Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

For the criteria to become a featured article, see Wikipedia:Featured article criteria.
For the similar process page for good articles, see Wikipedia:Good article nominations.
Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page.
This star, with one point broken, indicates that an article is a candidate on this page.
This star, with one point broken, indicates that an article is a candidate on this 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, David Fuchs and FrB.TG—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:

  • actionable objections have not been resolved;
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached;
  • insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met; or
  • a nomination is unprepared.

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  Done and  Not done slow down the page load time, and complex templates can lead to errors in the FAC archives. For technical reasons, templates that are acceptable are {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}}, used to hide offtopic discussions, and templates such as {{green}} that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples without altering fonts. Other templates such as {{done}}, {{not done}}, {{tq}}, {{tq2}}, and {{xt}}, may be removed.

An editor is normally allowed to be the sole nominator of one article at a time, but two nominations are allowed if the editor is a co-nominator on at least one of them. An editor may ask the approval of the coordinators to add a second sole nomination after the first has gained significant support. 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 {{FAC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates {{Article history}}.

Table of Contents – This page: Purge cache

Shortcut

Featured content:

Featured article candidates (FAC):

Featured article review (FAR):

Today's featured article (TFA):

Featured article tools:

Nominating

[edit]

Commenting, etc

[edit]


FACs needing feedback
view • edit
Independence Day (Nigeria) Review it now


Shortcut

Nominations

[edit]

Gagged (EP)

[edit]
Nominator(s): Aoba47 (talk) 01:04, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about an extended play (EP) by American drag queen Violet Chachki. Released shortly after Violet won the seventh season of the reality competition series RuPaul's Drag Race, Gagged is an industrial and electronic dance EP with lyrics about sex, confidence, and gender expression, identity, and norms.

I created this article in 2016, and in the same year, it passed a GAN review (and thank you to @IndianBio: for the review). I have completely rewritten this article since then, and I had briefly put it up for a peer review (and thank you to @Arconning: for their help there). I have revisited this article largely out of a sense of nostalgia, as I created it during my first year as a Wikipedia editor. I hope that you enjoy reading through it, and thank you in advance for any help. Aoba47 (talk) 01:04, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aesthetics

[edit]
Nominator(s): Phlsph7 (talk) 14:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aesthetics is the branch of philosophy that studies beauty, taste, and art. It examines what makes something aesthetically valuable and how to interpret the meaning of artworks. This is a level 3 vital article with over 500.000 page views last year. Thanks to Aza24 for their in-depth GA review and to Johnbod for the helpful peer review. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I notice you don't mention the peer review! Johnbod (talk) 14:58, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I fixed it. I got the impression from your comments that you did not want to be further involved in the process. However, I would appreciate more feedback. Phlsph7 (talk) 15:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from BorgQueen

[edit]
  • Nice work. I would like to raise one point, for now, regarding the See also section. MOS:SEEALSO states: Editors should provide a brief annotation when a link's relevance is not immediately apparent, when the meaning of the term may not be generally known, or when the term is ambiguous. […] If the linked article has a short description then you can use {{Annotated link}} to automatically generate an annotation. One of the links in that section of your nominated article, Theosophy and visual arts, appears to require such an annotation, as Theosophy is not a subject likely to be familiar to most readers and the topic is not mentioned or explained in the article body. In addition, could you please outline your rationale for its inclusion in the See also section? Thank you. BorgQueen (talk) 16:21, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hi BorgQueen and thanks for your feedback! I'm not sure that there is a good rationale for including this link so I removed it. I found ways to include most of the other see-also links somewhere in the article text. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the Medieval subsection of the History section, the image caption Al-Farabi envisioned beauty as a divine attribute of Allah. is potentially ambiguous, as it is not clear whether the image depicts Al-Farabi himself or an allegorical representation of the "divine attribute" mentioned. (At first glance, I took it to be the latter.) The caption could be revised to clarify that the image portrays Al-Farabi, and that it is only an artistic impression (likely one of those fictitious woodcut portraits popular in early modern Europe, I suppose). BorgQueen (talk) 10:20, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I adjusted the caption. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:57, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the Definition section: The term aesthetics was coined by the German philosopher Alexander Baumgarten in 1735, initially defined as the study of sensibility or sensations of beautiful objects. It would be more technically precise to state that Alexander Baumgarten coined the German term Ästhetik. While the following passages do note that the term was later introduced into English through translation, the current wording may momentarily give the impression that Baumgarten somehow coined the English word itself. BorgQueen (talk) 14:35, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure that he used the spelling "Ästhetik" in 1735 since the corresponding book was written in Latin as far as I'm aware. I tried to come up with a formulation that leaves the precise spelling open. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Phlsph7 I stand corrected. I checked out Baumgarten's Meditationes philosophicae de Nunullis ad poema pertinentibus on the Internet Archive and located the relevant passage: § CXVI. Exsistente definitione, terminus definitus excogitari facile potest; graeci iam philosophi & patres inter αἰσθητα & νοητα sedulo semper distinxerunt, satisque apparet αἰσθητα iis non solis aequipollere sensualibus, quum absentia etiam sensa (ergo phantasmata) hoc nomine honoretur. Sint ergo νοητα cognoscenda facultate superiore obiectum Logices, αἰσθητα epistemes αἰσθητικης siue AESTHETICAE. So Baumgarten coined the Latin term aesthetica (In the quoted passage, you see it appear as aestheticae due to syntax; it's the genitive form of aesthetica.) Perhaps you could be more specific about the word now? BorgQueen (talk) 19:19, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the "Aesthetic experiences, attitude, and pleasure" subsection, third paragraph: A central aspect of aesthetic experience is the aesthetic attitude—a special way of observing or engaging with art and nature. This attitude involves a form of pure appreciation of perceptual qualities detached from personal desires and practical concerns. It is disinterested in this sense by engaging with an object for its own sake without ulterior motives or practical consequences. The word "disinterested" is currently linked to Aesthetic distance, which seems to contravene MOS:EGG, as it hides the actual concept under a (somewhat) unexpected link. It would be preferable to rephrase so that "Aesthetic distance" is explicitly mentioned and linked by name, I believe. BorgQueen (talk) 17:04, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed the link instead since "disinterested" is the standard term in this context but "aesthetic distance" isn't. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:37, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
Basic concepts
  • “Aesthetic properties of an object are features that shape its appeal...” → “Aesthetic properties are features of an object that shape its appeal"

One more for the time being. MSincccc (talk) 10:38, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reformulated. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:45, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Basic concepts (continued)

MSincccc (talk) 14:20, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Celestica (song)

[edit]
Nominator(s): Skyshiftertalk 01:22, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"Celestica" was the first Crystal Castles song to differ from their usual aggressive noisy sound. It is definitely one of the most, if not the most beautifully sounding track by the band, and also a fan favorite. It is also one of the best songs of all time in my very non-biased opinion. Skyshiftertalk 01:22, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

[edit]

Will review this sometime this week. The song has a nice cover by the way. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 13:09, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Despre tine

[edit]
Nominator(s): Cartoon network freak (talk) 22:14, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the 2003 song "Despre tine" by Moldovan band O-Zone. Reissued in Europe in 2004 after the massive international success of "Dragostea din tei", it managed to chart within the top 10 in several countries. The article is well-written and well-sourced, modelled after the FA "Dragostea din tei". It is a topic that sits close to my heart because of its showcase of Romanian language. Feel free to leave feedback. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 22:14, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Skyshifter

[edit]
  • Image review pass, the only image in the article contains a valid free-use rationale.
  • Source review (quality-only, no spotcheck), is a pass for me. The article uses many non-English sources, however, they are all by well-established newspapers and magazines in their countries, some were already used in the "Dragostea din tei" FA.
  • The awards mentioned only in the lead should definitely be added to the body text.
  • There is a contradiction between note A ("the song opened on the Romanian Top 100 chart in October 2002") and the article ("the track debuted on the Romanian Top 100 chart in December 2002").
    • I also believe this is WP:OR, especially with the way it is written, and that the release date should be simplified to 2002 only.

