighted with this script:[17]
- "Terms for Syriac Christians such as Assyrian, Syriac, Aramean, and Chaldean" These names should all be linked here at their first mention, no? Now they are first linked under second mention in the background section.
- I don't think that would be helpful. The terminology article explains the use of these terms, which are not synonymous with the names or the membership of the churches.
- Link Ottoman Empire at first mention in article body.
- Done
- "speaking of an 'Assyrian Genocide' is anachronistic" I think we need to know what the alternative is here then, a general Christian genocide?
- Gaunt doesn't propose an immediate alternative and does not buy into the idea of a general Christian genocide. Since the localized killings in different areas occurred for different reasons, one potential argument is that there's more than one Assyrian genocide (although I haven't seen this in RS)
- "In Neo-Aramaic" Could be explained in parenthesis that is is the language spoken by these ethnicities, now there is no context.
- done
- "The people now called Assyrian, Chaldean, or Aramean, who historically spoke Aramaic languages, converted to Christianity in the first centuries CE" Would it be more accurate to say they are descendants of people who converted to Christianity, as their modern supposed self-identities would otherwise be retroactively applied to their ancestors, who we do not know identified as what?
- Rephrased
- Perhaps also specify these were people native of West Asia/Near East/Asia Minor/whatever works.
- Done
- Link Middle Eastern Christian?
- Done
- Link Nestorians
- Done
- "Unlike the Syriac population of Tur Abdin, many of these Syriacs spoke other languages." Unclear what is meant by this. What language did those of Tur Abdin speak, and what did the others speak?
- non-Aramaic languages (eg. Kurdish, Armenian, Arabic)
- Link World War I at first mention.
- Done
- "Although the Kurds and Assyrians were well-integrated" With each other or with the Ottoman Empire?
- the former, clarified
- Link Russian Empire.
- Done
- "tried to enlist Caucasian" Link to Caucasus or similar to avoid confusion.
- done
- Link Persian at first mention.
- done
- "confiscated from populations deemed unreliable" Perhaps specify they were unreliable to the empire, I was unsure who the CUP worked under at first read.
- done
- Link Turkify.
- Done
- "The goals of the population replacement were to Turkify the newcomers" Who are the newcomers, Muslims from other areas? Perhaps state specifically that these were of non-Turkish ethnicities, if that's the case?
- Some but not all the Balkan Muslims were non-Turkish (ie. Slavic-speaking, Albanian etc.) The source doesn't go into detail here though
- "expelled from the Lizan valley" To where? And where were Christians generally expelled to?
- It's not clear where they went, probably other Assyrian areas. There weren't a significant number of other Christians living in the Lizan valley at this time.
Thanks for your comments! (t · c) buidhe 08:13, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Link Sunni Muslim.
- Done
- "clearly related to the extermination orders from Constantinople" You don't mention extermination orders earlier, would seem the question of whether there were such orders could be dealt with in more detail, now it seems like a strong claim with little backing in-text.
- Removed since the source doesn't elaborate and other sources don't specify whether the killings were ordered from Constantinople or decided by local CUP leaders (or lean towards the latter interpretation)
- "a collection of eyewitness reports" Reports about what?
- fixed
- "The CUP government reversed its position on the Hamidiye regiments" Reversed from what? Until now, you have only stated they cooperated with the Ottoman authorities.
- Done
- "many Christian men were drowned in the river." The article body doesn't seem to state this anywhere? Image captions should preferably not have unsourced information not covered in the article body.
- Removed
- Halfway trough the article, you seem to switch from calling them Assyrians to Syriacs. If there is no particular reason for this, it might be better to be consistent.
- This because self-identified Assyrian identity is less common for the (descendants of the) mainly Syriac Orthodox population of Diyarbekir.
- "The killers began separating Armenians and Syriacs in early July, only killing the former" Regardless of their obvious role, it seems a bit blunt and informal to just refer to them as "the killers".
- Changed to perpetrators
- "militiamen were caught attempting to plant arms in a Syriac Catholic church in Mardin to justify the planned massacres" I don't understand the logic of this. How does an explosion in a church justify killing Christians?
- Not bombs, arms as in firearms. although source isn't explicit about the type of weapon. They weren't trying to blow up the church but rather "find" weapons there to "prove" that Christians were plotting a rebellion. Clarified
- "Those who refused to convert to Islam was murdered" Were murdered.
- Fixed
- "The city's Syriac Orthodox made a deal with authorities and were spared" What did the deal entail?
- It's not known exactly what kind of deal, but it apparently involved payment of a bribe, release of Syriac Orthodox notables and their subsequent declaration of support for the government (Gaunt 2006, pp. 171–172)
- "Islamicized Syriacs (primarily women) were left behind; their Kurdified (or Arabized)" Link "ized/ified" terms.
- Done
- "becoming landless agricultural laborers or (later) and urban underclass" Do you mean "an urban underclass"? Otherwise, it's a kind of odd sentence.
- Fixed
- "In 2000, Syriac Orthodox priest Yusuf Akbulut was secretly recorded by journalists saying: "At that time it was not only the Armenians but also the Assyrians [Süryani] who were massacred on the grounds that they were Christians". The journalists gave their recording to Turkish prosecutors" You should specify if he lived in Turkey.
- Done
- The intro could mention that the Assyrians fought back in some cases, now it looks like they were just passively exterminated?
- Done
- Support - nice work, and while a difficult subject, I hope it will attract more reviewers soon. FunkMonk (talk) 13:13, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Shaylee Mansfield
Shaylee Mansfield... she hasn't been around for very long and is probably younger than most of us. So Mansfield began appearing in viral ASL videos as a child and received some media coverage. In 2016, she starred in a viral Disney Parks ad. She became an actress after appearing in films like Noelle with Anna Kendrick and Feel the Beat with Sofia Carson. She has also made a request to Instagram that garnered coverage from Slate, MIT Technology Review and CNET. And finally, this year, she became the first deaf actor to be credited alongside the voice actors in an animated production... at 12 years old! This article passed a GA review earlier this year by Mujinga and was peer reviewed by Aoba47. All (constructive) comments welcome! Pamzeis (talk) 10:30, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Image review — pass: The only image is from YouTube, licences under CC. The image has ALT text. Made this formatting change. Rest looks fine. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 10:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Accessibility review — pass: Image has ALT text. Made these formatting changes in the table. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:17, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- "As of 2016, Shaylee attends a deaf school" - 2016 was six years ago, so this should be in the past tense
- Done
- "Because of the earlier relationship between Mansfiled" - spelt wrong
- 💀
- "the first-such credit" - that hyphen should not be there
- Removed
- That's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:16, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments
- "ASL" is not repeated again in the lead. Do we need to define the acronym?
- Removed
- "Mansfield has a younger sister named Ivy, who is hearing" — I feel the wording is a bit odd, though I am not sure.
- "E! said: "We can't" — Optional suggestion. A cable channel does not say, though it issues statement.
- Revised
- Citations for Filmography? Most of the films are mentionned and cited in the prose, but Role needs citations. It would be better, I think, if you could add citation for individial films (as done in various other filmographic FLs)
- IMO, it's not necessary except for uncredited roles, but I added refs anyways.
– Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 14:17, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Responded to your comments :) Pamzeis (talk) 16:11, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Very happy to support this article! Do you know any other FA promoted when the subject was this young? But that should not be an issue. In my opinion, this article meets WP:FA?#1e. If you have time and inclination, would appreciate your review for any of these articles. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:32, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- Give the full date of birth in the main article.
- The full DOB was removed in an edit that said a social media post is not good enough to provide a full DOB. I didn't notice it had been re-added; removed for now
- "As of 2016, Shaylee attended a deaf school." Is six-year-old information relevant?
- Removed
- Could it be explained what "ASL Nook" is.
- Can you expand on this request? The article already states "a website and YouTube channel that teaches American Sign Language (ASL)"
- "In 2015, she enacted Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer; HuffPost called her retelling of The Polar Express "beautiful ... like you've never seen before"." 1. Why the semi colon? I don't see the connection. 2. When did Mansfield sign The Polar Express?
- Fixed
- "Three years later, due to this event". Could you give some detail on how/why the two events were connected.
- The source doesn't really mention anything, only that "The Mansfield family must have shared that magical moment with Disney"
- "The family met an actor dressed as Minnie Mouse who had recently begun learning sign language." How is this relevant? (One assumes Mansfield has met many people learning sign language, of various professions.)
- This was the subject of the video. I have tried to clarify it
- "becoming the second-most-watched of Disney's advertisements." I assume that the Unforgettable Stories video was an advertisement? If so, could this be made clear at first mention. If not, consider rephrasing.
- Revised
- " "when we see the Mansfield family's moment, we feel that same joy in ourselves" ". I am lost here; what moment?
- Removed
- "deaf consultants on animated series Madagascar: A Little Wild". I really struggled to understand what you were saying here. Perhaps 'deaf consultants for the animated series Madagascar: A Little Wild'?
- Done
- "released a sticker that automatically transcribes speech in Stories". Could there be in line explanations of "sticker" and "Stories". Also suggest "Stories" → 'Instagram Stories'.
- Done
Gog the Mild (talk) 18:53, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: Responded to your comments :) Pamzeis (talk) 06:09, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
- Gog the Mild? Pamzeis (talk) 03:30, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Nice work. Supporting. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:52, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Source review
- You need to remain consistent in including website publishers. For example, you've done it with Rotten Tomatoes sources (Fandango Media) but not for others. Either do it for all or none at all.
- The article claims that "she is credited for her signed performance in the episode alongside the voice actors, the first such credit for a deaf actor" whereas the source says this is "possibly a first for deaf performers".
- Spot-checked some other sources for accuracy of the article; no issues. FrB.TG (talk) 10:08, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Cedar Hill Yard
- Nominator(s): Trainsandotherthings (talk) 04:09, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
This is my second nomination of this article. My first nomination last year, while garnering 3 supports, was failed over text-source integrity concerns, and my reaction to this was less than ideal. I gave it 4 months to cool off, and have since performed a major check for this issue and made numerous corrections. The article itself is about a rail yard in Connecticut, which once held the title of the largest such facility in the United States east of the Mississippi River. Today it is much smaller, but remains the largest rail yard in Connecticut. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 04:09, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- It appears you forgot to transclude this to the main FAC page. I did that. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 16:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- That's what I get for starting a FAC at almost midnight my time. Thank you for catching that! Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments Support from AviationFreak
- Classification yard is linked twice in the lede (once as "humps"). Check article thoroughly for other duplinks.
- This is true, but the link written as "humps" is to a specific section of the article. Not sure how best to handle this. Hump yards probably deserve their own dedicated article but that's a project for another day. Does this still count as a violation of duplink? If so, I can remove it, but I believe retaining it provides relevant information to the reader. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- This is fine to my eyes - DUPLINK is written in terms of "generally", and I think IAR would be well-applied here as it is legitimately beneficial to the reader. AviationFreak💬 22:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- This is true, but the link written as "humps" is to a specific section of the article. Not sure how best to handle this. Hump yards probably deserve their own dedicated article but that's a project for another day. Does this still count as a violation of duplink? If so, I can remove it, but I believe retaining it provides relevant information to the reader. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- To my eyes some of the commas in the article are extraneous (e.g. last comma in the first paragraph), but I am personally particularly picky about this and not even sure that my reading is the "correct" one. Wouldn't worry about this unless other editors say anything.
- Our article on Selkirk Yard states that it was built in 1924 and was merely rebuilt in '68.
- Yes, the rebuilding in 1968 was what led to Cedar Hill's decline. All mentions which implied it was newly built have been edited accordingly. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Why were the Mott Haven workers striking?
- You mention this right below, but the claim is that they were striking just because other workers were striking at Mott Haven. The strike did indeed end within 2 days after it began Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- My question concerns the actual Mott Haven strikers themselves though - Why were they striking? I thought it might be helpful to have a phrase about why the strike took place to begin with. AviationFreak💬 22:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- It turns out the Mott Haven workers went on strike because the railroad abruptly fired the assistant yard master there without any sort of proceedings first, which upset the workers who liked him. I've added a bit about this to the article along with a new source which says this. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- My question concerns the actual Mott Haven strikers themselves though - Why were they striking? I thought it might be helpful to have a phrase about why the strike took place to begin with. AviationFreak💬 22:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- You mention this right below, but the claim is that they were striking just because other workers were striking at Mott Haven. The strike did indeed end within 2 days after it began Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- ...beyond sympathy with the Mott Haven strikers. - This should be "sympathy for the Mott Haven strikers."
- Wording changed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Suggest linking Switchman
- Linked. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Suggest linking Brakeman
- Linked. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Suggest linking Flagman
- Linked. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Love the inflation templates, but for values this large (especially when spelling out "million" for the original value) I would recommend using {{Format price}}. Documentation on this here.
- I spent about 15 minutes trying to figure this out and I have had no success. I could just write them in plain text, but that loses the ability to quickly update the inflation end year in the future. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong but I can't get this to work properly. It seems so silly that I can't figure out something this simple but here we are. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:46, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Pretty sure I got it done for all the places where it would be applicable. AviationFreak💬 02:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for that. I'm not sure why it gave me such a headache. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 11:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Pretty sure I got it done for all the places where it would be applicable. AviationFreak💬 02:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I spent about 15 minutes trying to figure this out and I have had no success. I could just write them in plain text, but that loses the ability to quickly update the inflation end year in the future. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong but I can't get this to work properly. It seems so silly that I can't figure out something this simple but here we are. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:46, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- no fewer than seems overly editorialized to me
- Yeah, I can see how that could come across that way. I've removed that phrase. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Suggest changing ...allowed for fewer workers... to "...required fewer workers..."
- Wording changed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Specify whether 91,000 t is long or metric tons
- That's metric tons. The conversion template uses "t" for metric tons. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:18, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- ...resulting in the hills... -> "...creating the hills..."
- Wording changed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:57, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hyphenate battery powered
- Done. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- ...in the entire United States -> "in the United States"
- Word removed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Is the detail that the towers were labeled A through D really necessary?
- Probably not. Ironic that I'm the first to delete things from articles for being too much detail. I've removed this detail and merged the sentence with the one following. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Link PA system - Odd to me that suc
kh a system would be called public address when it's used for apparently private communication, but I see that's what the source says- Linked. Yeah, I'm not sure exactly why they say public, but that's what the source used. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- U.S. Senate can be linked
- Good catch. Done. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- ...New York governor Malcolm Wilson... is a sea of blue. Suggest something like "...Malcom Wilson, then the governor of New York..."
- I see what you mean about sea of blue. I could change it to "Despite a directive from Malcolm Wilson, the Governor of New York, in September of that year to reopen the bridge, the bankrupt Penn Central failed to do so." but I'm not a huge fan of how this sentence reads now. Would "Governor Malcom Wilson" with governor piped to Governor of New York work? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:46, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- How does "The bridge remained closed despite a directive to reopen it from Malcolm Wilson, the Governor of New York, later that year." sound? AviationFreak💬 02:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I like that wording. Added. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 11:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- How does "The bridge remained closed despite a directive to reopen it from Malcolm Wilson, the Governor of New York, later that year." sound? AviationFreak💬 02:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- I see what you mean about sea of blue. I could change it to "Despite a directive from Malcolm Wilson, the Governor of New York, in September of that year to reopen the bridge, the bankrupt Penn Central failed to do so." but I'm not a huge fan of how this sentence reads now. Would "Governor Malcom Wilson" with governor piped to Governor of New York work? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:46, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- department of transportation can be linked
- Replaced with Connecticut Department of Transportation. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Connecticut Department of Transportation really ought to be linked
- This has been done. Specifically where it just said "the state's department of transportation" I specified we are talking about CTDOT. No reason to link to both the concept of a department of transportation and specifically CTDOT in my opinion. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Gotcha. The first use of the phrase was lowercased when I reviewed and I figured you could link to both the concept and CTDOT if you wanted to. This works fine though and tbh I think most readers either know or can infer the function of a DOT as a concept. AviationFreak💬 22:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- This has been done. Specifically where it just said "the state's department of transportation" I specified we are talking about CTDOT. No reason to link to both the concept of a department of transportation and specifically CTDOT in my opinion. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Suggest linking Railroad ties
- Linked at first mention in the body. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Risley's Bridge is brought into the article without much context; if it is just a bridge in Berlin, CT, suggest just saying "a bridge"
- I suppose naming the specific bridge isn't necessary. I've changed it to just "a bridge". Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:48, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Suggest linking trap rock
- Linked. It's such a commonly known term in this area of CT that I forget it's not common in most places (fun fact, the image used in the trap rock article is in New Haven, Connecticut, but a few miles from Cedar Hill Yard). Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- ...illegally disposing the mercury... -> "...illegally disposing of the mercury..."