Skyshiftertalk 01:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyshifter: Hi and thank you for your review. I have added the awards to the section "Commercial performance", which I renamed to "Reception". As for the release date—there was a mix-up between October and December. The correct month is, of course, December. I have fixed that in the article. I think it is okay to use that as an approximation for the song's release date, just like it was used in "Dragostea din tei". Let me know what your thoughts are. Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 10:14, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

[edit]

Will review this tomorrow or in the following days. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:57, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yugoslavism

[edit]
Nominator(s): Tomobe03 (talk) 19:07, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the ideology that had a central role in establishment of Yugoslavia as well as the country's political circumstances in the 20th century. It took several main forms that were predominant at different times. Tomobe03 (talk) 19:07, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from BorgQueen

[edit]
  • Such extensive work! Just one thing for now — MOS:SEEALSO states: Editors should provide a brief annotation when a link's relevance is not immediately apparent, when the meaning of the term may not be generally known, or when the term is ambiguous. […] If the linked article has a short description then you can use {{Annotated link}} to automatically generate an annotation. BorgQueen (talk) 19:22, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Why so many lead images?
  • File:KongressfallofAH.jpg: source link is dead, needs a US tag
  • File:Izjav1.jpg: source link is dead. Ditto File:Proglašenje_Vidovdanskog_ustava_1921.jpg
  • File:Ustav46.png: source link is dead, and why is this believed to be in the public domain?
  • File:Josip_Vidmar_govori_na_II._zasedanju_AVNOJ_v_Jajcu.jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published?
  • File:Ljudevit_Gaj_(Knjižnica_Gajeva_1875).png needs a US tag. Ditto File:Илија_Гарашанин.jpg, File:Edvard_Kardelj_(5).jpg
  • File:Вук_Стефановић_Караџић.око_1850..jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published? Ditto File:Orjuna_v_Celju.jpg, File:Ivan_Meštrovic.jpg, File:Josip_Broz_Tito_uniform_portrait.jpg, File:Aleksandar_Ranković_(1).jpg
  • File:Trialisticki_zemljevid_Bec_1905_Henrik_Hanau.jpg needs a US tag and author date of death. Ditto File:NikolaPasic--balkancockpitpol00pric_0191.png, File:Vladko_Maček.jpg, File:Prince_Paul_of_Yugoslavia.jpg
  • File:Gavrilo_Princip_assassinates_Franz_Ferdinand.jpg needs a US tag and more specific source, and if the author is unknown how do we know they died over 70 years ago?
  • File:Ante_Trumbić_(2).jpg: why is this believed to be PD in Croatia and what is its status in the US? Ditto File:Proglašenje_raskida_veza_s_Austro-Ugarskom.jpg
  • File:Svetozar_Pribićević_(1).jpg needs a US tag. Ditto File:Ilustrovane_Novosti_15-12-1918.png
  • File:Stjepan-Radic.png: when and where was this first published and what is its status in its country of origin?
  • File:Kralj_aleksandar1.jpg needs a source to verify its status
  • File:Pan-Slavic_postcard_"Dědictví_otců,_zachovej_nám,_Pane".jpg: what is the status of this work in the US?

Oppose pending significant image cleanup. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:34, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Misti

[edit]
Nominator(s): Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully second time's the charm. Misti is one of the more notable volcanoes of Peru, towering high and close above the city of Arequipa. It hasn't featured much historical activity but future eruptions could be a threat to the city of Arequipa. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:19, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from BorgQueen

[edit]
  • Mummies section: The mummies were of children, mostly boys around six years old.[337] They included infants and children, which were sometimes buried one on top of the other.[338] — 1. You say "children" twice here: First as "the mummies were of children", then again "included infants and children". It sounds repetitive. 2. The mummies were children, and infants are a subset of children. Saying "infants and children" implies infants are not children, which is inaccurate. I suggest: The mummies were of children, mostly boys around six years old, though some infants were also found. In some cases, the bodies were buried one on top of another. BorgQueen (talk) 14:43, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Rewrote this a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:17, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Human geography subsection: Italian geographer Gustavo Cumin [it] in 1925 noted that three small man-made structures in the crater were known since 1677 AD, but noted that their origin was unknown. — 1. "noted" appears twice in quick succession, which sounds repetitive. 2. Tense issue; "the crater were known since 1677 AD" should be "the crater had been known since 1677 AD". I suggest: Italian geographer Gustavo Cumin [it] in 1925 noted that three small man-made structures in the crater had been known since 1677, though their origin remained unknown. BorgQueen (talk) 09:31, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jo-Jo Eumerus In addition, I don't think "AD" is needed after 1677 in this sentence, since "in 1925" at the beginning already makes it clear that the reference is to the past — i.e. it's obvious that 1677 refers to a year. BorgQueen (talk) 09:41, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the opening sentence of the Regional setting subsection: Off the western coast of Peru, the Nazca Plate subducts (goes under) under South America at a rate of 5–6 centimetres per year (2.0–2.4 in/year). — The parenthetical gloss creates awkward repetition ("under […] under"). If you're concerned that "subducts" may be too technical a term, you might consider rephrasing it for smoother readability—perhaps along the lines of: subducts beneath (that is, moves under) South America, to avoid redundancy. BorgQueen (talk) 14:01, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - pass

[edit]

Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, not much to add since the image review of the last nomination: there seem to be no significant image-relevant changes to the article. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:45, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Killing of Meredith Hunter

[edit]
Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 18:47, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Altamont Free Concert has been called the worst day in rock history, the end of the sixties, the event that killed hippydom and all sorts of other hyperbole. It was certainly an unpleasant experience for many, particularly those near the front who came within pool-cue swinging distance of the Hells Angels who acted like the violent thugs they are. The end result was the death of a man who was needlessly killed, even though his drug-addled brain had caused him to pull a revolver and thereby put potential death high on the agenda. This article has been through a complete rewrite recently and much gratitude goes to Ssilvers and Wehwalt for their copyedits and Americanisation of my prose. It's also gone through PR, where thanks go to Tim riley for his thoughts. – SchroCat (talk) 18:47, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

I struggle for words to express how tiresome the people and events are in this article, and God knows why anyone would want to read or write about them, but after a third, reluctant, perusal I find nothing to which to object in the writing – the prose, balance, neutrality and comprehensiveness seem fine to me and the page is surprisingly well illustrated. I think the article meets all the FA criteria. So supporting. Tim riley talk 19:11, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case

[edit]

I will, as usual, be printing out a copy, going over it with a red pen and doing a copyedit since I don't feel an article should fail a chance at recognition for easily correctable copy issues. After that I will be back with my thoughts. Daniel Case (talk) 21:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Daniel Case, please stop. What you are doing is far outside any reasonable definition of an FAC review. You are not ‘reviewing’ this article: you are rewriting it along the lines of your personal preferences. I do not consider much of what you are doing as improvements. Different, certainly, but not improvements. I will be unpicking many of the changes you’ve made while ensuring that any definite improvements or corrections are retained. - SchroCat (talk) 06:03, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I actually have done less than I had on my hard copy. I made no substantive changes, just improved the flow, made what I have edited less wordy than it was, and brought it into compliance with the MOS where it was not (and in some places I haven't reached yet, it still isn't). Daniel Case (talk) 06:08, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If or where the article breaches the MOS, please highlight those points here. You have made several inappropriate changes which I will now have to go back and change, as well as fixing the errors you have included. Either way, please feel free to point out on this page what you consider to be breaches of the MOS. - SchroCat (talk) 06:12, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The time to have asked me to do this would have been when I indicated my intention to do the copy edit; usually most editors have no problem leaving to their . Several days went by before I actually started. I actually rather prefer to do it in article rather than fill this page with an impossibly long punch list of fairly trivial things to change. And doing that in reviews has sometimes been taken as provocative.

Since I haven't actually finished my copy edit, if you are still willing I would be happy to list the remaining changes I saw as necessary or desirable. Daniel Case (talk) 18:08, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alright then, if that's the way you feel about this, I will just have to come right out and say it:

I cannot support this article for FA at this time, and I would be saying this even if the nominator had let me complete this copy edit. This outburst only further confirms the serious reservations I had as I read through it. Its problems run deeper than the prose. I would not even support this as a GA in its present form.

I note that it was nominated after only a regular peer review session (not even the FAC preparation peer review which exists for exactly this reason), bypassing the usual path here of a GA nomination. True, there is no requirement that featured articles be GAs first, and sometimes such articles do meet with this page's approval, but even a brief perusal of other nominations here will show that is a very common path. And for good reason: If we are going to put the gold star in the upper right, telling readers that this among the best work the community can produce, an article benefits greatly from fine-toothed comb review by at least one other editor before it gets here. This article clearly did not get this, and if we put it on the Main Page in this form it would likely result in at least a few readers asking for their donations to be returned.

Indeed, in this case, the minimal review preceding this nomination may actually have hurt the article: One peer reviewer practically mandated that the article write out the full names of the bands and (it seems) the Hells Angels each and every time they were mentioned, because that's apparently what you do in formal writing.

Huh? There is no support for this dictum in the MOS (and I have not found any other widely used style manual that so counsels). In many of our other articles about, or regularly mentioning bands with names longer than one word, we have had no problem using the shorter form of the band's (or organization's) name—the Stones, the Dead, the Angels. The respective articles about those bands and the Angels all use those forms a couple of times at least (and I think at least the article on the Stones is a GA). Even this article slips up, using "the Dead" once and "the Angels" a few times, telling you it was never seriously copyedited, because a good copyedit at a lower level of review would have flagged this inconsistency pretty quickly.

I just do not see the logic of such Snodgrassery. To me using shorter forms of band names on second reference is no different than using someone's last name only. The peer reviewer who demanded this change likened it to not using shorthand for work titles on second reference. But that comparison is inapt, as work titles will be used much less often in a context like this than names of people or groups of people.

The result of this devotion to some ancient religion is an article that is far too challenging to most readers than it has to be. I put the text into Word and got a Flesch-Kincaid reading ease score of about 54%, putting it in the "fairly difficult to read" bracket. Wikipedia featured articles should not be there. In addition to this belabored endless reuse of the band's full names, there is the regular repetition of information a reader should be expected to know (i.e., "at the event", "at the concert", long after we've established that), a preference for long clauses where an appositive phrase is all that's necessary, and an all-too-frequent tendency to put complex sentences on both sides of a semicolon. Among other issues which I was unable to address (OK, one: What the hell is it with the scare quotes around "chapters" as the term for local Angels' organizations? This is hardly some new word; it's been used for local branches of larger organizations of all types for quite some time—fraternities and sororities, and even the Wikimedia Foundation, I don't think most readers will find its use in that context strange).

Honestly, on the whole this article could have been more smoothly written by an LLM.

Because this had been brought up by the peer reviewer, who is also one of the reviewers here, I decided it was better not to change this during the copy edit and instead perhaps discuss it here first. I can see now that that decision, while generally against the interests of readable English prose, was well taken.

But as I said above it isn't just the prose. It is perhaps inevitable given that this article has to decide how much it needs to restate that is also in the Altamont article, but there are structural problems here as well that might be related to that:

I reject and refute pretty much all the above. It seems to have been written only to insult, not to try and improve the article. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the second graf of the intro, we find out only in the last sentence, by implication, that there was other violence at the concert besides Hunter's death (indeed, later in the body we read that three other people died at Altamont. Were any of those deaths the result of Angel violence? It would be useful to know). Wouldn't it be better if we read about that violence before we read that it made the Dead pull out of the show?
This is an article about Hunter's death. There is a separate article about the concert where more general information should be located. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then it's not relevant at all in the intro that the Dead decided to cancel their set because of the violence. Daniel Case (talk) 18:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Utter nonsense - you're clutching at straws with this sort of response and wasting people's time. I think it best if you stop now. - SchroCat (talk) 18:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The fact that Hunter was black is a) obvious from his picture right next to the graf and b) sounds gratuitously inserted where it is. It would be better to mention it where it does become relevant, further down when it is noted that the Angels seemed particularly to have it in for black concertgoers.
Obvious? Lucky you, with the eyesight to see the images. It's not clear to all, and it's not gratuitously mentioned. It was a (very likely) a factor in the events. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, you have a point, but the accessibility issue there can easily be handled with alt text; that's why we have that capability. And as I said I agree it's relevant, but better mentioned further down where the reason for the relevancy is stated in the article. If readers have skipped over the fact that Hunter was black in that sentence, then the later note about the racial bias in the Angels' violence seems completely irrelevant to the article

This is why smooth flowing text is important ... if, God forbid, we have to make readers go back up in the article to deduce the relevance of some information, it should be easy to do. Daniel Case (talk) 18:20, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your opinion is noted. - SchroCat (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Given that both men are long dead and the specifics of Hunter and Passaro's criminal records do not seem to be relevant to what happened at Altamont, per summary style I don't think it's necessary to give a blow-by-blow on each offense they committed, when they committed it, and how it was disposed. We can just say that both of them through their teens had criminal records that included convictions for violent offenses, and in Hunter's case that he was involved in the drug trade and used as well, since he was on speed at Altamont.
I disagree. Both sets of records are relevant. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
To reiterate what I said, I do not dispute that the fact that both of them had criminal records is relevant. I just don't see the necessity for all that specific information. This sort of overspecificity (biocruft, if you will) often occurs when editors want to demonstrate that they did the research. But the mere existence of a fact in a source does not mean it needs to be included in the article. Daniel Case (talk) 18:24, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinion is noted. - SchroCat (talk) 18:38, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • We should be clear on the Hells Angels being regarded as a social problem at that time. I know they are seen that way by law enforcement now as well, but they were a newer phenomenon then and this narrative is taking place in the late 1960s.

    Also, we read that the Angels were selling 50,000 hits of acid a year by ... 1965? Are we sure about this? History of LSD and what I know about this period suggests that interest in LSD only took off in 1966, and didn't become a popular street drug until the Summer of Love the following year.

Take it up with the sources, which this reflects. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources can and do make mistakes, too—I see it as quite possible that there was a typo in the source that someone doing copyediting for the publisher didn't catch. Just because a source is reliable on one topic does not mean it's reliable for everything not directly related to that topic, especially things it mentions in passing. Our sources do not come down to us on stone tablets from the top of Mount Sinai; they are as fallible as any other human effort. I would want to look at some reliable sources on the history of LSD and/or the Hells Angels specifically to make sure that this is true ... for one thing, LSD didn't become illegal in most of the US until 1966, so there would have been no street market.

And in any event, since you've said that the article is about Hunter's death and that determines what's relevant for inclusion, just what does the amount of LSD sold by the Hells Angels on the streets of San Francisco have to do with the death of a guy four years later and 50 miles away? No one, no source, says drug sales had anything to do with Hunter's death. Daniel Case (talk) 18:39, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the process of truncating the two short grafs on Passaro (and likely oombining them into one once we get rid of the exact details of his criminal history), we should put the part about his misspent youth first. As it is it's like well, OK, now I'm not surprised he didn't go to law school.

    And when the Gypsy Jokers got patched over into the Hells Angels, where was the "local" chapter they became part of? In San Jose? Was there a San Jose chapter? This will become important later on.