- Done. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Suggest linking lead paint and asbestos
- Both linked. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 19:15, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- The proposed Cross-Harbor Rail Tunnel in New York City would result in more usage of Cedar Hill Yard. - This probably needs attribution
- One of the sources definitely directly makes this connection, I need to go through and check which one and then attribute it in-text. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- The "Rail Freight In The Housatonic Region" reference is the one that gives this idea. On page 28 of the PDF: "Advocates for the project in Connecticut suggest that Cedar Hill Yard in North Haven is well positioned to provide intermodal services to take advantage of this new connection, as intermodal sites in New Jersey are operating at capacity, and there are limited sites in New York available for new facilities." I've added a citation from this to the following sentence, as it supports both sentences. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:46, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- One of the sources definitely directly makes this connection, I need to go through and check which one and then attribute it in-text. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
Sorry to hear about the bad experience at FAC earlier with this article. I had a similar experience; hope this nom goes better! AviationFreak💬 22:09, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
@AviationFreak: Sorry for the delay in getting a loose end tied up. How does the article look now? Anything else you want me to work on? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 17:40, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- No worries. Should just be one thing with the sea of blue left. AviationFreak💬 02:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Taken care of now. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 11:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Looks good to me! Support on prose. AviationFreak💬 15:07, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
- Taken care of now. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 11:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Support from Vami
Reserving a spot. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 02:44, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Forgive me for this somewhat personal quibble, but why not combine #Before 1900 and #1900 to 1917, and remove their headers so #History isn't just a hat? The labor disputes and crash described therein aren't described in the lead, so they may not require a header.
- I have merged Before 1900 and 1900 to 1917 into one section. The labor disputes and crash aren't mentioned in the lead, but the construction of the original instance of the yard is, so I do not think removing the headers entirely is wise. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:39, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
[..] and the NYNH&H's existing facilities and land in the area.
Prior abbreviation of this railroad's name in the article was "the New Haven". Why use an acronym here?- Changed to "The New Haven". Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
[...] removing a long-standing bottleneck on the New Haven Railroad's system.
Similar thing happening here.- While I can see not wanting to alternate between the spelled out words and the acronym, I don't see any harm in using "the New Haven" and "the New Haven Railroad" interchangeably. New Haven Railroad is used 15 times in the article and I think it's fine. Open to discussing. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
[...] from cuts made elsewhere [...]
Can a link be added here?- A link, like to Cut and fill? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- That one or Cut (earthworks) would be good. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 01:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Linked to Cut (earthworks) now. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 00:20, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- That one or Cut (earthworks) would be good. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 01:51, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- A link, like to Cut and fill? Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- Can
After several years of construction, the new Cedar Hill Yard opened in 1920.[16][17]
andAs part of the yard's expansion, a new freight transfer station to handle less-than-car load freight was built, which opened in July 1920.[15]
be merged? This would make the paragraph more immediately recognizable as the culmination of the previous; the first clause of the first highlighted sentence is also redundant.- Different parts of the yard opened at different times. The yard was fully completed in 1920, but construction had been ongoing for 3 years at that point and some portions were operational before 1920; this is detailed here. I have removed the redundant clause from the first sentence you mentioned and changed the wording a bit. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 16:39, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
[...] and the catenary in the yard dismantled.
was dismantled.- Word added. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 02:12, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
As of 2021, this line is operated by the Providence and Worcester.
Add link.- Whoops, I didn't link it in the body until the second mention. Fixed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:25, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
Support on prose. –♠Vami_IV†♠ 17:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- File:New Haven Alcos at Cedar Hill 1949 postcard.jpg, File:New Haven EF4 locomotives at Cedar Hill Yard 1964 postcard.jpg — how is it known that the first publication of these images was without copyright notice?
- User:Pi.1415926535, the uploader of these images, will likely have the answer to this question. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- For postcards that aren't an obvious reprint of an earlier postcard, it's vanishingly rare for it not to have been the original publication. I can count on one hand the number of times I've found a postcard where the photo had been previously published. While it's difficult to perfectly eliminate any possibility of previous publication for any images under this license, I see no reason to suspect previous publication (and thus license issues) with these specific images. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 21:10, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- User:Pi.1415926535, the uploader of these images, will likely have the answer to this question. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 13:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
- Other image licensing looks ok (t · c) buidhe 06:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)
Spotchecks
Ref | Text cited | Probable ref text | Comments/Fixes |
---|---|---|---|
6 | "In 1914, the New Haven added electrical catenary to the yard as part of its electrification program; operations with electric locomotives began in October of that year." | No direct quote. This is a summary of the whole article | Nothing tying this event to 1914 or October |
25 | "Traffic was rerouted over alternate trestles until the repairs, estimated by a New Haven Railroad spokesperson to cost up to $100,000 (equivalent to $970,000 in 2020 dollars), could be completed" | No direct quote. This is a summary of the whole article | Cite 25 was also used. From the AP; the wire service should be mentioned. Integrity good |
4 | "The strike came to an end on November 23." | I am paywalled out, but things seem good | |
42a | "Penn Central was merged into Conrail in 1976, along with many other bankrupt or troubled railroads in the Northeast, making Conrail the yard's new owner beginning in April." | "Since April, ConRail [...]" | Article does not mention the conrail creation |
42c | "Conrail also rebuilt and reopened several tracks in the yard that had been out of service due to their unsafe condition, a consequence of deferred maintenance." | deferred maintenance is not mentioned | |
42d | "The railroad projected it would spend over $3 million (equivalent to $4,800,000 in 2021) on repairs between the two yards; Conrail's Northeast Region general manager told a local newspaper that "By the end of the year, 30,000 more ties will be installed in Cedar Hill and Hartford Yards and an additional 34 miles (55 km) of tracks surfaced". | Good | |
42e | "In August 1976, Cedar Hill averaged 34 TOFC loads per day, and Conrail projected this number to double upon the completion of a clearance raising project for Risley's Bridge in Berlin, Connecticut." | Good | |
8a | "The New Haven Railroad purchased approximately 500 acres (200 ha) of land in the Cedar Hill area in 1917 in order to construct a new classification yard." | Good | |
8b | "Construction began the same year." | Good | |
47 | "With the line abandoned, the key link between Cedar Hill Yard and the rest of the country was severed." | I don't see a connection to the yard here |
10% spotcheck --Guerillero Parlez Moi 19:18, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- I will look into cite 6 which appears to have been an error on my part. The dates I listed are right, but I used the wrong cite to support them.
- I actually am not sure where I got the October 1914 date from. I haven't been able to find a source that says exactly when it was completed, but I have a source in July 1915 that refers to the electrification in Cedar Hill Yard as "recently completed", so I have changed the text to say it was completed by July 1915. I also found construction on the electrical catenary began in 1913. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:05, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Re cite 25, the Associated Press is already listed as the agency.
- Re cite 42a, it's a pretty widely known fact that Conrail succeeded Penn Central but I will add a cite that directly states this.
- This has been done. The existing "Conrail at 40" reference supports this and I have added it next to cite 42a. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:10, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Re cite 42c, it is true that deferred maintenance is not directly mentioned but it's a pretty obvious conclusion based on the information within the source in question. I could remove the deferred maintenance part of the sentence but that would also remove context (that being the New Haven and Penn Central didn't properly maintain the yard due to financial problems).
- Re cite 47, it is true the source does not directly make the connection. The preceding parts of the article however do illustrate that the bridge and the Maybrook Line were of importance to Cedar Hill Yard. I believe there are one or two existing sources which also directly make the connection between the bridge being abandoned and a decline in traffic at Cedar Hill Yard, I will take a closer look and add an appropriate citation here. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- The "Rail Lawyer predicts fight over freight" source directly links the closing of the Poughkeepsie Bridge to Cedar Hill Yard. I've added it here to supplement citation 47. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:20, 14 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Guerillero, how is this looking? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:27, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hey Gog the Mild, I spoke with Guerillero offwiki earlier today and he informed me he is busy irl and probably won't be able to get to this for at least a week. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:50, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:09, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hey Gog the Mild, I spoke with Guerillero offwiki earlier today and he informed me he is busy irl and probably won't be able to get to this for at least a week. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 23:50, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Guerillero, how is this looking? Gog the Mild (talk) 20:27, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Ref | Text cited | Probable ref text | Comments/Fixes |
---|---|---|---|
59 | "The yard contains a TRANSFLO bulk cargo transfer terminal which handles transloading." | Map | Map dosen't load for me in FireFox because they are loading http things on an https site and there is no way to grabbing the http version. I am going to AGF here |
36 | "The New Haven's initial decision not to replace the damaged bridge resulted in criticism; a union observer testified to the Connecticut public utilities commission that delays from the damaged bridge resulted in train crews and locomotives spending hours at a time idling, an expense the financially troubled railroad could ill afford." | good | |
22 | "The massive yards had a capacity of over 15,000 railroad cars." | good |
- Support passes my source check and the prose is high quality --Guerillero Parlez Moi 23:55, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
Previso support from Lee Vilenski
As I commented and supported on the original FAC for my usual MOS and Prose fixes, I'm still happy with how this is. I'm happy to support the nomination on the previso that Guerillero is happy with the article and any previous issues with close paraphrasing/sourcing is no longer an issue. In terms of the article's quality, I have no additional issues. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 20:59, 3 June 2022 (UTC)
Battle of Lalakaon
- Nominator(s): Constantine ✍ 18:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
This article is about a battle that took place in 863 between the Byzantine Empire and Melitene, one of the frontier emirates of the Abbasid Caliphate, which marks a real as well as symbolic turning point in the Arab-Byzantine wars. The Byzantines managed to encircle and annihilate the forces of Melitene (Malatya), and kill its ruler. This set the stage for the century-long 'Byzantine Reconquista', and also allowed the Byzantines to bring Bulgaria more firmly into their cultural orbit. The article is not very large, but quite complete. It was promoted to GA and A-class several years ago, but I never got around to nominating it for FA, so it is long overdue. Any suggestions for further improvement are of course welcome. Constantine ✍ 18:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Image review—pass (t · c) buidhe 19:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Warning, this is nearly 3 weeks old with minimal participation. If there is no progress towards promotion in the next few days, it is liable to be archived. (t · c) buidhe 20:58, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
CommentsSupport by Borsoka
As Byzantium remained the caliphate's major infidel enemy... Capital letter for caliphate?- Changed to 'early caliphates'.
...acquired a quasi-ritualistic character... Quasi-ritualistic or ritualistic (or something else)?- Quasi-ritualistic. There was something almost of a ritual in these raids, they were a symbolic expression of the caliphs' obligation to fight the infidel and a major source of legitimacy, but were never (after a certain point in time) actually aimed to destroy the Byzantines. At the same time, this was still actual warfare, with deaths, pillaging, sieges, enslavement, etc.
With the waning of the Abbasid Caliphate's power after 842... The article about the Abbasid Caliphate describes the period between 775 and 861 as the "Abbasid golden age".- Well, sort of. The collapse of Abbasid power only occurred in the 860s, but the Abbasids stopped being a military threat to Byzantium for good after 842, and signs of disintegration were already there, in hindsight. Have rephrased accordingly.
Consider linking "emirates".- Done.
Consider using the template "(r. XXX–YYY)" when first mentioning an emperor, emir, caliph...- Had used it in the lede, now moved it to the main body. With Ali al-Armani, the regnal dates are not applicable as he was an Abbasid commander, not a semi-hereditary emir like Umar.
Were the Paulicians renegades or heretics?What about deleting the adjective "renegade"? It presents a Byzantine PoV.- 'Heretic' is IMO more of a PoV issue than 'renegade', but you make a valid point. I have removed the adjective altogether. Constantine ✍ 20:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
...(probably the governor of Tarsus)... Do we need to know it? It is an assumption.- Well, the balance of likelihood is that he was indeed the emir/governor of Tarsus. Will have to look up how he is described in the sources though.
- Have re-checked this. It is a hypothesis by J. B. Bury, which Huxley at least considers reasonable. As it does not really play a role here, I have removed it. Constantine ✍ 20:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
...Tarsian army... Perhaps "Ja'far's army" since we do not know for sure that he was the governor of Tarsus? (And Tarsian is not a common adjective.)- Done, for comprehensibility.
...the Byzantine historians Genesius and Theophanes Continuatus... Perhaps "the 10th-century Byzatnine historians"?- Done.
...Persian historian al-Tabari... Perhaps "the contemporary Persian historian"?- Added 'contemporary' but removed 'Persian'; al-Tabari was of Persian/Iranian ethnicity, but lived and worked in Baghdad as an Abbasid official. Rephrased accordingly.
... Petronas (the Domestic of the Schools, or commander-in-chief of the Byzantine field army)... To be consequent, consider changing to Petronas, the Domestic of the Schools (or commander-in-chief of the Byzantine field army).- Done, with some modifications.
The potential expansion of Rome's ecclesiastic influence to Constantinople's doorstep could not be tolerated by the Byzantine government... Actually, it could have been tolerated, but the Byzantines did not tolerate it. (WP:NPOV)- Very good point, thanks. Changed.
Thank you for this nice, short, well researched and interesting article. Borsoka (talk) 03:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks a lot for taking this on, Borsoka! Have dealt with most of your points, will do the rest soon. Constantine ✍ 19:17, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Ceoil
I read this last weekend, but got distracted and forgot to comment. Hang on. Ceoil (talk) 10:46, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ok, went through it again, made trivial edits and found nothing substantive to complain about. My review is on prose, and on that basis it excels and is very engaging and I was grounded in who is who all the way through. Given the nominator, I doubt there are issues with sourcing; from a scan and a few author checks they seem first class. I did a few google searches for surveys to check comprehensiveness, and like Borsoka above am happy that the article is necessarily short, or in this case not padded out. Support. Ceoil (talk) 12:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for taking the time, and for your edits, Ceoil! Much appreciated! Constantine ✍ 19:17, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
Funk
- Will have a look soon. FunkMonk (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Give dates for the illustration captions, so the reader knows they're not contemporary with the events?
- Good point, done.
- Link Byzantine Empire at first mention outside the into, same for other potential terms only linked in the intro.
- Done.
- Per above, link caliphates, Muslim, Black Sea, Turkish, and Arab?
- 'Muslim', 'Arab' and 'Turkish' are probably WP:OVERLINK. 'Arab' especially is a tricky term, as at this stage it is a political or cultural rather than an ethnic term (i.e., the 'Arab' armies likely contained many other ethnicities as well, especially Turks). Linked the other terms.
- Link terms and names in image captions (Byzantine, Asia Minor, Arab, Bulgarians)?
- Done.
- "Only the emir's son, leading a small force, escaped the battlefield" What was his name?
- No name is given, this is reported only in Byzantine sources. Some highly corrupted names are given in later literary references, but nothing definitive.
- "the kleisourarches" what is that?
- Clarified.
- Link Constantinople, Rome, and Baghdad?
- Linked, but changed 'Rome' to the 'Pope's' for clarity.
- Perhaps link ecclesiastic?
- Removed, since the change to the Pope before implies that.
- Link baptism and baptized?
- Done.
- Hello FunkMonk, thanks for taking the time for this. I've adopted most of your suggestions. Anything else? Constantine ✍ 20:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Support from Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.
- "the naval Cibyrrhaeot Theme." Can a theme be naval? Perhaps 'coastal'?
And, er, that is all I can find. So I shall leave it with you, along with my support. Nice one. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:13, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Gog the Mild, thanks for having a look at it. There were definitely a few 'naval themes' (see [[Byzantine navy#Naval themes]), and the Cibyrrhaeots were both the first and most powerful of these. This is a deliberate technical term. Constantine ✍ 20:15, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Well, yes. And like all technical terms in Wikipedia that may not mean much to a non-specialist reader it needs either replacing with a plain-English equivalent or an in line "translation" adding. Or, if no brief explanation is possible, a footnote. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Gog the Mild: But that was not the question you asked ;). At any rate, the nature of the Cibyrrhaeots is not important for this article, so I simply removed the 'naval' bit. Constantine ✍ 19:08, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
- Well, yes. And like all technical terms in Wikipedia that may not mean much to a non-specialist reader it needs either replacing with a plain-English equivalent or an in line "translation" adding. Or, if no brief explanation is possible, a footnote. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:45, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Source review - pass
- All sources are high-quality academic works
- One reference uses ISBN-13 while the others use ISBN-10, but a Bot will take care of this.