There isn't going to be any truncating. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That obstreperousness aside, you did not respond to anything else I said. Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I should give the article some credit for at least telling me something I didn't already know, about the Stones' financial woes in the years under Klein leading them to do the high-priced tour which led to the media guilting them into winding it all up with a free concert. That explains some things.
  • Under "concert violence", we read "As had happened at previous festivals ..." This suggests something was cut from the article at some point in the past that is being referred to here, and I want to know more. I suspect what's being referred to are the many smaller outdoor rock festivals prior to Woodstock where the media covering them were pleasantly surprised that so many people attended an event with so little violence and even cleaning up after themselves. You know, like the ones the Dead hosted in San Francisco that led them to recommend the Angels as security.
No, nothing was cut. Your desire to know more is all well and good, but falls outside the lines of this article. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
But then change the wording and/or find sources that explain what "previous festivals" you're talking about (there are some general histories of late '60s rock festivals, I think). Because otherwise I won't be the only person asking this question. Daniel Case (talk) 18:48, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Violence began once the Hells Angels arrived ..." When during the day was this? They weren't there before anyone was let into the venue?
Let into a large open area in the middle of no-where? Again, this is per the sources. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, to say that "violence began once the Hells Angels arrived" implies that other people were already there to be on the receiving end of that violence.

I'm beginning to see a pattern here. For my last several points, you have run to hide behind the skirts of your sources. And I'm not questioning their reliability. But editing Wikipedia is not merely a matter of using reliable sources and transcribing or paraphrasing what they say. Even then we have to pick and choose (that's why we call it editing). We have to, as I have said, remember that even reliable sources can be mistaken (the "Sympathy for the Devil" thing, which has been bound up with this story for years, came about because Rolling Stone made some mistakes in its initial reporting). We cannot and do not use them uncritically. We have to stand back from what we've written and think, how does this sound/look to someone who hasn't read the sources I have and will be learning about this through what I've written? Or get someone else to do it, which is why multiple reviews before nominating an article for FA are strongly advised.

When other editors nominating articles for FA have been questioned on this sort of thing, they have generally been very flexible about it, because they understand that just because the source has a problem does not mean the article has to have the same problem. Those who insisted reviewers defer to their sources have not seen their articles promoted. Daniel Case (talk) 19:03, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • I have always had some problems with this account of Marty Balin being knocked unconscious, basically because as we now know, losing consciousness after any sort of head trauma is a pretty serious thing. Balin survived this not only once but twice? Has anyone verified that he actually lost consciousness? To me it's more likely that he was just incapacitated, but still conscious enough to do some damn fool thing like go back to the guy who knocked him out for more. I bet he was down, both times, but not out. It would be worth looking to see what, if anything, Balin has ever said if anyone's asked him about this. I know it's probably in the sources but maybe this is one of those times we need to take it with a grain of salt.
I'm delighted you've taken time out of your busy career as a medical specialist to share these thoughts, but again, this is per the multiple reliable sources with whom you should be arguing. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sarcasm isn't helpful for you at this point. And read what I wrote above if you haven't already. The sources you cite do not, it seems to me, include anyone who actually themselves eyewitnessed this.

And we can write around this. We don't have to use the word "unconscious" just because the sources do. Daniel Case (talk) 19:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Was it legal for Hunter to be carrying at the time? With his record?
Not covered in the sources. (Either way, it's not the only illegal thing that happened that day). - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It probably was legal, I guess, otherwise it would have been mentioned in other accounts. Just wondering. Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Maybe in an endnote we should note the common misconception that Hunter was killed while the Stones were playing "Sympathy for the Devil" (Fun fact: I have actually worked stagefront security at a Stones concert (almost 20 years later) when they played that song, leading to all of us making random jokes to each other about how we had to beat someone in the audience to death with weighted pool cues) instead of "Under My Thumb".
No. We state what did happen: that is more than enough. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are reliable sources for that belief having existed, and since it is part of the legacy of the killing, which the intro promises us it will discuss, I'd include it. But, it is less commonly heard as time (ahem) goes by. Daniel Case (talk) 19:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now this is where the chapters thing comes in. IIRC, one of the many things that led to this all going so far south was that, once the concert was moved to Altamont, territorial rules within the Angels meant that the Oakland chapter, rather than the San Francisco chapter with whom the Dead and their fans were more familiar, had to handle security. And the Oakland chapter were more ruffians, more inclined to look for opportunities to mix things up, and less into the whole hippy scene. There is a source somewhere that mentions this, but I do not see anything about this in the article beyond just a mention of the Oakland chapter being in charge.

    But what I do see are mentions about different chapters of the Angels—San Francisco, Los Angeles, maybe San Jose per my speculation above—being involved. So can we get some clarity on this?

Finally, an actual question that may be of benefit. I will look into it. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you ... Daniel Case (talk) 19:15, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The intro talks about the incident as "the end of the sixties" but there's nothing in the body about why. Maybe that should properly be in the Altamont article, especially if a source can be found that puts Altamont in the context of the violence related at least tangentially to the anti-war movement and the counterculture—the murder of Jeffrey R. MacDonald's wife and daughters, the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion, Kent State and Jackson State, the Manson Family trial, the Sterling Hall bombing—over the next few months.
Aside from it being December 1969, and quite literally at the end of the 60s, this is a point more for the concert article. - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Then let's not say that in the intro. Daniel Case (talk) 19:16, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lastly, I am not sure that "American Pie" lyric is really appropriate for this article since it doesn't specifically allude to Hunter's death.
It does, as we (and the sources) state - SchroCat (talk) 08:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Again, falling back on "the sources". I wouldn't argue that those lyrics aren't alluding to Altamont generally—it alludes to the Angels, the Stones and the Dead (through song titles) and even one scene near the end of Gimme Shelter where the film cuts between Jagger prancing around on stage and one of the Angels nearby watching him who looks like he's barely keeping himself from going onstage to beat Jagger up. But nothing in them could be construed as being about Hunter's death. Per your own argument, I think that passage is better consigned to the main Altamont article. Daniel Case (talk) 19:28, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, then, there's really no point in continuing this aspect of the discussion. Daniel Case (talk) 17:38, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing these latter issues would doubtless improve the article. But between them and the prose I do not think they can be addressed anytime soon, and so I oppose this as an FA. Daniel Case (talk) 07:54, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What a lot of nonsense. You seem to have a problem that a computer-driven "score" doesn't match what you expect of an article, or that this didn't go through GA. (As to the complaint it "the FAC preparation peer review", I [call https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Template:FAC_peer_review_sidebar&diff=prev&oldid=1319215742 bullshit]). Neither of those are requirements or even beneficial. I had to revert a lot of your changes (and please learn the difference between a reviewer and writer) because they weren't very good. MOS breaches, errors and problems all introduced. Maybe if you'd have tried to engage here it would have been better for everyone, but this oppose after I asked you to stop does come across as some form of fit of pique, with complaints about factual events above that run counter to multiple reliable sources. - SchroCat (talk) 08:03, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We are much better without the edits, some of them semi-literate, User:Daniel Case wishes to inflict on the article. I don't suggest his comments should be treated with what the late George Brown called "total ignoral", but on the whole the changes have not been beneficial. Tim riley talk 15:44, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I said, I was going to oppose anyway for all the issues I bulleted, after I was done with the prose. Since you asked me to stop, I honored your request and went ahead with what I was going to say anyway. I am not surprised that you see it as reactive, but that does not change the fact that I see many very serious issues. (and yes, I see that you did list at that peer review. I apologize for the mistapprehension; the archived version on the article talk page does not specify that it was so reviewed. Perhaps that change should be made in the future). Daniel Case (talk) 17:56, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The "issues" you've raised are mostly hogwash. There's one I will be looking into, but the rest have all been answered and refuted. Article talk pages do not tend to say they were listed on the FAC peer review list - I've never seen that on any of the FAs I've reviewed, nor have I added it to the talk pages of articles I have taken through the process - and it's not a practice I'll be taking up either. - SchroCat (talk) 18:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would amend that to "have attempted to refute" or "responded to". In a couple of cases I changed my mind. Not many. Daniel Case (talk) 19:18, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don’t intend to respond to any more of the nonsense here. It’s second rate (to put it kindly), patronising and entirely lacking in sense or any good faith. - SchroCat (talk) 19:17, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If you think this was bad, I can assure that if this article, as is, were to make the Main Page, the article's edit history and talk page would be even more discomfiting to you. What would you do then? How many toys would be on the floor?

    I did this in good faith. An article nominated for FA may not make it, but the process will result in improvements to the article regardless. I assume the assumption of good faith, but it seems to me that you have problems there too. Your attitude towards anyone else editing the article is also showing signs of ownership as well.

    When we nominate articles for GA or FA, we do so knowing it is possible other editors, whom we may not ever have dealt with, will review our work and they may find serious fault with it. If an editor can't handle that possibility, and deal with it by assuming that criticism was meant in good faith and perhaps the reviewer has a point, then they should not nominate articles for those recognitions. Daniel Case (talk) 19:41, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This disagreement is very long. Daniel Case, would you please, as briefly as possible, list the three most important remaining changes you would make in the article? Thanks. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:39, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
Thanks Nikkimaria; a couple of questions above. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 07:59, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, rationales updated and Stones image swapped. Please let me know if I've missed anything or done something else wrong. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 08:49, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HAL

[edit]
  • "Of Italian extraction," sounds too much like a 'British-ism'
  • "After his father left the family home in 1952, Hunter, who was black, was raised by his mother and his sister, Dixie, who was eight years older than him." is a little choppy, with five commas
  • Is there a year for when the Oakland chapter was formed?
Not that I could see on a very quick check, but it's a bit too tangential
Found it and added it, as it’s only a few words. - SchroCat (talk) 15:01, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • maybe shorten "as being closely related" -> "as closely related"
  • "hanging around" - is there something more encyclopedic, e.g. "socializing"
  • Does note b contain the inflated prices?
  • "including some who sold a tainted batch of LSD (acid)" - I would move '(acid)' to the first use of 'LSD'. Or remove it entirely.
  • "took with him" -> "brought"
  • "and he lay dying" -> "as he lay dying"?
  • "As he was on bail at the time" - bail for what?
  • "as one of the witnesses" -> "as a witness"

That's all I got. ~ HAL333 14:32, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks HAL333. All sorted, bar one. Thanks for your thoughts. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:27, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Pbritti

[edit]

I'll leave a few comments but I don’t know if they'll add up to a complete review. Looks like a great article. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why is revolver described as a .22 Smith & Wesson and linked to .32 S&W? It's almost impossible that the revolver involved was in an archaic cartridge that would've necessitated someone to carry an antique. It's far more likely that this was a .22 caliber, probably in the ubiquitous .22 long rifle. If the caliber is uncertain but the manufacture is known, defer to just referring to it as a "Smith & Wesson revolver".
    Nice spot, thank you! Tweaked to ".22 Smith & Wesson" to avoid further linking problems. Cheers - SchroCat (talk)
  • If "Native American" refers to the indigenous peoples of the United States, each word is always capitalized. If this refers to someone born in the US but not of indigenous descent, then a different term is preferable.
    I didn't know that - thank you. Now capitalised. - SchroCat (talk) 16:32, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You can thank a glance at my copy of a guidebook from the United South and Eastern Tribes for a quick sanity check on that. ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:40, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think you removed a reference to Passaro being of "Italian extraction" (which, if it makes you feel better, is how my dad has always referred to our family). As such, I think it's probably worthwhile describing him as white, thereby assisting the reader in understanding some of the racial elements at the trial.
    OK, added that in the same sort of position as we describe Hunter. - SchroCat (talk)
  • Excellent fixes–love when I'm on the project at the same time as the person on the other end! I was about to make sure you had the public domain video from the LOC–you do! I also checked the ISBNs to ensure the books are properly link–all good there. I have looked over the article enough for me to feel confident in saying that I support its promotion. Love an article that is simply very good. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Pbritti! That's very kind of you. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 17:02, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2025 World Figure Skating Championships

[edit]
Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:10, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2022 World Figure Skating Championships is well on its way to Featured Article. This is the most recent event, and I was lucky enough to attend in person. The competition results are all sourced and documented, the tables are properly formatted, the background and history have been extensively re-written, the sources are properly formatted and archived where possible, and relevant photographs are used. Please let me know if you have any suggestions or comments, and I look forward to any constructive input. Bgsu98 (Talk) 16:10, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder

[edit]

Comments

[edit]
  • The lead seems a bit short. Is there more that can be added to it?
  • "the loss of friends and training partners who had died on American Airlines Flight 5342" - this is a bit of an Easter Egg link as it isn't immediately clear that it refers to the same crash as the one mentioned in the previous paragraph
  • Okay, I clarified in the earlier paragraph that it was American Airlines Flight 5342 that was downed in the crash.
  • "Yuma Kagiyama of Japan entered the World Championships after a shocking loss to Cha Jun-hwan of South Korea at the 2025 Asian Winter Games" => "Yuma Kagiyama of Japan entered the World Championships after a loss to Cha Jun-hwan of South Korea at the 2025 Asian Winter Games which was considered shocking by [whoever]"
  • Removed "shocking" altogether. This whole section was originally written by someone else and read like it came straight from a fan blog. I tried to clean it up.
  • "Additionally, Shaidorov became the first skater to land a difficult triple Axel-quadruple toe loop jump combination earlier in the season" => "Additionally, Shaidorov had become the first skater to land a difficult triple Axel-quadruple toe loop jump combination earlier in the season"
  • Done.
  • "she expressed her challenges and enjoyments of returning to competitive skating" - this doesn't really work grammatically. I would suggest "she expressed the challenges she had faced and the enjoyment she had experienced in returning to competitive skating"
  • I reworded it.
  • That's what I got as far as the end of section 1.3. I'll return to look at some more later..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:03, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "while winning the 2024 Skate Canada International, they had lost at the 2024 Finlandia Trophy to Fear and Gibson." => "although they won the 2024 Skate Canada International, they had lost at the 2024 Finlandia Trophy to Fear and Gibson."
  • "with a shocking loss to Fear and Gibson" - same comment as above - who considered in shocking?
  • "moved on to the free skating component [singular], which were [plural]"
  • "of which one has to be a twist lift" => "of which one had to be a twist lift"
  • "His short program became the highest scoring of his career.[5] His short program featured" => "His short program became the highest scoring of his career.[5] It featured" (avoids starting two consecutive sentences with the same three words)
  • "A fall on his quadruple Salchow, as well as a flawed triple Axel, dropped him to tenth place in the free skate, but finished overall with the bronze medal" => "A fall on his quadruple Salchow, as well as a flawed triple Axel, dropped him to tenth place in the free skate, but he finished overall with the bronze medal"
  • "Her free skate to Donna Summer's "MacArthur Park" received a standing ovation from the audience, set another personal best score, with a shocked Liu exclaiming "What the hell?" as she finished her program and received her scores" => "Her free skate to Donna Summer's "MacArthur Park" received a standing ovation from the audience and set another personal best score, with a shocked Liu exclaiming "What the hell?" as she finished her program and received her scores"
  • "and didn't skate as close together" => "and did not skate as close together"
  • That's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:17, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

User:ChrisTheDude: All of the above issues have been addressed. Let me know if you have anything else, and thank you! Bgsu98 (Talk) 07:22, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

2024 United States drone sightings

[edit]
Nominator(s): Anne drew (talk · contribs) 16:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the so called "New Jersey drone sightings", a fascinating recent event at the intersection of technology, social psychology, and national security. In late 2024, thousands of reports of "mysterious drones" flooded in, only for investigators and experts to conclude the phenomenon was largely caused by the misidentification of everyday aircraft and celestial objects.

As the topic is recent, it naturally lacks a deep well of scholarly sources, but the article is built upon the highest-quality sources currently available. The article itself is stable; the core events are firmly rooted in 2024, with an "Aftermath" section covering the subsequent fallout and legislative responses in 2025.