- Haldon (2001) links to the wrong book
- Spot checks: 1, 6, 9, 33 - okay
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:51, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Hawkeye7: ISBNs are as given in the original works. Haldon 2001 is the correct book, it is just that for some reason Google at some point (it used to be the correct one) mixed up its cover and data. The content is correct, e.g. look at the index and the keywords. Nevertheless, I removed the url as it will confuse people. Constantine ✍ 16:48, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Carlton Town F.C.
- Nominator(s): Curlymanjaro (talk) 21:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
This article is about Carlton Town Football Club, a small Nottinghamshire team competing at the eighth tier of the English football pyramid. I've long wanted to write-up a local team (in-part inspired by the Stocksbridge Park Steels F.C. entry), and I hope I've done this one justice. The article passed GA requirements last month and has since featured on DYK. After re-reading (again), I think the article's ready for FAC comments. Thanks! Curlymanjaro (talk) 21:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Image review
- Don't use fixed px size
- Fixed.
- Not quite - lead image still uses that. Suggest also scaling up some of the uprights. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed.
- Not quite - lead image still uses that. Suggest also scaling up some of the uprights. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed.
- Suggest adding alt text
- Done.
- File:Carlton_Town_FC_logo.png: second source link is dead
- Fixed.
- File:ArthurClamp.jpg: if the photographer is unknown how do we know they died over 70 years ago?
- Removed this image to cut down on clutter. I can't prove anything, but presuming the photographer was an adult of 18, and the latest this photo could've been taken is 1915, he'd have been 95 in 1992.
- File:SneintonFC1926.jpg: the given US tag relies in part on the image being PD in country of origin on the URAA date, but there's also a tag indicating that it may not be PD in country of origin - that is contradictory
- Fixed.
- Nothing seems to have changed here? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- My apologies, fixed now I believe.
- Since this is to be moved to Commons, it would be helpful to specify why the image is believed to be PD in country of origin. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Done. Curlymanjaro (talk) 22:51, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Since this is to be moved to Commons, it would be helpful to specify why the image is believed to be PD in country of origin. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- My apologies, fixed now I believe.
- Nothing seems to have changed here? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Fixed.
- File:SneintonCricketClubandGround1920.png: is this CC or PD? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- PD, I believe. Fixed.
- Thanks, @Nikkimaria: I hope that clears things up. Curlymanjaro (talk) 15:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Please let me know if there's anything else, @Nikkimaria: Curlymanjaro (talk) 13:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments Support by Eem dik doun in toene
Interesting article and it's great to see "lesser-known" football clubs being nominated at FAC.
- "Sneinton Football Club, the club's" ==> Club ... club's is a bit repetitive
- Replaced with "its".
- Is the ref in the lead really needed, since it's supposed to be a summary of what's said in the article?
- Removed.
- "It was most recently promoted in 2006–07 from" ==> maybe: "It most recently won promotion in 2006–07 from"?
- Done.
- "The team enjoyed success in its first season. Finishing" ==> it's quite a short sentence, so it might better to merge it with the following one.
- Done.
- The team is plural, so "they" should be used instead of "it". (e.g. "The team enjoyed success in its" ==> "The team enjoyed success in their")
- Done.
- Did anything noteworthy happen between 1950 and 1965?
- Not that I could ascertain from scouring the British Newspaper Archive, but more on this point later.
- a valid promotion, it duly topped, comfortable League, unimpressive League ==> all sound a bit too journalistic to me.
- Fair comment. "Valid promotion" is included since Carlton finished in a promotion spot at the end of the previous season but had it denied to them because of a technicality. "Duly" because they rebounded from this, after a big investment, so that they could achieve what they had actually earned in the previous season. I realise I might be digging myself into a bigger journalistic hole here, but I've deleted "comfortable" and replaced "unimpressive" with "poor". Hope that suits.
- "Improved year on year" ==> who stated this?
- The club, I think. Deleted!
- "establishing a record" ==> establishing a club record?
- Done.
- Perhaps mention Vardy's stature when talking about the 2008–09 playoff semi-final? E.g. "future England international Jamie Vardy"
- Done.
- I believe there's a bit of recentism in the history section as the last 20 years cover about as much text as the previous 75 yrs.
- This is a very valid criticism, one which I've wrestled with quite a bit. The truth is that the club spent the years between 1947, after the second reformation, and the football-pyramid-entering 1995–96 season in massive obscurity, even locally speaking. Looking through contemporaneous articles on the British Newspaper Archive, Sneinton very rarely gets a bespoke mention week-to-week. We're talking the most parochial of the parochial divisions for the most part. There are entries I've found which chart its league position on a given week, along with all the other teams, but that indicates very little about general performance and might lead to mischaracterisations. My other defence is that more recent events tend to have better coverage online, although with a small club such as Carlton, even this can sometimes be tricky.
- "Central Midlands Football League", "Northern Counties East Football League", et cetera ==> which tiers do these leagues belong to?
- Clarified (I hope).
- Why are the honours and tournament tables collapsed?
- Just my preference, I'm open to reversing that if you prefer.
- I'm missing info/sections about Carlton's crest/colours, supporters/rivalries, records. Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 17:44, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Alas, me too. I can describe the crest and colours but sadly have no historical background with which to buttress it, so the section would just be a restatement of the infobox (which is fine - let me know). According to my sources, I've virtually nothing on fans and rivalries, which is a shame (I'm questioning whether sources even exist on these). Tournament records are in a (collapsed) box at the bottom, and the record attendance is described in the section covering the ground at which it happened.
Really appreciate you looking at this @Eem dik doun in toene: I'm glad you enjoyed the read. Curlymanjaro (talk) 22:51, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- Curlymanjaro, no problem and thanks for the clear explanations. I understand it can be quite a task to find enough/the necessary info. I still think the history section from 2002 can be trimmed down a bit to make it all more balanced. About the collapsed tables, I would uncollapse them as most people will check out the club's honours, and it will save a click. I would also make a crest/colours section then, even if it'll be short. Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 08:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, @Eem dik doun in toene: what do you reckon to the improvements? I had to get slightly creative with sources for Carlton's rivalries, but since these are informal affairs at a low level of competition, I hope that's acceptable. Curlymanjaro (talk) 17:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - I think the article looks better now! I'm not sure if the FM Save ref is "acceptable" but that'll come up at the source review I reckon. Good luck with this nom. Eem dik doun in toene (talk) 21:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- "its early years were [...] described by the Manchester Courier in 1909 as "the leading amateur football club"" - that doesn't work grammatically, Suggest "its early years were marked by considerable local success, leading to the club being described by the Manchester Courier in 1909 as "the leading amateur football club""
- Done.
- "Its reputation declined for several decades afterwards, participating" - again, it wasn't the reputation that participated. Suggest "Its reputation declined for several decades afterwards, with the team participating"
- Done.
- "Carlton has played its home games" - it's the team rather than the club as a singular entity that plays games, so here it should be treated as plural
- Done.
- "Sneinton moved to sign more “promising amateurs of the city”" - why is that last part in quote marks? Who is it a quote from?
- A nameless newspaperman. Since I've cited the source I might as well shorten the sentence and remove quote marks.
- "Sneinton, "by no manner of means", insisted" - literally no idea what this means, can you clarify?
- It means they weren't wealthy. Reworded.
- "paid for the team's travel to Stockton, where it was defeated 7–2" - the team is plural, not singular
- Done.
- Refs after "annual profit" are not in numerical order
- Fair enough, happy to change that. Previously, I've been instructed to order according to where the cited info is placed within the sentence.
- Remove the redlink on Trent Rangers as this club is not notable and never going to have an article
- Done.
- "returning to the Sneinton district after a season away" - why? Where did they play the previous season?
- Its unclear in my source. I suppose its connected to general disruption after Carlton dissolved because of the war, but I can't say for sure.
- "being noted as "much-improved"" - by whom?
- Clarified.
- "Eager "to progress beyond the confines of local parks football"" - again, who is this is a quote from?
- The NPL. Easier just to change into straight prose.
- "joined the Central Midlands Football League at the twelfth tier of the league system" - the CML Premier Division was level 11 back in 1995, not 12
- Help me understand this, please. At which point did Carlton's tier change without promotion or relegation?
- With the creation of the Conference North in 2004. Prior to that, the divisions below the Football League went Conference > NPL Premier > NPL 1 > NCEL Premier > NCEL 1 > CML Supreme > CML Premier, so in 1995 the CML Premier (the level at which Carlton entered) was level 11. Similarly in 2001 when they were in the CML Supreme, that was at level 10 as per the above. So, when the Conference North was formed in 2004, the NCEL Div One shifted down from level 9 to 10, so by staying in the same division Carlton went down a tier. Hope that makes sense..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, @ChrisTheDude: I hope I've reflected this. Curlymanjaro (talk) 12:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
- With the creation of the Conference North in 2004. Prior to that, the divisions below the Football League went Conference > NPL Premier > NPL 1 > NCEL Premier > NCEL 1 > CML Supreme > CML Premier, so in 1995 the CML Premier (the level at which Carlton entered) was level 11. Similarly in 2001 when they were in the CML Supreme, that was at level 10 as per the above. So, when the Conference North was formed in 2004, the NCEL Div One shifted down from level 9 to 10, so by staying in the same division Carlton went down a tier. Hope that makes sense..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Help me understand this, please. At which point did Carlton's tier change without promotion or relegation?
- "Notwithstanding a "reasonable" first season" - reasonable according to whom
- Removed quote marks.
- ""In a desperate quandary"," - again, who is this quote from?
- NPL again. Bit journalistic so replaced.
- "Sneinton's third-place finish in the eleventh tier in 2000–01" - tenth tier at that point
- See other CML comment.
- "if not for "ground grading issues" negating this opportunity." - ground grading issues is a perfectly standard term, so no reason to present it as a quote
- Wasn't aware of this before. Removed.
- "guarantee a valid promotion should it be achieved" - really weird wording. Maybe "make the team eligible for promotion if they finished in an appropriate league position"
- Done.
- "establishing a club record in the FA Vase by entering its third round" => "establishing a club record in the FA Vase by reaching its third round" as otherwise it sounds like they just went straight in at the third round
- Done.
- "playoff semi-final, losing 5–2 to Stocksbridge Park Steels" => "playoff semi-final, Carlton losing 5–2 to Stocksbridge Park Steels"
- Done.
- "Finishing ninth in 2009–10, Brookbanks" - it wasn't Brookbanks who finished ninth
- Done.
- Refs after "red and white mix for 2021–22" in wrong order
- Done.
- Same after "before its collapse in 2011, Gedling Town"
- Done.
- "Located on the Colwick Lawn Estate [...] he led" - it wasn't the ground that led this
- Done.
- "becoming the home of Parliament Street Methodists" - again, this non-notable team is never going to have an article so remove redlink
- Done.
- Refs after "requiring a relocation of the pitch within the premises" again in wrong order
- Done.
- "30 carparking spaces" - I don't think "carparking" is a single word
- Done.
- I can't see any reason to have a References heading and then a Footnotes subheading right after it when there are no other sub-sections in that section
- That's what I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:47, 20 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks very much for your thoroughness, @ChrisTheDude: once the CML tier-position thing is cleared up I should have addressed everything. Curlymanjaro (talk) 16:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi ChrisTheDude, 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) 19:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Any improvements I can make to persuade you to support, ChrisTheDude? Curlymanjaro (talk) 18:06, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies, I forgot all about this. I don't have time to do a proper re-review tonight but will try to do so tomorrow....... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:44, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Any improvements I can make to persuade you to support, ChrisTheDude? Curlymanjaro (talk) 18:06, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi ChrisTheDude, 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) 19:21, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Oppose (on 1a) Comments from BigDom
Sorry, but I felt I had to be honest. It's good to see a substantial article about a smaller club, but I think there are quite a few prose issues and it isn't at the required "professional standard" yet. Some of the word choices strike me as a bit strange (that's not necessarily a problem, everyone has their own style), but some bits I found a little confusing and had to read two or three times before I could work out what was meant. Here are a few things I've picked out (not exhaustive):
- "The Football Association (FA)" - the acronym "FA" is already used a sentence earlier. It only appears in competition names throughout the article anyway, so not convinced it is needed.
- Deleted.
- "the club became frustrated" - the players, the board, the supporters?
- Prose changed.
- "In 1948, the team vacated to a pitch at Colwick Wood Park, returning to the Sneinton district after a season away." - I see this sentence has been mentioned above but reading the article as a newcomer it's not clear at all what is meant. Is it trying to say that the team had played elsewhere for a season (presumably 1947–48 and if so, where was it?), or that Colwick Wood Park is somewhere outside Sneinton (if so, where is it?)?
- The former. The problem is, my source doesn't say. We're talking about a local parks team in the late 1940s; quoting directly: "The Sneinton F.C. have secured new playing headquarters for the coming season. A return, after one season's absence, being made to the district of the club's origin ...". I wish I had more for you. I've changed the existing prose, anyhow.
- "finishing seventh in 1949–50 but with steady finances." - why "but"? Would a team finishing 7th not expect to have "steady" finances?
- Changed.
- "Avoiding relegation,[30] the club again transferred leagues ahead of 1969–70 to rejoin the Notts Alliance in its Division Two, being noted as "much-improved" by the Nottingham Football Post in 1976–77." - did avoiding relegation have anything to do with transferring leagues? Also, what happened in the years leading up to the improvement?
- I'm not sure on the first point, largely since the sources aren't very helpful. However, on the second, I've uncovered that Sneinton's first season in the division was a stinker. This could explain the "improvement" comment.
- "Sneinton eventually won the 1984–85 campaign" - "eventually" sounds like it took them a long time to win that particular season
- Removed.
- "satisfied both activities" => "met the needs of both"
- Changed.
- "leading to the appointment of a deputation in protest." - presumably it was the club protesting, not the Improvement Committee? Also, it reads as if "deputation in protest" is a single noun phrase.
- Correct. Changed.
- "contesting a season remotely" sounds rather odd - I would change this whole sentence to be honest. How about: After reforming in 1947, the club relocated to one of two public pitches at Colwick Wood Park in 1948, having played its matches in the intervening year at an alternative venue."?
- Changed.
- "In the early 1990s, the team moved to their current location on Stoke Lane in Gedling, dovetailing with Sneinton's competitive ambition to progress through the English league system." - dovetailing?
- Was probably better to remove the entire third clause of that sentence, to be honest.
- "That said" - not really encyclopedic tone.
- Changed.
- Source issue: what makes CBJStar a reliable source? It seems to be a student newspaper.
- It is. My only defence would be that, apparently, it was a story too insignificant for the bigger local papers; I see no reason or opportunity for the writer, even if they're a student, to get the presence of a youth academy suite wrong.
I really wanted to support this so would be happy to come back and reconsider once some work has been done on the prose. Good luck! BigDom (talk) 21:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking this over, @BigDom: doing an article like this is a poison chalice in some respects. The need is clearly there for better articles on smaller clubs, but finding information is often a flipping nightmare! Curlymanjaro (talk) 21:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)
- I understand it can be tough to get the information when it's an obscure topic like this. Thanks for addressing the points above, I still think the article needs a thorough copy-edit to meet 1a though as well as some specific concerns:
- "Mixed fortunes followed as key players Arthur Clamp and Andrew Mosley joined Notts County, despite new tram infrastructure in the area promising improved attendance." is a bit of a non-sequitur to me. What's the connection between the players leaving and the trams arriving? Did the players leaving affect performances on the pitch? Did the improved tram infrastructure have any effect on attendances?
- I see what you mean. My sources are from when these events were unfolding, so it's hard to discern their actual impact beyond the immediate outlook for the club during the 1907–08 season. Any suggestions on rewording? I'm a bit stuck.
- "playing form suffered [...], losing several players" - the playing form didn't lose several players
- Fixed.
- "the club reformed on 29 April 1919" - there is no mention of the club disbanding so it's confusing to read that it reformed.
- Fixed.
- "finishing seventh in 1949–50 and with steady finances.[27] By 1965–66" - any information about the intervening 15 years? That paragraph in general is very sparse, covering around 45 years in under 200 words.