I received an extremely helpful GA review from Viriditas and a comprehensive peer review from Noleander, both of whom provided invaluable feedback to get it to this point. I am ready to address any and all further comments. It would be great if this could appear as Today's Featured Article in December to mark the one-year anniversary of the sightings, but one step at a time! Anne drew (talk · contribs) 16:42, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by from UC

[edit]

I intend to come back for a proper review later, but for now: Gatwick Airport in London. Although it's called "London Gatwick" as a marketing exercise, Gatwick is well outside London. UndercoverClassicist T·C 07:55, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch - thank you! Fixed. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 00:22, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Federal authorities have acknowledged these and other incidents both domestically and internationally: is this quite what is meant? What's the difference between acknowledging an event domestically and acknowledging it internationally?
  • We could do with some context on a few places and things. For example, Plant 42, a US Air Force facility in California -- it's not just a facility; it's a classified aircraft manufacturing plant. Similarly, most readers won't understand why NASA aircraft were involved at Langley Air Force Base, until they Google around to find that it's right next to a major NASA centre.
  • Related to this, we have a few short paragraphs which are also short on information. Take for example:

Unidentified drones were reported over US bases in the United Kingdom in November 2024, followed by sightings over Ramstein Air Base and arms factories in Germany in December 2024. Major General Patrick S. Ryder commented that while private drones periodically fly over military bases, most are not considered threats and do not affect operations.

Who is this guy? We've just talked about the US, Britain and Germany, so it's not obvious which country he's from, and Major General is a relatively junior rank in the grand scheme of things -- why do we have a pronouncement from him displayed so prominently? The answer becomes clear when you find out that he was the Pentagon press secretary at the time.
  • More generally on short paragraphs -- we have a lot of sections and sometimes it gets hard to see the logic and structure. We have a map in the lead which shows sightings across the United States, but very few states are named outside New Jersey (we don't mention, for example, that Camp Pendleton is in California, as is Vandenberg AFB). I think it would be clearer if paragraphs and sections could be closed up and the writing could give more sense of the threads through the story.
    • Thanks, this is valuable feedback. The article definitely appeared a bit fragmented with so many short sections and paragraphs. I've gone through and combined related paragraphs, removed unnecessary section headings, and kept things organized topically. I also added location information where it was missing. Please let me know if this addresses your concerns. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 19:14, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I spotted a couple of minor typos and grammatical errors reading through: see in particular MOS:GEOCOMMA.

I'll stop there for now -- it's an interesting topic and I'm enjoying the article, but I think the prose and organisation need a bit of work to bring it to FA level. UndercoverClassicist T·C 14:07, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • Captions could use editing for grammar
Thanks for the image review! I've added alt text and improved the captions. I removed that Boeing 747 image since it was only marginally relevant. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 14:31, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Noleander

[edit]
  • Alternate wording? By Christmas Eve, reports in northern New Jersey ... I suppose most readers of WP, of all religions, are aware that Xmas is near the end of the calendar year, but still it seems odd to mention a religious holiday instead of saying "late December" or "Dec 25th". Unless the sources tie the reduced sightings to Xmas (implying that they were falsehoods, and people got busy with Xmas celebrations, and were too busy to fabricate sightings) consider rewording.
  • Provocative phrase needs attribution ... TSA .. investigators concluded the so-called "swarms" were commercial jets executing S-shaped ... Use of "so-called" here requires special justification. Who used that phrase? The TSA? or the WP editor? If from TSA, probably "so called" should be in quotes. If WP editor, probably should be reworded or removed.
  • Another thing with that same sentence: ... TSA .. investigators concluded the so-called "swarms" were commercial jets executing S-shaped ... , "Swarms" is in quotes. This is the first occurance of that word in the article. I gather it is from the TSA report, but the context needs to be presented as either (a) The TSA is seriously calling them "swarms" as a legit/accurate descriptor; or (b) the people reporting the sightings were calling them "swarms", and the TSA is merely repeating that word (perhaps skeptically). In either case, the article should add words to help reader know who first used the word "swarm" and what the TSA thinks of the accuracy of that word.
  • "However" needs justification: RVCC security supervisor Brian Serge commented, "We never found out what the actual drones were." However, the TSA later released documents showing that three commercial aircraft approaching... Some readers may conclude that word "however" suggests that the statement by Serge was a lie (or he was ignorant) and was exposed by the TSA. Did Serge know about the commercial aircraft facts when he said "we never found out ..."? But maybe it is simply the WP editor indicating that there were two opposing stmts on the same event? Suggest removing "however"; or if keep it: clarify if Serge was being (deliberately?) corrected.
  • The Proposed Explanations section has several subsections, each one discussing a potential explanation. I'm not sure what the sequence of those subsections is. It seems like they should be either (a) chronological based on when they were first proposed. Or (b) in a descending series based on plausibility. Obviously we editors cannot perform original research and determine the measure of possibility, but since the sequence of sections is within our jurisdiction we should be able to sequence them in a way that puts the least likely or most irrelevant proposals near the bottom. Consider making the topmost explanations the normal drones and psychological explanations. Likewise, the bottom most proposed explanations would be the foreign drones and the nuclear materials.
    • That's fair. Currently it's arranged alphabetically, but organizing the sections by their support in the literature seems like a good approach aligned with WP:DUE. I've arranged it thusly: Misidentified objects (consensus expert view), Ordinary drones (one of the official explanations), Psychological and social explanations (second order explanation for the widespread reactions to routine aerial objects), Foreign drones (disputed explanation), and Nuclear material search (disfavoured, fringe explanation). Anne drew (talk · contribs) 16:49, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis

[edit]
Nominator(s): UndercoverClassicist T·C 22:12, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a (relatively) big hit in the field of archaeological theory, and an interesting snapshot of the science-loving processual trend in the archaeology of the 1970s and '80s. In 1970, a graduate student named Art Saxe came up with a set of eight ideas about how a society's funerary practices might tell us interesting things about its social organisation. Numbers one through seven were barely noticed, but the eighth was adopted by another young scholar, Lynne Goldstein, and turned into a sharp if controversial tool for reading the archaeological record. Essentially, Saxe and Goldstein argued that cemeteries are really about competition over resources, and a society's use of formal cemeteries is a good indication that people in that society are fighting over something.

This is probably the most technical article I've written, and certainly the most arcane I've taken to FAC. In a university course, its subject would probably be first encountered towards the end of undergraduate study, or in postgraduate work. Archaeological theory by its nature is not an everyday topic, and archaeological theoreticians are not known for being concise or comprehensible in their writing style. It's also the sort of topic that's rarely fully discussed in itself, which made some of the article quite tricky to pull together. It received an extremely helpful (and unwittingly consequential) Good Article nomination from Femke, and a PR (also extremely helpful) from Mike Christie and MSincccc. In both of these, a key item of discussion was the balance between detail and comprehensibility, with WP:MTAU and WP:ONEDOWN making several appearances. I think I've managed to thread the needle reasonably well, but quibbles and advice on improving accessibility would be most gratefully received. UndercoverClassicist T·C 22:12, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:Kerameikos,_Athens_-_51036694153.jpg should include an explicit tag for the original work
    • This one's a bit tricky. The gravestones in the image are replicas (plaster casts), and I can find no specific information on when they were made. The Cambridge University Cast Gallery mentions when a few of the originals were moved -- that the Dexileos stele in the image was "in situ until the Second World War" (so 1940 in Greece), for example, which makes it reasonably likely that the first cast was installed at the same time (though it may have been older: it was common for museums to use such casts in the early C20th). In that case it would probably be PD in Greece (as an anonymous work, copyright expires 70 years after publication) but I'm not sure that it would be in the United States (which would need it to have been PD in Greece in 1996, so made prior to 1926, which is possible but unproveable). Even then, we have no way of knowing that these plaster casts are the originals. That would point towards a swap -- unless we say that a plaster cast doesn't meet the US threshold of originality for a new copyright? UndercoverClassicist T·C 07:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If there is a PD original from which a replica was made, the replica is PD per commons:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_subject_matter#Replicas_of_PD_artworks. Is it known that the original is/was PD? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:55, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, yes — the originals are over 2000 years old! I’ll link that Commons page – unless there’s a nice template for this purpose? UndercoverClassicist T·C 08:18, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Now done. UndercoverClassicist T·C 19:34, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Flyby from RoySmith

[edit]

I'm not sure this is in-scope for FAC, but I'm wondering if "Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis" is a good title for the article. The problem is, it doesn't give any hint what the topic is. It could be a hypothesis about anything from biblical studies to quantum mechanics. But maybe that's just the nature of titles and I see we have lots like that, so take this for whatever it's worth. RoySmith (talk) 13:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps. I think the relevant policy here is WP:CONCISION: specifically The goal of concision is to balance brevity with sufficient information to identify the topic to a person familiar with the general subject area. (emphasis mine). So we could have e.g. "Saxe--Goldstein hypothesis (archaeological theory)", but that wouldn't be needed for someone familiar with the general subject area (archaeological theory?), and there's no other S-G hypothesis with which it might be confused. Without wishing to go all WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, we have plenty of existing FAs with potentially opaque titles: Weise's law, Greek case, Quine–Putnam indispensability argument and WINC (AM), for instance. Did you have a specific suggestion in mind? UndercoverClassicist T·C 13:32, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no better suggestion. As a wikipedian, it is my inalienable right to complain about something without actually having a clue how it could be improved :-) RoySmith (talk) 13:43, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
Lead

That's all that I have to say about the lead. More on the article later, if time permits. MSincccc (talk) 14:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prose (general)

An initial read which pointed out the following errors:

  • “Carla Antonnacio” → should be “Carla Antonaccio”
    • Misspelling of the archaeologist’s surname.
  • “Criticisms levelled by Morris” → in American English, it should be “leveled"
  • “(in particular) American archaeology” → stray parentheses; should be “particularly American archaeology” or “in particular American archaeology” (without both).

MSincccc (talk) 16:52, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MSincccc: done the two spelling fixes. Not sure about those two links -- they're general topics and the whole of (e.g.) ancient Rome isn't particularly relevant to the specific context of cemeteries and funerals. The passage is pretty dense with blue and I think we'd be in danger of overlinking. The parentheses are intentional rather than stray, and within normal usage in AmerE. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:17, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Application
  • “towards” → “toward”
  • “north-west Europe” → “northwest Europe”
Reception
  • In 2012, André Strauss wrote that the hypothesis was of limited interpretative value for Brazilian sites of the Archaic period, particularly due to the difficulty of precisely defining a "formal disposal area" within the terms of the prediction.
    • Use "interpretive" since the article is written in American English?
  • You could link to Stephen Shennan.
Bottom line
  • A thorough article and well presented. There isn't really much for me to post here except for a few stylistic revisions, which I'll leave as they are. Congratulations on another high-quality article (despite it being your most technical article yet). Support. MSincccc (talk) 17:50, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, MSincccc: done those four. UndercoverClassicist T·C 08:38, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Prose
  • "a middle-range theory is one which attempts…" → "a middle-range theory that attempts…"
  • "model archaeology upon the scientific method" → "model archaeology on the scientific method"
  • "centering the agency of material objects" → "centering on the agency of material objects"
"center" in this sense is intransitive and requires "on" to indicate what is being focused on.
  • "due both to cultural changes and to methodological difficulties with its study" → "because of both cultural changes and methodological difficulties with its study"
I leave this to you; in American English, "because of" is preferred over "due to" when indicating the cause of a situation.

A few more suggestions above after taking a further look at this article. Cheers. MSincccc (talk) 13:35, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi MSincccc -- I don't know if you saw Tim's review below, but most of the points you raise here are included and have been handled (one way or the other) there. I think all we really have left is the first, which I think would be a step in the wrong direction: it would turn a definition of an unfamiliar term into an opaque use of it. UndercoverClassicist T·C 14:15, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@UndercoverClassicist I hadn’t done so before, but I have now. Good luck with your nomination, and I’ll move on to other articles I’m currently working on. MSincccc (talk) 14:55, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

Booking a space for comments to come. I'm too punch-drunk after a first read-through to comment cogently just yet. Tim riley talk 12:36, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A few minor points, which don't affect my support:

  • "a body of theory which sought to bring archaeology closer" – as we're in AmE I'm not sure you have the same leeway as one has in BrE to use "which" interchangeably with "that" in a restrictive clause, here and later in the text. It doesn't bother me but I wonder what an American reviewer would think. I merely mention it.
  • "important but archaeologically invisible means of funerary differentiation" – I cannot work out what this means. A word of explanation of what might be both important and yet archaeologically invisible would be helpful
  • I noted "crucial" in the lead and main text, and it struck a slightly false note. I grant you that the Chambers Dictionary includes "important" as one of its definitions, but the OED calls this a trivial use. To me "crucial" indicates a crossroads where the path followed will be one of two options (crux, crucis anyone?). I think perhaps "essential" would be preferable.
  • "to model archaeology upon the scientific method" – this is the first of six instances of "upon" in the article, and I just wonder what "upon" has got that a plain "on" hasn't, apart from two extra letters.
  • "In 1981, Brown described the methods of Saxe and Binford" – I got lost during this sentence, and I think it would be clearer if you moved its last three words to follow "applying".
  • "alongside explanations centering the agency of material objects" – is there a preposition missing here – centering on the agency? I don't think I've ever seen the verb used transitively, as if meaning "giving centre stage to".
  • "due both to cultural changes and to methodological difficulties with its study" – I'm sure I've bored you before with my old-codgerly contention that "owing to" or "because of" is preferable to "due to" in such uses. Admittedly, using "due to" as a compound preposition is not taboo in AmE, but I am told by an American editor who knows of what he speaks, "Because of" is much better in AmE too".
  • In your bibliography it wouldn't, I think, do any harm to give Goldstein's and Kerber's theses their OCLCs (which according to WorldCat are, respectively 3175396 and 1194781816)

That's all from me. The article is widely sourced, with plenty of recent publications on the list, there are ample and appropriate pictures, the structure of the text is cogent and sensible, the prose is well up to UC's usual standard. I think the article meets all the FA criteria. Tim riley talk 10:21, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anne drew

[edit]

Saxe's formulation

  • ...which aimed to model archaeology on the scientific method of the natural sciences. Processual archaeology emphasized... Why is this past tense?
  • The anthropologist Arthur Saxe, Could drop the 'the' for brevity. There are a few examples of this throughout the article.
  • In a 1962 article, Binford had called on archaeologists to make greater use of ethnographic parallels, as Saxe later did, to draw conclusions about past societies, adapting an earlier comment by the archaeologists Gordon Willey and Philip Phillips to write that "archaeology is anthropology or it is nothing". Consider breaking up this long sentence.
    • Again, we could, but I don't think that it's unclear as written, and breaking at e.g. "He adapted..." would make it less clear that all of this is talking about the same article. UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think it's possible, e.g. In a 1962 article, Binford had called on archaeologists to make greater use of ethnographic parallels, as Saxe later did, to draw conclusions about past societies. In the article, he adapted an earlier comment by the archaeologists Gordon Willey and Philip Phillips, writing that "archaeology is anthropology or it is nothing".
      • Not a critical issue, I just try to be mindful of the readability of our articles, in which sentence length is a key factor. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 21:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Application

  • In collaboration with L. P. Gall... Maybe it's obvious, but we should probably say who L. P. Gall is. Another anthropologist presumably?