- Added a fair bit after some serious trawling. You'll no doubt want to look at the prose.
- "Notwithstanding a reasonable first season" - Chris mentioned this above too. Removing the quotes doesn't make it not an opinion, so again, reasonable according to whom?
- The NPL; I was trying to avoid mentioning it since Carlton hadn't been promoted to that tier yet. I could just delete that bit? Doesn't tell us terribly much anyway.
- "Runners-up and playoff semi-finalists in the division's 2011–12 contest,[36] League form dipped in the following seasons, finishing twelfth, tenth and eighteenth respectively." - I don't think this sentence is grammatical at all, there's no subject.
- Fixed.
- "Combined with poor tournament results in 2014–15 [...] McJannet resigned." - McJannet wasn't combined with poor results
- Fixed.
- "narrowly missing out on playoffs" - "[...] on the playoffs"
- Fixed.
- Club identity - this section is incomplete, there's no details about the club colours until "recent"ly (when?). When was the club crest introduced and has the club used any others before this one?
- I'll need a day or two to search the Wayback Machine on this point and the next. A very tricky section!
- Green's mill - nice, but where is the link between it and the club? (the "About Green's windmill" page linked doesn't mention the club as far as I can see)
- Maybe worth giving inflation figures (e.g. how much is £300 in 1905 worth today)
- Fixed.
- "Conversely, 1935 saw the addition of another pitch" - why "conversely"? It doesn't disagree with the previous sentence.
- Fixed.
- Better, but note that MOS:NUMNOTES says to avoid starting a sentence with figures.
- Fixed.
- Most of the article is written about the club in the third-person singular but a couple of times it drifts to third-person plural, e.g. in the lead "Carlton have played their home games" and in the Grounds section "moved to their current location". There may be others I missed.
- Good spot. The team/club distinction was brought up by "Eem dik doun in toene" above. I've tried to go "it/its" for club and "they/their" for team. What do you reckon?
- Refs: #35 - what makes Non-League Football Matters a reliable source (it might be, I haven't come across it before but I haven't written much about non-league). #47 is a fan blog, which I don't think would count as reliable.
- The league tables on it follow pretty seamlessly from those found on the British Newspaper Archive. Also, I'd say its self-identification as an "independent football history information site" is about equivalent to the status of the Football Club History Database. Fan blog deleted and rival team replaced.
- "Mixed fortunes followed as key players Arthur Clamp and Andrew Mosley joined Notts County, despite new tram infrastructure in the area promising improved attendance." is a bit of a non-sequitur to me. What's the connection between the players leaving and the trams arriving? Did the players leaving affect performances on the pitch? Did the improved tram infrastructure have any effect on attendances?
- Hope these are useful. BigDom (talk) 06:23, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks again, @BigDom: quite a lot to be getting on with here but I hope we're getting closer. I'll do some more digging on the "club identity" section before reporting back. Curlymanjaro (talk) 22:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Right, @BigDom: I've done my best with the "club identity" section after some further research. Alas, I still can't prove the Green's Mill connection in writing (despite, annoyingly, knowing it to be true in real life). Curlymanjaro (talk) 18:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Curlymanjaro: You've put some great effort into improving the article, really impressive. I've struck my explicit opposition although I can't quite bring myself to support. I'm still not convinced the prose is quite of a "professional standard" per WP:FA?#1a and it still feels a little incomplete (for example, no information about club colours/kits before 2003) for #1b. I understand though that this may just be the nature of writing about such an obscure topic and am not sure whether it could ever be overcome. Good work overall, though! BigDom (talk) 06:11, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Right, @BigDom: I've done my best with the "club identity" section after some further research. Alas, I still can't prove the Green's Mill connection in writing (despite, annoyingly, knowing it to be true in real life). Curlymanjaro (talk) 18:00, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks again, @BigDom: quite a lot to be getting on with here but I hope we're getting closer. I'll do some more digging on the "club identity" section before reporting back. Curlymanjaro (talk) 22:33, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- I understand it can be tough to get the information when it's an obscure topic like this. Thanks for addressing the points above, I still think the article needs a thorough copy-edit to meet 1a though as well as some specific concerns:
Coordinator comment - as this nomination has been open for well over a month and is not close to a consensus to promote, it will have to be archived in a couple days unless significant movement towards a consensus to promote occurs. Hog Farm Talk 04:08, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
Royal necropolis of Byblos
This article is about a group of shaft and chamber tombs that housed the remains of Bronze Age Gebalite Kings. A chance landslide in the early 1920s uncovered the first of the underground tombs. Some of the burial chambers that escaped looting contained a great number of funerary goods; among these were ornate royal Egyptian gifts bearing the names of Twelfth Dynasty pharaohs. Inscriptions found in the tombs allowed the identification of some of the buried Kings. The most important of these finds was the famed Ahiram sarcophagus. The story of the re-emergence of the ancient city of Byblos/Gebal, and the subsequent discovery of the royal tombs, is reminiscent of Indiana Jones movies.
I have spent long hours searching archives and drafting this piece, and I have covered good ground so that it not only informative, but also compelling. The article underwent a thorough GA review, which made it significantly better, and I am very grateful for AirshipJungleman29's time and effort. I am hopeful, with your guidance, to drive the article to 'featured' status.el.ziade (talkallam) 11:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Coord note -- Hi Elias, I don't think you've been to FAC before, in which case welcome! Some house-keeping... It looks like you have a peer review open for this article, and you need to close that now that the FAC has been opened. Also, as a fresh nominator, we'll want a spotcheck of sources for accurate use and avoidance of close paraphrasing, a hoop we as all newbies to jump through, as well as the regular source review for reliability and formatting; that can take place in the course of the overall review here. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi @Ian Rose , it is true that I edit sporadically, but I have 4 FAs under my belt already. Some guidelines may escape me since I am not here often. I welcome any feedback that will help improve the article. I will try to close the peer review, I haven't had many comments there. el.ziade (talkallam) 14:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
- Image review
- File:Byblos View.jpg, File:Ahiram Sarcophagus.jpg probably not freely licensed, nominated for deletion on Commons
- File:Cimetiere royal.png what's the source for the info on the map?
- The Montet maps and photograph; according to Internet Archive's scan these publications were in 1928 and 1929, after 1927 as indicated by the tag. Since it was published in France it would also need to be public domain in France to be kosher on Commons, which it does not seem to be if Montet created these sketches since he died in 1966
Other images look ok (t · c) buidhe 08:24, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Not a source review
- Article is well structured and length is reasonable. However, I noticed a majority of the citations are from the 1920s. Are there more recent sources that could be cited instead? I realize stuff like "The longer inscription is carved on the font (typo for front?), long edge of the lid" are not likely to change over time, making the datedness less of an issue, but, for example, it would be best to cite a more recent source for the number of grave goods recovered.
- akg-images is not a high-quality reliable source in my view
(t · c) buidhe 08:33, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your usual meticulous work Buidhe below are my comments.
- Concerning File:Byblos View.jpg, it's a real shame to see it go. There are no replacements. As for File:Ahiram Sarcophagus.jpg I am not oppose it's deletion, I have already replaced it in the article.
- File:Cimetiere royal.png: it's derived from the map in the early 1920s letters from Montet to Cagnat a copy of the Image on JSTOR. Shall I add this bit of info on commons?
Montet's maps and photographs are sourced from the Internet Archive open source library, IA states that it respects the intellectual property rights and other proprietary rights of others. The Internet Archive may remove certain content or disable access to content that appears to infringe the copyright or other intellectual property rights of others. I believe we are safe in this regard, is there something else we can do? These images are fundamental to the understanding of the article. I can upload them here under a fair use label if this prevents them from being lost. Please advise. The copyright term in France was +50 years after the death of the author at the time of the publication of the above-mentioned works.- I will try to find more recent sources to add to the early 20th century ones. But mind you these are seminal works and are still authoritative. el.ziade (talkallam) 13:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- Currently the copyright term in france is life + 70 years, including works that were published before the change came into effect. I agree that Internet Archive usually only shows full text for out of copyright works, but I don't think that's something we can rely on to determine copyright status. I've expanded the image description for File:Cimetiere royal.png. (t · c) buidhe 19:40, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- I’m quoting a legal website pertaining to intellectual rights protection of sketches: « Si le “dessinateur” a effectué quelque chose de visuellement très simple : par exemple un fond de carte faisant apparaître les frontières et le réseau hydrographique d’un pays. Ce “contenu” ne peut pas prétendre à la protection par le droit d’auteur. Il n’est qu’une information (plus exactement, une somme d’informations), donnant une représentation rudimentaire de la réalité. Le fond de carte nu n’est pas une œuvre originale, il n’a pas d’auteur. Ce fond de carte n’entre pas dans le champ du droit d’auteur ; il peut donc être repris sans problème. »
- [ If the “dessinateur” has done something very simple visually: for example, a base map showing the borders and the hydrographic network of a country. This “content” does not qualify for copyright protection. It is only information (more exactly, a sum of information), giving a rudimentary representation of reality. The bare basemap is not an original work, it has no author. This base map does not fall within the scope of copyright; it can therefore be resumed without any problem. ]
- In archeology
- « En élaborant ces dessins, ces relevés de fouilles, ce rapport de fouilles, l’auteur du dessin élabore des archives de recherche qui sont des archives publiques… À l’instar des règles applicables à un fond de carte très simple et à une carte originale protégée (le fond de carte peut être utilisé sans demander d’autorisation mais il convient d’en indiquer la source par honnêteté intellectuelle ; la carte originale ne peut être reproduite ou réutilisée qu’avec l’accord de l’auteur), on peut appliquer le même raisonnement à un histogramme ou à un graphique. Si le graphique est très simple et fait apparaître quelques données en abscisse et en ordonnées, il constitue une représentation brute, non protégée par le droit d’auteur. Si l’histogramme ou le graphique sont très élaborés (ombre, couleurs, bref, de l’infographie qui donne à la représentation un caractère créatif original), ils sont originaux, donc protégés par le droit d’auteur. »
- [ By developing these drawings, these excavation records, this excavation report, the author of the drawing develops research archives which are public archives… Like the rules applicable to a very simple background map and a protected original map (the background map can be used without asking permission, but the source should be indicated for intellectual honesty; the original map can be reproduced or reused only with the agreement of the author), the same reasoning can be applied to a histogram or a graph. If the graph is very simple and shows some data in abscissa and ordinate, it constitutes a raw representation, not protected by copyright. If the histogram or the graph are very elaborate (shadow, colors, in short, computer graphics that give the representation an original creative character), they are original, therefore protected by copyright. ]
- source el.ziade (talkallam) 00:47, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your usual meticulous work Buidhe below are my comments.
Funk
- Nice to see some more Lebanese history here, especially during these hard times. Will have a look soon. FunkMonk (talk) 16:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
- On the above note, I think the intro could mention explicitly that this is located in modern day Lebanon.
- "Location of Royal necropolis" The royal? Add the and remove capital r?
- It's the template Wallah it's not me lol. Fixed it.
- You mention an acropolis only once, in an image caption, could be mentioned and linked in the article body if it's important?
- Linked it in the infobox, I think it's enough there.
- Well, the main point is, why is it important enough to mention in the caption, but not in the article body? If it's not important for the article body, it's just confusing to introduce a new term just in a caption. Otherwise, it could be elaborated on in the text, or removed. FunkMonk (talk) 00:17, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- "Main article: Byblos" followed by "Byblos (modern Jubayl)", is the "main article" really necessary when you can just link the first word of the paragraph?
- No problem
- "derived from the Canaanite Gubal" Link Canaanite.
- Done
- Link more unlinked terms in the infobox and first mentions in image captions?
- Sure, done
- "that has been inhabited, and continuously used" Why not just say "that has been continuously inhabited", means the same?
- yes *smh*
- Link Bronze Age?
- done
- Link ancient Crete?
- done
- Link Ramses II.
- done
- Link Phoenicia.
- done
- Images are a bit clogged up in the lower right of the article, perhaps use some horizontal multiple image templates instead, like in for example quagga?
- All done except for the images, will get to these later. el.ziade (talkallam) 14:22, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- On second thought, do you mind if I don't change the layout? I am not fond of large blocks either, they are disruptive in an article where all the images are of the same size. Please don't ask me to alternate right and left too :( el.ziade (talkallam) 14:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- It appears the "problem" would still be there with the images below, so not easy to solve. But I think much of the cramming is caused by the huge image "Gold oenochoe from Tomb IV in Mycenae.", which I don't really think is even necessary to show here, as it is not from this necropolis, and the caption doesn't explain the connection. FunkMonk (talk) 00:17, 21 May 2022 (UTC)
- On second thought, do you mind if I don't change the layout? I am not fond of large blocks either, they are disruptive in an article where all the images are of the same size. Please don't ask me to alternate right and left too :( el.ziade (talkallam) 14:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
- "Renan had relied on Strabo's writing" Strabo and other people could be presented like you do with other people, by nationality and occupation, for consistence.
- "Now Byblus, the royal residence of Cinyras, is sacred to Adonis; but Pompey freed it from tyranny by beheading its tyrant with an axe; and it is situated on a height only a slight distance from the sea." Is this a quote? If so, it would remove ambiguity if you added quotation marks.
- "Byblos is a much later Greek exonym, possibly a corruption of Gebal." I think it's important to add this at the beginning of the main text (Historical background) too instead of just in a footnote, because now it's a but confusing that you jump between using the terms Gebal and Byblos seemingly at random, for example: "Ancient texts and manuscripts hinted to the location of Gebal... Strabo identified Byblos as a city situated on a hill some distance away from the sea."
- "Renan correctly posited that the Ancient Byblos must have been located atop the circular hill dominated by the Crusader citadel of Jbeil." What was his reasoning?
- "Byblos (modern Jubayl)" Elsewhere you spell it Jbeil.
- You seem be using British spelling (archaeology) some places, but others US (metres). Should be consistent.
- "During the period of French Mandate" Usually it would be "the French Mandate", definite.
- "landslide in the seaside cliff of Jbeil" Wouldn't this be "on"?
- "The next day the administrative advisor of Mount-Lebanon" Mount Lebanon hasn't been introduced at this point, I don't think all readers would know what this refers to.
- Link hypogeum and sarcophagus in the article body.
- "the excavation of Ancient Byblos" Why capital A?
- "Maurice Dunand succeeded Montet" Again no introduction of this person, check for consistency throughout.
- "had been emptied from their contents" Emptied of?
- "instead of rock at a later period of time" Do we know how much later?
- This is detailed in the dating section. I'd rather not repeat it here if you don't mind it el.ziade (talkallam) 15:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- "was closer to that the northern group" That of?
- You use the name "Abi Chemu" in captions, but "Abishemu" in the article body.
- Yeah, depending on the sources. Older French sources use Abi Chemu. el.ziade (talkallam) 15:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- "on Tomb I chamber's north wall" A bit oddly worded, perhaps "on the north wall of tomb I's chamber?
- "A coarsely built wall separated the chamber of Tomb I from its well." Why is this past tense when the previous description is present? There are other cases of this too where it seems pretty random.
- The walls and other structures were dismantled during excavation, this is why. el.ziade (talkallam) 15:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- "The two conduits did not communicate." Connect?
- "It was also the only tomb to have an inscription within its shaft." State in which language.
- I did in the following sentence, or else it could have been understood as "the only Phoenician inscription as opposed to "only inscription" . el.ziade (talkallam) 15:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- "The semicircular shape of Tomb V, known as "Ahiram's tomb"" I think it would be less confusing if you state already here it was a king.
- "at the center" If you use British English, should be "centre".
- I haven't even given it a thought. I will consider this from now on. el.ziade (talkallam) 15:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- "on their down to the royal grave" way down?
- "All of the three chamber sarcophagi were looted and only contained human bones" Do we know of who?
- Did other sarcophagi contain bodies or bones?
- no bodies we recovered. The environment is too wet to preserve soft tissue. el.ziade (talkallam) 15:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Is enough known about any of these interred people to warrant articles, or just short descriptions of who they were here in this article?
- Link sedimentary.
- I think ashlar could be linked.
- ", without any masonry retaining walls" The walls?
- "and an entire corner section of the lid have broken off" Has broken (singular).
- "the lug at the northwestern corner and an entire corner section..."
- "body of the sarcophagus IV is" I don't think definite "the" is needed here.
- Fixed the sentence
- "Montet ascertains that" Why present tense?
- Fixed
- "while the rest of the lions' bodies appears in bas-relief on the long sides" I think it should be "appear", because bodies is plural.
- Right
- "Two scene of a funerary procession of four mourning women occupies the" Scenes, as it's plural? And "occupy" because it's plural.
- Fixed
- Do we have any images of these scenes?
- Added
- "Tomb I contained a 12 centimeters (4.7 in) obsidian vase" I think it could be specified if this is the height?
- Indeed it is
- "Tomb II had two royal Egyptian gifts, 45 centimeters (18 in) long obsidian box" Missing "a" in front of the measurement?
- Done
- Link the two Amenemhat names in the article body too.
- Done
- "which French art history expert Edmond Pottier likened its spiral decorative patterns to that of the gold oenochoe from Tomb IV" I think the grammar is a bit odd here, could be "the spiral decorative patterns of which the French art history expert Edmond Pottier likened to that of the gold oenochoe from Tomb IV".
- Thank you, done
- Link Mycenae and Aegean in article body.
- Done
- "which divide the body of the receptacles in into several parts" First "in" seems superfluous.
- Done
- "A funerary inscription written in Phoenician identify the names" Identifies, singular.
- Done
- "triggered a landslide in the seaside cliff of Jbeil" By this point in the intro, you have not connected the name Byblos to Jbeil, so unfamiliar readers will not know its the same.
- Clarification in the lead.
Thanks @FunkMonk el.ziade (talkallam) 15:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - nice work, and certainly something I think would be worth giving a look for our ancient Egypt interested reviewers. FunkMonk (talk) 13:34, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you buddy, I know I could have made your review much smoother had I given the article a few more reads. Truth is I find it very hard to catch my own typos and grammar mistakes. This review gave me a much needed boost to step up my game. el.ziade (talkallam) 18:23, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Coordinator note
After nearly five weeks this nomination has only attracted one general support. Unless further attention is forthcoming over the next two or three days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:45, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Perhaps tagging editors who have reviewed your earlier FACs could be an idea. FunkMonk (talk) 15:57, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
Jens
Marking my spot, will review as soon as possible. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 20:28, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- but was rediscovered in the late 19th century by the French biblical scholar and orientalist Ernest Renan. – Not sure if the scholar is relevant here (because he discovered the city, not the necropolis). But in any case I would add where Byblos was rediscovered; a reader without any knowledge might be confused otherwise because the previous sentence talked about a "continuously populated city". Maybe add where in modern Byblos it was discovered?
- Right! Thanks. ^^^
- Byblos (modern Jbeil) – that seemingly indicates that "Byblos" only refers to the ancient city, but according to Byblos it is the most common name of the modern city?
- Well... Yes and no, the official name and the common name locally is Jbeil (Jubeil, Gebeil) which derives from the ancient Semitic roots "GBL". Byblos is a Greek corruption of the city's name, and it used in the scientific literature, and in the touristic context. Road sings use both names btw. I cleared the confusion now I think. Good call ^^^
- The whole first paragraph of the lead is just background information, and I'm not sure if all details are relevant there, for example the meaning of the word Byblos. I am not sure if the article should try to focus more on the topic, which is the Royal necropolis.
- making precise dating problematic, however – I think this needs a ; instead of ,
- It can go both ways ^^
- I am not sure it can: As it is now, it is not clear if the "however" goes with the previous or the following part of the sentence. The ; would make this clear. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- It can go both ways ^^
- the temple of Baalat Gebal complex – is this correct? Or should it be "the temple of Baalat Gebal" or the "temple complex of Baalat Gebal"?
- Done ^^
- The grave goods were not affected by the landslide; inside the burial chamber the excavators discovered several pottery jars floating in damp clay, and a large white limestone sarcophagus with three protruding lugs on its lid by which it could be manipulated. – Source?
- Fixed ^^
- Sarcophagus of Abishemu (Tomb I) in situ – Is that tomb still in situ (which would be an information to add to the article), or is that picture taken after discovery (then, please add "after discovery in 19xx")
- This is a recent image. Most of the sarcophagi were moved above ground. This one is kept in place. I modified the caption, I think it is clear now. ^^
- Section "The search for the ancient city" goes a bit off-topic, as it is not about the necropolis. Under "excavation history", I would expect the excavation history of the necropolis. Maybe better placed in another article, or move to a background section (which could have two headings, "History of ancient Byblos" and "The search for the ancient city")?
- I am trying to keep the article interesting, and encyclopedic at the same time. The subject, if approached from a narrow scope, would be too dry. The story of Renan (much like Schliemann's) provides some nice insight, and an interesting backdrop for the following sections. I would rather not move the part related to Renan to the historical background; I want to keep all the excavation stuff together. ^^
- In the "Historical background" section, maybe mention those tombs that could be dated when talking about that particular time, to make the connection with the necropolis? That would help the reader I think.
- I would, except the chronology is patchy, and I don't believe it helps with the flow of the article. But I will keep this in mind when I fall on some peer-reviewed source that could help clear this up without affecting the flow of the narrative. ^^
- more later. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 08:17, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- kept in siture – in situ? Link to in situ?
- The sandstone sarcophagus of Ahiram was found in Tomb V and is so called for its bas-relief carvings – Why is the "Ahiram sarcophagus" referring to the bas-relief carvings? I can't follow here.
- it represents the terminus post quem of the transmission of the alphabet to the west. – Without context this is very hard to understand.
- link lotus flowers
- Done
- of the main sarcophagus bas-relief scenery – I am irritated by the "sarcophagus" here. Are their sarcophagi other than the main one? Or should this mean "the main bas-relief scenery"? (I think it is very clear from the context that these are on the sarcophagus)
- The longer inscription is carved on the front, long edge of the lid. – Maybe add a sentence stating the content of these inscriptions?
- link obsidian
- lid set with gold; the rectangular box rests on four legs; it has at the center – I think this needs reformulation or better interpunctation.
- One difference however, – I think this needs a comma behind "difference"
- Two grand silver hand mirrors, were recovered in tombs I and II – comma too much
- Some signs point to a range spanning from the end of the Middle Bronze Age to the Late Bronze Age for others – I don't understand the "for others" here.
- French priest and archeologist Father Louis-Hugues Vincent, Pierre Montet, and other early scholars believed – But the section "dating" does only contain the interpretations of the early scholars. The sentence, however, reads as if this would be no longer accepted. Is it a widely accepted fact, or are there simply no newer studies available?
- The dating of the tombs by early scholars still holds. The dating of the Ahiram sarcophagus however, is now widely accepted to fall between the 11th and the mid-ninth century BC. Scholars advanced this date based on rubble material suggesting that Tomb V was reused in the Iron Age to bury Ahiram. In short, the sarcophagus of Ahiram was introduced to the preexisting shaft tomb. This is detailed in the Ahiram sarcophagus article. Should I include this here or it would be going off topic ? el.ziade (talkallam) 19:18, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- That is almost everything now. I will be away until Sunday, and take a last look as soon as I am back. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:30, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
Cas Liber
Been super busy IRL...will look soon Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:46, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'd link exonym
- Done ^
- Foreign words are generally italicised not in quotation marks.
- mudir, mastaba, serdab, khopesh, italicized ^
- link Middle Bronze Age
- Done ^
- The Historical background is a bit choppy. I would combine some small into larger paragraphs
- Neater I guess ^
- Relation with Egypt dwindled again.... "Relations"?
- Right ^
- He based his assumption on an ancient coin depicting a representation of the city... - "ancient" is a bit general. Can the coin be described in a bit more exacting way?
- I wanted to add the description, but I was hesitant to go off topic. I am glad you find including these details helpful. ^
Rest of it looks pretty good. Will have another look later Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:44, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Mirokado
General impression so far: the article is well written, thorough and will be a valuable addition to our featured articles if accepted.
- lead
- "Byblos (also called Jbeil) ... "Gabal" ...": just reading the lead, why does the article use the "also called" name Jbeil rather than Byblos which appears in the title? I'm not suggesting a change, but would like to see the motivation expressed a little more clearly in the lead. Subsequent content does clarify.
- "Byblos (also called Jbeil) ... "Gabal" ...": just reading the lead, why does the article use the "also called" name Jbeil rather than Byblos which appears in the title? I'm not suggesting a change, but would like to see the motivation expressed a little more clearly in the lead. Subsequent content does clarify.
- yes, and Jens had the same question. It is quite like the case of Troy/Ilium/Hisarlik. Byblos is a Greek exonym that was apparently favored by 19th century scholars because of hellenocentrism. Most of what was know about the city was sourced from classical writers. The local name has always names Jbeil which directly derives from the Canaanite root ‘GBL’ (Gebal). Even in crusader times the city was known as. Gibelet. Ancient Gebal and modern Jbeil are one and the same. The ancient city was forgotten on a hill directly under the medieval castle and skirting the medieval city walls from the outside. The medieval city was moved closer to a shallow natural harbor used for fishing. The medieval city, was enclosed by a defensive wall, and the Harbour is still guarded by a medieval tower. The names Byblos and Jbeil are both corruptions of Gebal, and are now used interchangeably on road signs in Lebanon mostly for touristic reasons, especially that the exonym took root because of European scholars. If I could rewrite the literature, I’d revert back to the old, pre classical exonym, but unfortunately this is the common name of the necropolis in literature. el.ziade (talkallam) 15:54, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- yes, and Jens had the same question. It is quite like the case of Troy/Ilium/Hisarlik. Byblos is a Greek exonym that was apparently favored by 19th century scholars because of hellenocentrism. Most of what was know about the city was sourced from classical writers. The local name has always names Jbeil which directly derives from the Canaanite root ‘GBL’ (Gebal). Even in crusader times the city was known as. Gibelet. Ancient Gebal and modern Jbeil are one and the same. The ancient city was forgotten on a hill directly under the medieval castle and skirting the medieval city walls from the outside. The medieval city was moved closer to a shallow natural harbor used for fishing. The medieval city, was enclosed by a defensive wall, and the Harbour is still guarded by a medieval tower. The names Byblos and Jbeil are both corruptions of Gebal, and are now used interchangeably on road signs in Lebanon mostly for touristic reasons, especially that the exonym took root because of European scholars. If I could rewrite the literature, I’d revert back to the old, pre classical exonym, but unfortunately this is the common name of the necropolis in literature. el.ziade (talkallam) 15:54, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
"the sarcophagi of several kings of the city." I would link thus: "the sarcophagi of several kings of the city." so that the link text more accurately matches the contents of the link.
"The city established major trade links with Egypt during the Bronze Age, leading to the latter heavily influencing local culture and funerary practices." This is not clear on first reading, although subsequent content is clearer. I suggest rephrase to avoid using "the latter".
The search for the ancient city"hinted to": "hinted at" is the more usual idiom.
Discovery of the royal necropolis
"he uncovered eight other tombs, bringing the total number to nine." Nine does not include the original sarcophagus, whereas the previous "A second tomb" did. Unless the eight includes the second in which case "other" is confusing. Subsequent content in §Description shows that Montet numbered the tombs I–IX, implying that he was not including the original sarcophagus as one of the tombs. In that case "A second tomb" needs to change somehow.
wl tell: I had never seen this term before.
Bibliography: Dever (1976) does not appear in the references list.
I will continue in detail with the individual tombs later. ---- Mirokado (talk) 00:31, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
- In the article as a whole, the vertical shafts are referred to as wells. I am more familiar with a "well" being something that is used to draw water, so I wonder if "shaft" would be a better word. I am not requesting a change just to keep me quiet, but please consider which term is best.
Tombs I and IIIn this context (followed by "wide" or "deep") I think meter should be singular, we are specifying the unit used, not counting them."disused archaic tomb": does this mean "created but never used" or "used but emptied by the contemporaneous authorities" (or something else)?
Tombs III and IV
"Another, similarly sized and shaped conduit": lose the comma here (if you want "similarly sized and shaped" to be more parenthetical, you can place a second comma after "shaped", but I don't think this is necessary.
More later. ---- Mirokado (talk) 21:34, 9 June 2022 (UTC)
Tombs VI, VII, VIII, and IX
"The burial chamber of wells VI, VII, VIII, and IX are completely dug in muddy soil." I think "chambers" should be plural here.wl lozenge, I was imagining something different until I checked.
Sarcophagi
"One difference however, is that the lids of said Gebalite sarcophagi retain the lid lugs which allowed workmen to maneuver them." I find "said" here rather stilted, "these Gebalite sarcophagi" would read better.
"decreasingly smaller": I suggest "successively smaller".
- The Ahiram sarcophagus
- "The Phoenician inscription is composed of two parts": wl (section link) The Phoenician inscription.
-
- Perhaps expand this paragraph a bit to summarise the contents of both parts of the inscription (see the section link). Also please consider whether we should be describing this as two parts or two inscriptions: the positions described here and different contents described in the section link imply two inscriptions.
More later. ---- Mirokado (talk) 22:38, 10 June 2022 (UTC)
- Egyptian royal gifts
- "This type of vase is known from representations ...": Does this mean that the vase found here is the only actual example of what has been illustrated elsewhere? If so I would mention that more explicitly.
- Attribution
- "Scholars have noted the similarity of the spiral decorative patterns of which the French art history expert Edmond Pottier likened to that of the gold Oenochoe found in Tomb IV in Mycenae." Needs to be rephrased, perhaps: "Scholars, following the French art history expert Edmond Pottier, have noted the similarity of the spiral decorative patterns found in Tomb I to those of the gold oenochoe found in Tomb IV in Mycenae." (a bit of context for "the ... patterns", correct "of which ... likened to ...", no capital O for oenochoe). At the same time, please remove the space before [compare].
Thank you for the fixes so far, I will check and start striking over the next day or so. I've finished a first read through, I will read it again, probably during next week. ---- Mirokado (talk) 21:40, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from A. Parrot
- I agree with Jens Lallensack that the first paragraph of the lead contains too much background for the lead. I think you should at least cut the second and third sentences, starting the fourth sentence with "The city of Byblos, also called Jbeil, established major trade links with Egypt during the Bronze Age…"
- I kept the first sentence which informs of the location of the site. I removed the following sentence.el.ziade (talkallam) 12:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- As WP's unofficial ancient Egyptian religion specialist, I dislike the wording "the deceased was believed to take the form of a bird" (found in both the lead and the body). The bird form of the ba is a metaphor. You could say "the soul of the deceased was believed to fly from the burial chamber…", and possibly have a wikilink to Ancient Egyptian conception of the soul#Ba (personality).
- My Egyptological sources (Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times (1992) by Donald B. Redford, The Oxford History of Ancient Egypt (2000) by Ian Shaw, and Ancient Perspectives on Egypt (2003) edited by Roger Mathews and Cornelia Roemer) treat relations between Egypt and Byblos in the Old Kingdom as an exceptionally close trading relationship, not as direct control, which doesn't seem to have existed until the Middle Kingdom at the earliest. The link to the archived Awada Jalu source doesn't work for me, but the DeVries source, written by a religious scholar, doesn't seem strong enough to support the claim when other sources don't.
- Good point. I reviewed the sources and will update the text accordingly as soon as I can. el.ziade (talkallam) 12:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Even Byblos, the oldest state in the Levant to have been subverted by Egypt, demanded payment for its goods; and the present ruler averred strenuously that his ancestors had been paid for their services:63 in response to the statement that his fathers had willingly sent timber, Zakar-Ba'al replied:
Of course they did, and if you pay me something I will do it! But my (fathers) performed this service only after Pharaoh l.p.h. had despatched six cargo boats laden with Egyptian products and they were unloaded into their storehouses (i.e., in payment). And you? What have you brought for me? . . . Now if the ruler of Egypt were my lord, and if I were his vassal, he would not have to cause gold and silver to be brought with the request “Perform the business of Amun!”— Redford, Egypt, Canaan, and Israel in Ancient Times, https://books.google.nl/books?id=G9PgDwAAQBAJ
- "the advent of the 19th century" gives the impression that the city was rediscovered when the 19th century arrived, which, as the next sentence shows, was not the case.
thanks! el.ziade (talkallam) 12:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for your notes @A. Parrot:. el.ziade (talkallam) 12:38, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Gerda
Thank you for the detailed article. I'll comment while reading, leaving the lead for afterwards. Please reply only when I'm done for today, to avoid edit conflicts. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:36, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Infobox and TOC are basically fine, but I don't need four headers for references. I read the prose without problems, fixing minor things, - please check. I suggest to use "cm" (abbreviated) instead of "centimeter", for consistency with "m". I like the image arrangement all right, but wonder if the connection to the prose might be clearer by positioning, for example getting the gold pectoral closer to where it's mentioned. The last two images of grave findings remain a mystery to me, but it's a topic I am not familiar with. Will look at the lead tomorrow. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 16:51, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
Now to the lead.
I think it is where readers unfamiliar with the topic meet new information, and believe that you could do a few things to make that easier. Some of those will just result from me not being a native speaker, so I may not now terms that everybody else knows. Please ignore such things ;)
- link shaft tomb, sarcophagi (which is linked later, why?)?
- be a little more wordy about Byblos being the modern name for the ancient city, or is it the other way round? (The linked article is also not clear. The prose later on has the many names, but in the lead, it's not clear enough for me.)
- translate hypogeum? yes, there's a link, but someone who wants a quick overview will not want to go back and forth.
- split the sentence beginning "Montet categorized the graves"?
- "dated back" - they still do, no?
That's all. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:51, 14 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Johnbod
- Clearly pretty much there (I haven't read all the comments above) but a few points.
- There needs to be some indication of the dates in the first sentence or two.
- in the lead, a bit more specificity on the grave goods - materials etc. "Egyptian-style local crafts" isn't very helpful.
- You are rather too fond of hyphenated adjectival phrases - "reliefs inscribed with Egyptian hieroglyphs" is better than "Egyptian hieroglyph-inscribed reliefs".
- "Another interpretation of the Gebal is "mountain town" - "name" missing?
- "Ancient texts and manuscripts hinted at the location of Gebal.." this para pretty long - split?
- "floating in damp clay" - don't think one can do that.
- "The opening leads to a 1.8 m (5.9 ft) high and 1.2 m (3.9 ft) to 1.5 m (4.9 ft) wide corridor that adjoins the south side of the shaft of Tomb II" - should "adjoins" be "joins" or "enters"? Unclear what it means as it is. From the Montet plan illustrated it should be "enters".
- "damaged by falling rock shards" not sure rock has "shards". The word doesn't seem needed, or "fragments" maybe.
- "Beware, here is your loss (is) below" - whose translation is this? The English doesn't make much sense.
- There are generally a number of missing links.
- More later, Johnbod (talk) 16:41, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
1982 World Snooker Championship
- Nominator(s): Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:44, 30 April 2022 (UTC), User: BennyOnTheLoose
This article is about the 1982 edition of the World Snooker Championship. Davis's first defence. Second nomination - let me know what you think! Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:44, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Image review—pass (t · c) buidhe 22:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- Doing a prose review of the article. Side note, I have my own FAC up here, and I would appreciate any comments. Of course, while appreciated, you are not obligated to leave a response. elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 11:43, 1 May 2022 (UTC)- "30 April and 16 May 1982 at the Crucible Theatre, Sheffield, England" --> somewhat awkward placing of commas, but that might just be me. I'd put a "located" between "Crucible Theatre" and "Sheffield" to alleviate that
- "The tournament was sponsored by cigarette company Embassy and was organised by the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association (WPBSA)." --> There are a lot of "was"s in the first paragraph of the lead, which raises concerns about repetition. Plus this sentence could be reworded in such a way that the active voice is employed. "Embassy, a British cigarette company, sponsored the tournament, and the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association (WPBSA) handled the organisation for the event", perhaps?
- "It had a prize fund of £110,000 and the winner received £25,000." --> a comma before the "and" is missing
- The lead's second paragraph has a lot of participle phrases. "having defeated Doug Montjoy..." "becoming the latest champion who was unable to defend his first world title..." "defeating Welshman Ray Reardon 18–15 in the final..." all within three consecutive sentences. I believe you can rewrite one or two of these sentences to avoid repetition.
- "The World Snooker Championship is ... the official snooker world championship" --> this is just restating the title. We can rewrite this to "the official global (or worldwide?) tournament for snooker"
- I'd rewrite the next sentence to "Developed in the late 19th century by British Army soldiers stationed in India, the sport was popular in the United Kingdom before being introduced to Europe and the Commonwealth" just to avoid having snooker appear in two sentences in a row
- In view of that wording change, I'd also rewrite "the sport is now played worldwide" to "nowadays, snooker is played worldwide"
- "governed by the World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association (WPBSA).[6]Thirty-two" --> space after the citation
- "Thirty-two professional players competing in one-on-one single-elimination matches that were played over several frames." -> I feel like there is a verb missing here, because at the moment this reads like an incomplete sentence
- " This was the first world championships" -> the verb is singular but the noun is plural
- Many thanks for the detailed feedback. I've addressed the points above in the article, and hopefully fixed most of them. I've used a slightly different wording about it being the "official" championship, as there are at least two other world snooker championships: the IBSF World Snooker Championship and the World Women's Snooker Championship. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- No problem! By the way, with regards to this sentence - "The World Snooker Championship is the official world championship of professional snooker. Developed in the late 19th century by British Army soldiers stationed in India, the cue sport was popular in the United Kingdom..." - this essay argues that elegant variation, such as the one used here "world championship of professional snooker... stationed in India, the cue sport...", diminishes clarity. This is because at first glance, readers will not be able to tell what "the cue sport" refers to, and would have to spend more time than necessary figuring out the answer to that question. Here you seem to be doing elegant variation to introduce new information about professional snooker, which the essay says is not always an ideal way to go about it, for the reasons already outlined above. A way to improve clarity would be to put "the cue sport" beside "professional snooker", replacing the term with the "it" pronoun, i.e. "world championship of professional snooker, a cue sport... it was popular in the United Kingdom..."
- Many thanks for the detailed feedback. I've addressed the points above in the article, and hopefully fixed most of them. I've used a slightly different wording about it being the "official" championship, as there are at least two other world snooker championships: the IBSF World Snooker Championship and the World Women's Snooker Championship. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 23:38, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- All of the sentences in the third paragraph for the Overview section are in passive voice. I believe the MOS prefers the active voice whenever possible, no?
More comments to come once I get around to reading the tournament summary. :) Please ping me whenever you get around to addressing these points, by the way! FAC pages really need a "subscribe" button in the same way talk page sections do...
- Will have a look at these in a mo. You can watchlist FAC pages, btw. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 11:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note that I will be moving the rest of my comments on talk to prevent clogging the FAC page. elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 08:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)- Elias, FYI, you can also use {{cot}} and {[tl|cob}} to collapse talk page comments, if you prefer. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:52, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
- Note that I will be moving the rest of my comments on talk to prevent clogging the FAC page. elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
- Hi Troubled.elias, how is this review coming along? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:39, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello @Gog the Mild: sorry that the review had taken a while. I had a swathe of homework to deal with since last month but now that school is over I can take a look at the article again. Courtesy ping to @Lee Vilenski and @BennyOnTheLoose - expect the last set of comments soon. Once again apologies!! elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 07:24, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hello @Gog the Mild: sorry that the review had taken a while. I had a swathe of homework to deal with since last month but now that school is over I can take a look at the article again. Courtesy ping to @Lee Vilenski and @BennyOnTheLoose - expect the last set of comments soon. Once again apologies!! elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
- Hi Troubled.elias. I am considering archiving this as it is six weeks since it was nominated and a consensus to promote does not seem to be forming. But I was wondering if you were planning on continuing your review within the next day or two. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:55, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
NØ
I will have a look at this article. The review above looks extensive already so apologies if I repeat something.
- Is there a reason why newspapers that have articles are unlinked in the references?
- "a score of 18–12 in the final the previous year" could be "a score of 18–12 in the the previous year's final".
- "The first World Championship, in 1927, was won by Joe Davis in a final at Camkin's Hall in Birmingham, England." could be active voice.
- "The tournament was sponsored by cigarette company Embassy." would sound better in active voice too in my opinion, actually this could be done wherever applicable.
- "after which Knowles scored 67" - points?
- "Knowles said he had been to a nightclub until 2:00 am that day" - maybe "been at/in a nightclub"? They sound more appropriate than "to" here.
- "Higgins failed to pot the last red and conceded the frame" - last red what?
- "Reardon, a six-times champion" - shouldn't this be "six-time champion"?
- "he had not sufficiently recovered from a broken leg sustained in October 1981" - "he had not sufficiently recovered after sustaining a broken leg in October 1981"
- Great work just like all of the other articles in this series. If possible, I would be really glad if you were able to contribute something at my currently active FAC.--NØ 11:05, 12 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hey Lee Vilenski are you going to address these and will you consider leaving comments at my FAC linked above? Hope you're able to see this.--NØ 01:11, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi MaranoFan. Thanks for the review. I've amended the article in response to most of your comments, except the one about linking newspapers. My understanding is that there should be consistency in whether types of source are linked, and not a presumption that all newspapers will be. But I'm happy to make this amendment if necessary. Regards. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 20:30, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Epicgenius
I will leave some feedback a little bit. If I forget to leave any feedback within two days, feel free to ping me. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:28, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Epicgenius. I am considering archiving this as it is six weeks since it was nominated and a consensus to promote does not seem to be forming. So I was wondering if you might be able to start your review within the next day or two. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:57, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sure. Here are my initial comments:Lead:
- "at the Crucible Theatre, located in Sheffield, England" - I think this can just be "at the Crucible Theatre in Sheffield, England"
- Amended in lead and body. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- "the only one that carried world ranking points" - As in the only tournament of the season that decided a player's status in the world rankings?
- Yes - is that a suggested rewording? BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- "World Professional Billiards and Snooker Association (WPBSA) handled the organisation for the event" - I'm not sure if it's an ENGVAR thing but isn't it "the organisation of the event"?
- Amended, and also changed "handled" to "governed" as in those days there was a separate promoter, Mike Watterson, who was very hands-on in terms of the organisation. He's mentioned in the body. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- "with a score of 18–12 in a score of 18–12" - I'm guessing this is repeated by mistake.
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:42, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- "becoming the latest champion who failed to defend his first world title at the venue" - Currently, this phrasing seems to imply that there would be previous champions who failed to defend their first world title at the Crucible Theatre. Since I don't see any mention of any such champions, perhaps this can be condensed.
- Removed, as the Crucible Curse wasn't really a a thing in 1982. Davis was only the third player to fail to defend at the Crucible. BennyOnTheLoose (talk)
- More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:22, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Epicgenius ? Gog the Mild (talk) 17:19, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sure. Here are my initial comments:Lead:
Comments from JennyOz
Hello Lee - and Benny? I have a few questions and suggestions for clarity or to avoid ambiguity...
- Steve Davis had defeated Doug Mountjoy with a score of 18–12 in a score of 18–12 in the previous year's final - score is repeated
- In 1982, he lost 1–10 to Tony Knowles - change "he" to Davis
- champion who failed to defend his first world title - champion to fail to defend his
- Amended per the three points above. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:12, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- popular in the United Kingdom before being introduced to Europe - mainland Europe (or rest of Europe or wider Europe)
- Nowadays, snooker is played worldwide, especially in East and Southeast Asian nations - "especially" is wrong word? ie sounds like is played more there than anywhere else? Maybe, 'especially becoming popular in...'
- nations such as China, Hong Kong and Thailand - HK not a nation
- Amended per the three points above. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Joe Davis won the first World Championship, in 1927, at Camkin's Hall in Birmingham, England. - maybe 'Championship held in 1927 at Camkin's '
- amended, but retained the comma after "Championship"
- There were 67 entrants for the 1982 tournament, a new record.[10] - add 'including the qualifying event' (because you called it a "pre-tournament" event)
- Amended per the three points above. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- This was the first world championship to have 32 players - 'all' 32
- Not amended (yet). 1980 and 1981 had 24 players in the main event, and the few years preceding that had 16, so the point is that the total number was increased. I'll find a source to add something about the number of players in the main event changing, and reword. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- The breakdown of prize money for 1982 is shown below - money on offer? ie if no max break achieved the £110,000 would not be awarded, add 'possible'? ie breakdown of possible prize money
- Amended, but might need another tweak. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- was a new record high for the world - high is redundant?
- Amended. ("high" distinguished it from being a record low I suppose, but that would be an unusual way to say it was a new low.) BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- after Davis failed to pot the final black ball twice - twice failed to pot
- Without making a significant break, Davis won - wlink break
- Davis made a foul shot - wlink
- by lightly feathering the cue ball while - accidentally?
- Yes. Added a source to support the addtion. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- and played without vision aids. - without any eyewear?
- John Virgo defeated Mike Hallett 10–4 after leading 7–2. - add 'in the first session'
- Terry Griffiths, the next bookmakers' favourite after Steve Davis's - the bookmakers' next favourite
- Terry Griffiths, the next bookmakers' favourite after Steve Davis's elimination elimination - repeated word
- Alex Higgins, who had said he was having - wlink AH
- Fagan made the highest break of match - break of 'thrir' match
- five of the top-eight seeds were - is hyphen necessary?
- Steve Davis (1), Thorburn (2), Griffiths (3) - I'd put 'seeded' in the first parentheses to help reader ie Steve Davis (seeded 1),
- who were also the top-three - hyphen needed?
- Knowles defeated Miles by 13–7 - remove by
- Francisco won the first four frames of his match against Reynolds, and after leading 5–3 and 9–5,[28] won it 13–8.[29] - this is repeated from previous paragraph
- Higgins then won the next three consecutively for 12–10 - consecutively is redundant
- Stevens defeated Fagan by 13–7 - remove by
- File Jimmy White alt=Jimmy White wearing a waistcoar and bow tie - typo waistcoat
- when Knowles missed an routine green ball. - 'a' routine
- After this, Charlton made a break of 78 - Charlton then made a break
- White, by defeating Stevens, had become the - add 'in the quarter-finals' after Stevens
- Amended per the 17 points above. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:38, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- White made breaks of 60 and 38, and won the second frame to even the score - ?
- White again drew level at 4–4 - remove "again" or add a comma after "level"
- compiling a breaks of 69 in the first and 52 in the second - remove "a"
- White won the first frame of the fourth session and Higgins fluked a brown in the following frame, which he went on to win. The scores were level at 13–13 - should be 12-12? ie they were 11-11 at end last session?
- In the 32nd frame, White was 59 points - should that be 30th frame?
- Reardon won five successive frames to with the match 16–11 - "with" --> win
- Amended per the six point above. 10:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Sheffield Snooker Centre - is that a different venue to the Crucible?
- Yes, and unlikely to be notable enough for its own article. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- There was a £5,000 bonus for compiling a break higher than the championship record of 145. - 'On offer' was a £5,000 bonus ...
- Amended. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
- Missing? - any reaction in media worth reporting? How were players rankings affected after final?
- Will look at sources and add. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, JennyOz (talk) 15:48, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Many thanks, JennyOz. There are a couple of points still outstanding from above that I'll look at sources for. Hopefully I haven't created any new problems whilst addressing your comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:52, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
Streets (song)
- Nominator(s): elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 13:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
This article is about a song that achieved commercial success in frankly the most 2020s way possible: blowing up on TikTok. After an Internet challenge which featured "Streets" went viral on the platform, the resulting boost in streams propelled this song to number 16 on the Billboard Hot 100 and number 8 on the Global 200---a pretty impressive feat. The trend was so influential to the song's notability, in fact, that the music video for the song features the artist Doja Cat performing her version of the online challenge.
When I found the article lying on the GA nominations backlog for 6 months, while still having several issues with regards to sourcing and prose, I decided to take on the duty of nursing it to good health. Now, after a GA review from Realmaxxver, and a very helpful PR from the wonderful @Aoba47 and @GWL, I believe that this article satisfies the criteria for a featured article. This is my first-ever foray into FAC, so please remind me when I fall short of understanding how the process works! Cheers, elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 13:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Aoba47
- I understand the purpose of this part, Incorporating both Doja Cat's singing voice and rapping voice, but it seems like an unnecessarily wordy way to say that she sings and raps on this song. I think this information could be conveyed in a better way.
- You Right, right! That part of the lead should be less verbose now
- I'd move the citation for this sentence, "Streets" was a sleeper hit that gradually acquired Internet-driven success., to the end. as the current placement is not the best for readability.
- ref 32 is used to cite only the "sleeper hit" claim, and that article does not support the other part of the sentence that says "gradually acquired Internet-driven success." I think it will be fine to keep it where it is, but we'll see if anyone else objects.
- For the Paul Anka, Yeti Beats, and Theron Feemster images, I would include the year these photos were taken in the caption to provide full context to readers.
- Rewritten. I also split the caption for the Yeti Beats/Theron Feemster images into two sentences, since I found them to be overwhelmingly long.
Great work with the article. A majority of my concerns were already addressed in the peer review phase. I believe this should be everything from me. Once the above comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this FAC for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 01:12, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the quick comments above, @Aoba !! I have addressed everything that needs to have been addressed. Also, if you don't mind --- I need to know if you're able to do a full source review of the article? Of course, that's not necessary on your end, and these comments are already of enough help for me. elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 05:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)- Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. As for your question about a source review, I will have to decline on that one. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 14:52, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Oops, apologies. Anyways, once again, thanks! I am glad that you supported. And I completely understand that you declined elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 15:24, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Oops, apologies. Anyways, once again, thanks! I am glad that you supported. And I completely understand that you declined elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
- Thank you for addressing everything. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. As for your question about a source review, I will have to decline on that one. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 14:52, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Image review - pass
So, let's see what we got here left after the PR. Pinging nominator Troubled.elias per offwiki request. I might do a prose review when I am in the mood for it; may also do source formatting check. GeraldWL 15:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
- Thank you for the review! I will drop by comments really shortly. Please ping me again if for whatever reason I neglect to respond within a reasonable timeframe :") elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 13:58, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
- The infobox image is good: it is reduced, and the parameters are validly copied from other articles. Good job with the footnotes too btw :D
- Thanks :")
- Theron's image looks good
- Hooray!
- I was kind of conflicted seeing Yeti's image's parameter, considering the EXIF data has no data on the camera used, but then again EXIFs can be wrong, and a Google Lens search has no avail, so I'll give a pass on that.
- Actually, there is EXIF data, at least on the original image file. I didn't use the crop tool to trim that photo, so it is very likely that that is the reason why there is a discrepancy in the EXIF
- Paul Anka's and Doja Cat's images are well-licened: one PD and another OTRS-verified
- Neat
- The music video:
- "partly because it has been viewed over 100 million times on YouTube already." This is redundant; most fair use rationales only state "because it is in low resolution"
- I'm not sure I follow. That "...partly..." line is for the "Respect for commercial opportunities" parameter and not the "minimal use" one, which is where the "low-resolution" bit is indicated. Being low-res and not harming the commercial viability of a product are not exact synonyms (though of course one is the result of the other), so is it really redundant?
- Troubled.elias, typically I would write "This is a low-resolution image used only in one article with a valid purpose, and thus will not hurt any commercial opportunities." No rationale as far as I'm aware of ever states other reasons, and it's not needed, since the commercial protection is pretty apparent in the "minimal use" and "purpose" sections. Using the number of views as a justification also isn't really a legally effective defense either. GeraldWL 01:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
- Got that. Rewrote as you asked
- Kemosabe / RCA Records doesn't own the video though-- remember this is not the song. The production companies are The Lucky Bastards Inc. and London Alley Entertainment; they are the presumed copyright owners.
- Okay got it. I can put a "song copyright belongs to" clause before the labels. Then I'll write a separate sentence that states the owner of copyright for the video. I can see the "Streets" music video in the website for Lucky Bastards Inc., but not in the London Alley Entertainment website. Do you know how you managed to find out that London Alley did production for the video?
- Nevermind, found it. Turns out the director works for London Alley
- Aight, the captions. You can remove note K and L, then alter note M to start with "The latter" to avoid confusion.
- Is there really any reason to remove the two footnotes? Subjective descriptions like "this was described as erotic" should all be attributed properly to whomever said it. It makes no sense to provide attribution only for the "epic version" claim just because you think only one of the descriptions should have quotes. By the way, I have explained my concern with trying to unquote "film noir-like" in the bullet point below this one.
- Captions, as we know it, are not part of the prose but the images. That's why you don't see gameplay screenshots with cited captions very often, because they're covered in prose and images are merely enhancers of the prose. I think you can honestly phrase the whole thing with "erotically suspenseful". Also, in a way, "Doja Cat dances while lit from behind with red lights" can be combined with "and an "epic version" of the Silhouette Challenge". "the online trend that contributed to the song's success" is not needed, assuming at this point people already know what the challenge is. GeraldWL 09:47, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
- Fair enough. I've removed some of the footnotes (while still keeping the one that attributes the "epic version" line to Billboard). And you're right to point out that by this section of the article folks would already be familiar with the Silhouette Challenge's significance towards the song's success. The caption should be trimmed accordingly now.
- Hmm, I still think it's a bit lengthy; I very rarely see screenshot captions with all these attributes, as in, the publication and author. Even if you want to keep this attribute, you will have to cite it, which makes the caption way more lengthy than it should. As I stated, the suspense and eroticism can be merged. "Several critics have categorized the music video as erotic, suspenseful, and fantastical." More specific quotes can be seen by readers in the prose. GeraldWL 13:00, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- What do you advise we change the whole caption for the screenshot to, then? Remember that the NFC use rationale currently states that the image is there to (1) depict the Silhouette Challenge, (2) convey the sultry and scary tone (keep in mind that the prose mentions only one writer who described this video as such, so your "several critics" suggestion confuses me), and (3) illustrate the film noir comparison made by The Times writers. Thus, the caption should adhere to, at the very least, two of these points. "Several critics praised or otherwise noted the video's aesthetics and its combination of sultry and scary tones; two writers compared the visuals to that of film noir media." --- would that be good enough for you?
- Plus... I'm not really sure about the whole "you will have to cite it, which makes the caption way more lengthy than it should" comment... a lot of captions for music video screenshots have citations within them. See Shake It Off#Music video and All About That Bass#Music video for instance.
- Well, I found a way to get rid of the citations and trim the caption! Glad that we could make that happen. Hopefully I have now solved this comment of yours ^^ And I'm sorry that I came across slightly miffed here
- "The clip was described as "film noir-like", an erotic "horror-fantasy", and an "epic version" of the Silhouette Challenge," --> "The clip was labeled as film noir, erotic horror fantasy, and an "epic version" of the Silhouette Challenge," ... These genres are not coined by the critics so they don't have to be quoted.
- Cairns and Helm did not call the music video "film noir"---they only made that comparison, i.e. by saying "film noir-like". Hence that term being in quotes. I could try and rewrite that part to "compared the video to film noir" to properly paraphrase, but that would make an already-long image caption even longer (and unnecessarily wordy; I think that sentence does the job of combining the descriptions just fine). Plus, your suggestion for "erotic horror fantasy" has some MOS:SOB problems, and I would just link the entire thing to erotic horror.
- The Yeti and Theron caption has a citation, but it's already cited in prose? GeraldWL 13:00, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
- The "co-wrote 11 out of 12 songs on Hot Pink" claim is not mentioned in the prose itself, so I had to put a citation in the caption as well to get that fact covered
- Alt texts:
- The infobox: "Doja Cat facing frontwards as she kneels on top of a smashed car hood." facing frontwards as she kneels on top of can be trimmed to atop; we don't need to be too specific in alt texts
- Trimmed
- "The title "Streets" is handwritten in red on the center of the cover art. Below it is smaller, white text spelling out "Doja Cat". A red sticker that says "SILHOUETTE REMIX" is plastered on the bottom left corner." --> "The song's title is written in red on the center, and "Doja Cat" below it, alongside a "SILHOUETTE REMIX" sticker."
- Trimmed, although very slightly. "The song's title is written in red on the center, and 'Doja Cat' below it" is clunky in a syntactic way---there is no verb on the latter clause that applies to "Doja Cat". If you were to remove the "and", the clause on its own will not make sense. Plus, the sentence does not specify the colour of the text that says "Doja Cat", which would lead readers to assume that it is also red. Which is not. That part of the alt text now currently reads "The song's title—in red—is written on the center, and below it is smaller, white text spelling out "Doja Cat". A red sticker that says "SILHOUETTE REMIX" is plastered on the bottom left corner."
- Portraits typically don't have to be alt-texted unless it's an infobox image of a bio article. So for photos of Yeti, Theron, Anka, and Doja Cat, you can change them all to "Refer to caption".
- Got that. Although when I look at the article using my phone, Yeti Beats and Feemster's photos are displayed from top to bottom instead of from left to right. Which makes the caption somewhat confusing. Thus I'll have to indicate which photo depicts which person. "A photo of Yeti Beats." vs. "A photo of Theron Feemster"
- "A male driver in his cab, looking to his left. Behind him is a shop display window lit by red lights. The silhouette of a woman, who poses provocatively, is shown in the window." -- This can be changed to "Refer to caption" too, as the caption's sentence 1 describes it well.
- Done
- Question: @GWL, have I addressed all your concerns for the image review?
- Hi Gerald Waldo Luis, is that a pass for the image review? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from BennyOnTheLoose
Happy to be challenged on any of my comments. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Footnote 1 does not have a reference.
- Added the Apple Music references, which are used in the track listing and release history sections
- The images of Yeti Beats and Theron Feemster have different widths to each other. Can they be equalised?
- Yep - I've added a new cropped version
- How do we know the dropbox content is from ARIA?
- If you go to their official website's accreditations page and click "Latest accreditaions [sic]" it would take you to the dropbox link. It's certainly a choice on their end; I understand why this tipped you off at first
- Seems like a good idea to mention this in the reference. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Refs 108 and 109 have Billboard mis-formatted
- Looks like another editor kindly took the time to fix that issue
- Footbnote b: "This date pertains to when the song..." - how about something like "This date is when the song..."
- Rewritten
- Footnote c: "in which the three served as songwriters" to something like "for which the three served as songwriters"
- Done
- Footnote f & K: "...are attributed to ..." - maybe "...are from..."/2"...is from..."
- I honestly like "attributed" better since it feels more elegant. But to prevent unnecessary repetition I have applied the suggestion to one of the footnotes
- Footnote g: I think '"Audience impressions" refer to' should be '"Audience impressions" refers to'
- Good catch
- "Length 3:47" from infobox doesn't match any of those on the track listing. I guess it may be 3:47 on the album, in which case a citation should be added I think.
- Added length info in the Production and songwriting section, with a citation to the album's Apple Music entry. Apple Music and [Spotify https://open.spotify.com/album/1MmVkhiwTH0BkNOU3nw5d3] actually say that the song duration is 3:46, turns out
- Lead: "Some critics who reviewed Hot Pink praised the track for demonstrating Doja Cat's versatility as a musical artist" feels a bit vague, pehaps because of the "some", or because it doesn't go on to say anything about what other critics wrote.
- My thought process behind this was that if I removed "some" from that sentence, it would give the impression that quite a lot of critics commented on the song during their Hot Pink reviews, when the prose only gives two. We could quantify "some" and change it to "two" if you prefer
- Fine as is. We don't know whethere it was actually only two. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Lead: "...Kemosabe and RCA Records.." perhaps mention that the single was on these labels in the lead.
- Sorry - can't quite parse that. Do you mean that I should specify that Kemosabe and RCA Records are record labels?
- No, I just meant it could be mentioned in the lead, but it's already there, so ignore! BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Backgrond: 'During 2019, Doja Cat released three additional singles in promotion of Hot Pink, two of which appearing in over 200,000 videos on the platform combined—"Rules" and "Cyber Sex".' - I don't understand this.
- Oh yeah sorry. Should be more straightforward now
- Background "aforementioned" seems unnecessary.
- Right - reworded to "successes of the tracks"
- Production and songwriting: "proceeds to, in the words of Billboard editor Jason Lipshutz," To me, this wording seems like he is expressing a truth rather than an opinion.
- Changed "in the words of" to "in the views of"
- Commercial performance and release: "with negligible amount of airplay" something like "with a negligible amount of airplay"
- Commercial performance and release: "with negligible amount of airplay for the song because of its unprecedented boost in fame online" - reads like the fame online was the cause of the negligible airplay.
- I was under the impression that that was correct per the cited Billboard source ... Relevant quote: "Airplay for the single is virtually nonexistent, with minimal chart activity deriving from the radio sector as 'Streets' was an unplanned single that gained traction through users on TikTok and social media apps" But I may have misread. Currently I have reworded to the following so that the whole train of thought makes more sense---open to any alternative suggestions.
At first, the track received a negligible amount of airplay; instead, its initial chart activity was driven predominantly by streams and digital sales because of its unprecedented boost in fame online.
- Update: I revised that final bit to "driven predominantly by streams and digital sales because of its online success" because the Billboard source says that the single release was unplanned, not the boost in fame
- I think it's a suitable improvement, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Commercial performance and release: "Kemosabe and RCA Records.." - same point as for the lead above.
- Commercial performance and release: Should "third biggest" be hyphenated?
- Not quite sure about this one honestly... in my head I can see good arguments for both the hyphenated and unhyphenated version. I would gladly appreciate a third opinion from another editor ^^
- Commercial performance and release: "in its second charting week[74]" - add comma before ref, or move ref to the end of the sentence.
- Moved to the end
- Critical reception and analysis: "in her most serious form" is a direct quote from the source.
- Enclosed in quotes
- Critical reception and analysis: Perhaps remove "..during the album's runtime" as I'm not sure that the source is specific about whether it's "her most serious form" on the album or in general.
- That is a good call
- Critical reception and analysis: I expected more than four sources here. Are there further reviews from reputable sources that can be added?
- Unfortunately, no... One of the FA reviewers actually raised the same concern during the peer review. Here's an abridged recap of what I said at the time
When I scoured for reviews of Hot Pink posted at the time of its release, there were only two of them that described something about "Streets" in non-trivial detail. Actually, the Pitchfork review for Hot Pink, quite annoyingly, has said very little about the song itself ... That and the Consequence review were all the critical commentary I can find for the song during 2019, unfortunately
- Though I believe the amount of critical commentary about the song is at a bare minimum - it addresses both the composition itself, as well as its commercial reception. So it doesn't seem to neglect any major details per WP:WIAFA.
- OK. BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:53, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Music video: "Aaron Williams, an editor for Uproxx" has already been mentioned, so perhaps just "Williams" or "Williams of Uproxx"?
- Amended
- Music video: "Mason of Slant Magazine" - magazine was mentioned in the preceding para, so just "Mason" would do
- Rewritten
- I ran scripts to fix a couple of date formats and dashes.
Hi Troubled.elias. I can't see any big issues, only things to tweak. I might have some further comments or questions later. Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 11:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks Benny! Deeply grateful for your comments here - lately I've been busy and stressed with real life due to election season in my own country, but I hope to regain productivity soon. I'll try to respond to your comments here - and continue my review of the snooker article - when I have the time. cheers :) elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
📝see my work 03:51, 13 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Troubled.elias, have you completed your responses to BennyOnTheLoose? Gog the Mild (talk) 13:57, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Troubled.elias and Gog the Mild. I'm happy with responses above, but will have another look later, probably after some of the other reviewers' comments have been replied to. Feel free to ping me if I'm delaying the process! Regards, BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 10:58, 6 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Troubled.elias, have you completed your responses to BennyOnTheLoose? Gog the Mild (talk) 13:57, 5 June 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks Benny! Deeply grateful for your comments here - lately I've been busy and stressed with real life due to election season in my own country, but I hope to regain productivity soon. I'll try to respond to your comments here - and continue my review of the snooker article - when I have the time. cheers :) elias. 🧣 💬reach out to me
Source review
Doing the easy to look sources first, then the more complex ones. Will do spot-check. GeraldWL 08:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
Citation formatting
- The Apple Music sources need publisher parameter to the record labels/company.
- Done
- Ref 7: remove the Illustrators parameter. Those people merely drew the featured GIF which holds little significance. The parameter is more reserved for multimedia articles, like this one.
- Got it
- Ref 8: Remove "Billboard Staff". We don't put staff attributes.
- Alright. A few other refs had that listed as the author so I went ahead and removed those parameters for those refs as well :))
- I can't look at ref 9 and the archive is pretty laggy, but it looks multimedia so I'll let this pass.
- Oop- you're right. Nothing is showing up when I click the archive link. Perhaps I can use something other than Internet Archive for it?
- Ref 20: is "19439-71705-1" catalogue number? If so, are there prefix letters at the number (e.g. ISC 0000)?
- Yep, it is the catalogue number. And no, there ain't any prefixes before the ID (see also this Discogs entry).
- Ref 51-52, 63-66, 105: can you fill in the transl-title parameter? Google Translate should work as the titles are very short.
- To keep consistent, I have not added a trans-title parameter for any foreign-language references, because refs 63, 64, and 66 are generated by Template:Single chart instead of Template:Cite web. With the current parameters in {{Single chart}}, I am not able to add a translated title, unforts. See also my response to the point below this one.
- Ref 53-55, 57, 59-75, 93-99, 101-102: is there a way these links can be archived? If Wayback doesn't work, there's always ghostarchive.org
- The templates behind those references are generated by Template:Single chart and unfortunately with the way that things are, there is no way for me to sneak in an archive link... which is really annoying from a verifiability and formatting point of view. As mentioned above, the same goes for the translated titles
- Ref 56: decapitalize "Select". "SK – SINGLES DIGITAL – TOP 100", "202105" should be italicized per ref 75's format.
- I'm trying to keep the Slovak Charts citation's formatting consistent with the Czech Charts citation's if that makes sense... hence the capitalized "Select". I can't just change how the note looks for the Czech citation because, well, it's not generated by any of the cite templates. It's not like I can change how the Mexico Certs ref (ref 75) looks either, because funnily enough, that is also generated by a non-cite template. Specifically, Template:Certification Table Entry. My god, these templates need some serious cleanup to keep references consistent, now that I think about it. Lmao
Other than that, looks good. I might revisit later just to make sure.
Spotcheck
- Aight so this sounds more of a prose than spotcheck but it is kind of relevant. You often interchange "the track/song" with "the record", and though in a way synonymous, "record" only applies to a song that is exclusively released physically. And the sources don't seem to state such.
Ok that is like, really it. Do apologise for the long wait! Got an IRL project going on so it is super hard to catch up. I do have some prose comments though.
- Troubled.elias, poke. GeraldWL 17:17, 4 June 2022 (UTC)
Prose
- "four years after the viral success of her first single"-- Viral phenomena or viral marketing you think suits more?
- "By September 2021, "Rules" and "Cyber Sex"" --> "By September 2021, the latter two"
- Including both "Tiktok superstar" and "household name" in the same sentence is kind of repetition. I would suggest trimming the first half of the sentence to "Likewise, Aliya Chaudhry of Slate argued that..."
- "brothers who comprise a two-person band"-- wasn't "two person" already established by mentioning two names and "comprise"?
- Add a "(YEAR)" to the film ("You Got Served (2004)")
- Footnote e: "The adjectives "sultry", "melanchol[ic]", and "soulful" are" can be removed as it is excessive.
- "It has a duration of 3 minutes and 46 seconds." This would be read in a monotone way. "has been described as "sultry", "melanchol[ic]", and "soulful", with a duration of 3 minutes and 46 seconds" sounds more natural.
- "Jade Gomez of Paste called the vocal performance in the song a blend between a "wispy" singing voice and a "raspy" rap delivery that does not "[ruin] the immersion" for listeners." I kind of got lost out of focus reading this. I suggest something like "Jade Gomez of Paste remarked the vocals as immersive despite its blend of euphonic singing and hoarse rapping." Shorter, less quotes but synonymous.
- ""dark harmonies, trap hi-hats, and psychedelic textures""-- Trap music and Psychedelic music can be linked?
- "However, in the beginning of 2021, around 15 months after its initial release, the track experienced a surge in popularity on TikTok." I think this would suit best as the first sentence of paragraph two. "On the application" would have to be changed to "There" to avoid repetition.
- I think silhouette is overlink
- "sparked fans'"-- of? Doja Cat, or the song, or the album?
- Skipping the rest of the section since it's too much lol. But given the extensive copyedits we've done, I think it's all great, and a quick scroll reveals no flaws to me!
- "as the reason why" is extraneous, "cited" already does the job.
- Italicize Uproxx
- I still do think the first paragraph felt repetitive, but I guess it's fine given the limited sources and statements, and paragraph two is very strong!
- "the first few seconds of Paul Anka's "Put Your Head on My Shoulder""-- "Paul Anka's" is repetitive, it's already established.
- Okay, I think you mayyy just be overdescribing the MV a bit. Let me elaborate bit by bit.
- "In the next scene, Doja Cat dances" --> "Doja Cat then dances"
- "wearing white contact lenses and appearing to be undead, subsequently emerge from the road on which the car is parked" --> "rise from the dead". It's not a breakdown, it's a summary, and it's perfectly assumable that they're rising from the dead.
- "As "Streets" comes to an end, the video transitions to a shot of Doja Cat as she reclines on a living room couch. Residing in a house located on a nuclear testing site," --> "Doja Cat is then seen reclining on a living room couch, in a house nearby a nuclear test site."
- "She rests her head on the lap of a mannequin that looks like the cab driver"-- you can't assume that it's a mannequin. "She rests her head on the lap of a the cab driver, immobile" is safer since it doesn't assume the true nature of the driver, only what is visible onscreen.
- "and the resulting explosion"-- repetition. --> "which".
- Italicize Uproxx
- Cinematography is overlink
- "Lift program, a campaign"-- so is it a program or campaign?
- "The production team for the video decided to incorporate milk into the set design to evoke cat imagery"-- they... put milk, to evoke cat imagery?
- "marked her "latest step toward world domination""-- "latest" may be outdated sooner or later. Suggest something like "believed that the live performance is an effort in achieving global fame."
- Link medley
- "UFO" --> "unidentified flying object"
- Troubled.elias: nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:37, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments by Lee Vilenski
Support - happy with this one. Saw one or two minor bits, but nothing to avoid a support in this case. great work. Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 15:04, 7 June 2022 (UTC)
1998 FIFA World Cup Final
This article is about the 1998 edition of the World's most important football (soccer) match, the FIFA World Cup Final. It featured the host nation, France, in their first final, against the previous champions Brazil. The pre-match headlines were dominated by the initial omission of Brazil's star player Ronaldo, only for him to later end up playing... but as a shadow of his usual self. Several conspiracy theories later emerged, but it remains something of a mystery to this day... As usual, any and all comments gratefully received, and I'll be happy to do reciprocal reviews for anyone who asks. — Amakuru (talk) 09:34, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- Image review can you put a source for the lineup in the image description for File:BRA-FRA 1998-07-12.svg ? (t · c) buidhe 23:53, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
CommentsSupport from TRM
Lead
- "final match... The match" could mix it up a little.
- "as the holders" is that 100% clear to non-experts?
- "one defeat, after which they defeated" repetitive.
- Could link "round of 16" in the lead.
- Also "kick-off"?
- And corner.
- "slotting the ball" pretty sure this might get called out by non-football readers as "jargon" or too "in-universe".
- Any consequences of the final, reactions, subsequent tournament performances for either side, etc. which could be added to expand the final para of the lead.
Background
- "as did Brazil as the" as ... as... bit clunky.
- "an 80,000-capacity" so why did the final only have 75,000 spectators?
- I've had a search around, and I can't find any direct evidence. Even in current times it seems the capacity is 80,000 but 75,000 tickets are sold. No explanation why though. — Amakuru (talk) 17:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)
- "The match ball for this..." this is less significant than the previous performances of he finalists so I'd put it as the final para of this section.
- "having been involved ... having been eliminated" repetitive.
- "by the Czech Republic. Their midfielder Zinedine Zidane" -> France's midfielder...
Route to the final
- "were already confirmed as winners" did this impact their team selection for Norway?
- "before Patrick ... before the end" before .... before repeat.
- "with the golden goal rule in effect" I hate to be the first person to say it, is this worth a footnote explaining the principle of "next scorer wins" here....??
- "Brazil kicked first and the first five penalties were all scored," and this could be misconstrued by those who aren't aware that penalties are taken alternately....
- "France began their campaign..." first two sentences of this section start with "France..." bit repetitive.
- Did Zidane get suspended for his red card in the Saudi game?
- Apparently Blanc's GG was the first ever in the FIFA World Cup, worth noting?
More anon. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: I think I've looked at all your points so far... Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 21:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
- Hi TRM, anything further? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
- Ian Rose yes, sorry. I'm on half-term with kids etc, so don't have much time but perhaps at the weekend? If there's a mad rush then that's fine, but I'd rather that I do a decent review and that Amakuru gets a chance to get this one promoted? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 21:11, 1 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi TRM, anything further? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:33, 31 May 2022 (UTC)
More, at last, from me:
Pre-match
- "An amateur who worked" do you mean he used to be an amateur referee? This is a touch confusing for me to parse.
- "The assistant referees were" were they called assistant referees back then? Or just linesmen?
- "in his stead" feels a little whimsical, maybe just "place" rather than stead?
- "Reporters for the BBC and other media received the news shortly after 8 pm had " missing a word here I think, either "who" after "media".
- "At 8:18," be consistent with the "pm" inclusion.
- "afternoon of the match" I would say "afternoon of the final".
Match
- "an estimated global audience " television?
- "at the time of kick-off" link.
- "a long ball was played" you know the drill, what's a "long ball"? I guess you mean "the ball was passed a long distance" or whatever, but you know there's a cadre of reviewers here who would simply fall off their chair if you expected them to know what a "long ball" was.......
- Could link goal kick for the aforementioned horrified audience, but then again they might well ask you to describe what a "goal kick" is here, because to them it might well be a "kick at the goal" (or, in my youth when I played against USAF servicemen abroad, they'd shout "SHOOT THE GOAL", kinda like "GET IN THE HOLE" kind of thing...).
- "passed it into the centre" the centre of the pitch?
- "was able to punch his " ->" punched his"
- "shown a yellow card " link.
- You have "four minutes later" but previously "On 5 minutes"?
- "yellow card four minutes later for a diving challenge on Rivaldo.[70] Four minutes before" maybe make the second "four minutes" an absolute.
- "sent a long ball upfield" see above. The horror.
- I normally include all substitutions as "important aspects of the event" kind of thing, e.g. not seeing Desailly's substitution being noted in the prose?
- "receiving a through ball from" no chance on earth that our "non-football readers" will even begin to decipher this I'm afraid.
- We normally directly cite Statistics in the header of the table.
Post-match
- "win the competition in their own country" could this not be tighter as "win the competition as hosts"?
- "For Brazil, it was only the second time" ->" It was only the second time Brazil..."
- Link Uruguay v Brazil (1950 FIFA World Cup) instead of the overall tournament, and pipe it appropriately.
- "loss in the World Cup until their 7–1 loss to" loss/loss. Perhaps make one a "defeat"?
- "Juan Antonio Samaranch" seems to be oddly linked, just his name is fine.
- "during his speech" I guess you're assuming we know that the French president makes a Bastille Day speech?
- "emerged. This included an allegation" I would merge, "emerged, including an allegation"
- "eliminated at that stage" quick repeat of "stage".
That's content reviewed. I can take a look at references if that's not already been by anyone else, who would no doubt be far more competent than me? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 19:40, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: I think I've looked at all your points. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 15:09, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
Seems to have been a change to an attendance of 80,000 yet the "statistics" source clearly says 75,000...? The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 18:41, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: Yeah, there actually seems to be a slight discrepancy here. This "FIFA API" source does say 80,000, and that's the basis on which it was changed to 80,000. More sources do seem to say 75,000 though, including 11v11 and RSSSF, so I've restored that figure and added extra sourcing. I've removed "official" though, as it's not clear what the official figure really is, or whether there even is one. Let me know if anything else needs doing w.r.t. this. CHeers — Amakuru (talk) 09:26, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
Sorry it's been a while, happy that my concerns have been addressed. We can't very well explain the rules of association football within this article, so the vitriol that brought down these kinds of articles in the past is a genuine waste of time, glad to see it's subsided significantly and allowed good faith editors to crack on with making excellent articles, like this one. So, glad to support now. The Rambling Man (Keep wearing the mask...) 16:47, 18 June 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Mike Christie
- There were a lot of comments in the press about Blanc's red card in the semifinal; it was clear from video footage that Bilić was faking his injury. This article is about the final, not the semifinal, but given that it meant Blanc could not play I think a mention of the controversy is warranted.
I made quite a few copyedits; most were minor but please check to see if you disagree with anything. The above is the only suggestion I have; the article is in excellent condition. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)
- @Mike Christie: thanks for the review and copyedit. I've added a couple of sentences about the Blanc-Bilić incident on the semi-final. CHeers — Amakuru (talk) 21:04, 26 May 2022 (UTC)
Support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 07:43, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
Comments from ChrisTheDude
- "The 1998 FIFA World Cup was the 17th edition of the World Cup, FIFA's football competition for national teams" - you specify men's in the lead but not here
- "where which they were beaten" - where which?
- "was labelled by former Brazilian Pelé" - pretty sure Pele is still Brazilian
- "The match ball for this game was" - was it the match ball for the whole tournament? If so, I would say that. If just for this game then it needs moving later, because otherwise you have a structure that essentially goes background to the whole tournament > specifics of the ball for the final > details of the earlier rounds > everything else about the final. which does not make chronological sense
- That's what I got as far as the end of the Route to the final section, I will look at the rest later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:08, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
More comments from ChrisTheDude
- "an in-swinging corner from the right taken by Emmanuel Petit" - no need to repeat his full name
- "Guivarc'h was taken off, as Dechamps brought on Dugarry in his place" - Deschamps is spelt wrong, but surely it was the manager who brought on a sub, not Deschamps?
- Think that's all I got -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:05, 19 May 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks, @ChrisTheDude:, I think I've looked at these points now. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 14:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi Amakuru, did you miss these recent comments? (t · c) buidhe 12:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
- Support - @Amakuru:, if you fancy reviewing another football article, your feedback would be most gratefully received here (if you don't fancy it or don't have the time, no problem at all) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
Source review - spotchecks not done. Version reviewed
- Cited sources shouldn't be repeated in External links
- "16th edition of the quadrennial football competition" - source? Don't see this in the text
- FN1: the source indicates the primary authors are the "Editors"; the list given here are secondary authors only
- Apologies, I'm not clear what the error is and what you want me to correct here, so please could you advise, @Nikkimaria:. — Amakuru (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per here the primary contributors to this article are "The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica". So you could either cite just them as a group author, or cite them as the first author and list the other ones after - your call. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - I have amended the cite so that "The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica", which I think is what you're suggesting as an option above, and seems preferable to listing out the lengthy list of editors which might not even be complete. Just noting though, this has now raised a citation template warning which links to Help:CS1_errors#generic_name, saying that we shouldn't have used a "generic placeholder", presumably because it contains the word "editor". Just checking if this is a problem, but if not then I think I'm done with your issues. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 10:54, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'd suggest implementing the accept-as-written fix outlined there. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:53, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: Done, thanks. — Amakuru (talk) 15:24, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- I'd suggest implementing the accept-as-written fix outlined there. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:53, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - I have amended the cite so that "The Editors of Encyclopædia Britannica", which I think is what you're suggesting as an option above, and seems preferable to listing out the lengthy list of editors which might not even be complete. Just noting though, this has now raised a citation template warning which links to Help:CS1_errors#generic_name, saying that we shouldn't have used a "generic placeholder", presumably because it contains the word "editor". Just checking if this is a problem, but if not then I think I'm done with your issues. Cheers — Amakuru (talk) 10:54, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- Per here the primary contributors to this article are "The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica". So you could either cite just them as a group author, or cite them as the first author and list the other ones after - your call. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
- Apologies, I'm not clear what the error is and what you want me to correct here, so please could you advise, @Nikkimaria:. — Amakuru (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- FN3: it appears that this source includes contributed chapters - the particular chapter cited should be reflected in the citation
- I don't have immediate access to this, but should hopefully be able to look at an actual copy of the book by Wednesday this week. — Amakuru (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: just noting that I never did manage to get a look at the book, so I've found an alternative reference for this assertion. THanks — Amakuru (talk) 15:34, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- I don't have immediate access to this, but should hopefully be able to look at an actual copy of the book by Wednesday this week. — Amakuru (talk) 16:34, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
- FN9 is missing work
- What makes FN27 a high-quality reliable source?
- Sometimes you credit Newspapers.com for citations to it, other times not - should be consistent
- FN38: missing page number, and is a clip available?
- Be consistent in whether BBC Sport is italicized and/or linked. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Nikkimaria, how does this one seem now? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:06, 16 June 2022 (UTC)
- One minor point outstanding above, otherwise good. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:53, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - This appears to potentially have been addressed; are you comfortable with signing off on this now? Hog Farm Talk 04:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- Yep. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:26, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- @Nikkimaria: - This appears to potentially have been addressed; are you comfortable with signing off on this now? Hog Farm Talk 04:14, 19 June 2022 (UTC)
- One minor point outstanding above, otherwise good. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:53, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
- Hi Nikkimaria, how does this one seem now? Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:06, 16 June 2022 (UTC)