Reception

  • In 2002, William Rathje, Vincent Lamotta, and William Longacre used the Saxe–Goldstein hypothesis as an example of what they called the "black hole" of archaeological explanation, suggesting that its poor fit with burial practices in the contemporary United States illustrated the unwillingness of archaeologists to incorporate observations from their own societies into supposedly general models of human behavior. Long sentence; consider splitting it up. Also I think the "black hole" label needs a bit more explanation.
    • The explanation is the second part of the sentence, which is why I'm reluctant to split: suggesting that its poor fit with burial practices in the contemporary United States illustrated the unwillingness of archaeologists to incorporate observations from their own societies into supposedly general models of human behavior. UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • Touché, I see why the sentence is structured like this. As a side note, I'm glad this information was included; I was curious about the implications of this hypothesis with regards to contemporary western societies. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 21:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

  • Brown wrote in 2007 that it was the "most enduring accomplishment" of the processual approach to mortuary studies, and that it had remained useful into the present. Slight MOS:NOW issue here with the "into the present". Consider rephrasing to "...and that it remained useful."
    • I think that's a slightly different emphasis/meaning, and we have the date of 2007, so MOS:NOW isn't a problem -- we're talking about the narrative present rather than the literal present, and this sentence will never become outdated. UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      • I still think it's a little strange to refer to 2007 as the present when it would be easy to rephrase to avoid that, but you're right, it's not strictly a Manual of Style issue. Anne drew (talk · contribs) 21:57, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        We quite often quote people talking about the present of their time -- we wouldn't quote Churchill saying "Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." and add (as of 1940). To me, there's a difference between "it has remained useful into the present" and "it remains useful" -- the first is a much more hesitant endorsement, as I read it. UndercoverClassicist T·C 22:03, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]


Review in progress... Anne drew (talk · contribs) 15:53, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for these, Anne drew -- replies to your first batch above, and looking forward to the next set. UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blackstar (album)

[edit]
Nominator(s): – zmbro (talk) (cont) 18:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about... David Bowie's final studio album Blackstar. Released on Bowie's 69th birthday, January 8, 2016, this album's themes of death became poignant after the star's unexpected passing only two days later. It went on to become one of his most celebrated releases, both critically and commercially. Even if he hadn't necessarily intended it to be his final album, he recorded it after being diagnosed with liver cancer, and its lyrics blatantly hint at his upcoming demise. I had originally expanded this article years ago, and that revision became a GA. Over time, though, I realized the article was missing a lot, so I rewrote the entire thing and it's this revision I believe is worthy of the star. I'm looking forward to any comments or concerns. It would be nice to have it featured by its 10th anniversary on January 8, 2026, but I'm not getting my hopes up. It's also on me for taking ten months to write it. :-) – zmbro (talk) (cont) 18:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

[edit]

I notice that the article does not really use scholarly references. I did a search on Google Scholar, and I was wondering if something like this journal article from Celebrity Studies or this chapter from a Springer book were considered? I have not read either of these sources, so I cannot say with 100% certainty that these would be helpful in particularly, but I am curious if academic citations were looked at and considered while working on this article? Apologies in advance if this is an obvious question. I will try to do a full prose review in the future, but this part caught my attention. I hope that you are doing well and having a good week so far. Aoba47 (talk) 19:19, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had searched for some awhile back but wasn't able to find anything of use. I'll check those out and report back if I'm able to use those! – zmbro (talk) (cont) 19:43, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. It may be worthwhile to go through Google Scholar or something similar to see if there is any further academic coverage on this album. I have only included two examples that I have found, but it is by no means exhaustive. I just wanted to clarify that. I trust your judgement, as you know more about this album and about David Bowie in general than I do. Aoba47 (talk) 20:54, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aoba47 I was able to add two scholarly articles but unfortunately I don't have access to the ones you posted through my institution, so I can't use those. It's a shame as I'm sure they contained great info, but the article is already pretty in-depth as it is. If you could possibly access them and send them my way, I'd appreciate it! Otherwise, it's no biggie. – zmbro (talk) (cont) 16:57, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the ping and for the message. I did a small edit (here) to link Continuum in the citation. I have sent you an email about the above article and chapter. I do not think that I can send attachments directly with the Email this user feature, but apologies if I overlooked this. Both of these references can be access through the Wikipedia Library, but I would be more than happy to email them to you. Just send me a reply, and I will attach the files to my reply.
I trust your judgement when it comes to the scholarly coverage. I agree that this article is already in-depth. I was just making sure that there was not a gap in the coverage and that scholarly and academic publications were considered (and just to be completely transparent, I am not saying that any of these sources have to be used for the article). Aoba47 (talk) 18:14, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would make sure that album titles are consistently italicized in citation titles per WP:CONFORMTITLE. It is done in several instances, but I see some cases in which Blackstar is not in italics, such as Citation 18.
  • I thought I got them all. Hopefully fixed now.
  • This is admittedly more of a nitpick, but I believe that the citation titles should be consistently in title case.
  • For press releases, I would recommend using the press release template rather than the more general web template.
  • I would recommend adding English translations for the titles of non-English sources.
  • Citation 165 (here) is missing the author (Andy McFarlane). Citation 53 (here) is also missing the author (Adam Budofsky). On a related note, I would not use Staff as an author for citations in which a named author is not credited in the source.
  • Fixed
  • The lead includes Visconti's description that Bowie intentionally made Blackstar as a final album for his fans prior to his death, but the article itself points out that Bowie has plans for further music. Highlighting Visconti's statement in the lead seems misleading, as when I first read the lead, I was under the assumption that this was true. I would recommend removing this sentence.
  • Cut
  • I would add clear attribution to the following sentence: (Blackstar has since been described as one of Bowie's best albums, a perfect farewell to his fans and one of the best final albums ever.) It is currently unclear who is doing the describing in this part.
  • Done
  • Since studio album is linked in the lead, I would recommend linking it in the article as well for consistency. On a separate linking-related note, I would recommend linking demo to help readers who may be less familiar with music jargon.
  • I question if one-word quotes like "affirming" and "refreshing" in the "Recording" section are truly necessary, especially when other more impactful quotes are already being used. I have been told in the past to be cautious with one-word quotes as they can take away from the impact of other, longer quotes. That and I could see a potential concern with using too many quotes, particularly in the second paragraph of this section. I wonder if some of these one-word quotes could be paraphrased instead.
  • I am uncertain if the "Happy Birthday" performance for Iman is entirely necessary. It is sweet, but it reads more as trivial to me. Just because something happened in the studio and with the band, it does not mean that it relates to the album.
  • Removed
  • Not to be morbid, but for the following sentence, (He kept the illness private, only discussing it when it affected his work), I was wondering if there were any examples of how this affected his work? I can imagine how this would happen, but I was wondering if this could be slightly expanded upon?
  • The following part (art rock, experimental jazz, free jazz, progressive rock, and experimental rock) uses the serial comma, while it is not used in other instances. This is the first time that I saw the serial comma while reading the article, so I am guessing that this inclusion was a mistake, but I would make sure that its usage or omission is consistent.
  • I do not believe this is necessary for a FAC/FA, but I have noticed that there are a few spots in which citations are not organized in numeric order. Is there a reason for doing this?
  • I am not sure of the value of the link for "A New Career in a New Town", which is a redirect to Low. That album is already linked directly in front of this song link.
  • In the "Artwork and packaging" section, I think that it would be helpful to include a link for sleeve if possible for readers who may not be as familiar with vinyl and the terminology around vinyl.
  • There is an instance in which four citations are used in the "Post-death analysis" subsection, which I would consider citation overkill. I would recommend citation bundling to avoid this.

I hope that these comments are helpful. For clarification, I based my review on this version of the article. Once everything has been addressed, I will read through the article again. Let me know if you have received my email about sending you the sources. Aoba47 (talk) 00:08, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47 Apologies for the delay. Yes I received your email and if you could send me those through email I'd appreciate it :-) – zmbro (talk) (cont) 18:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No apologies are necessary. Thank you for addressing everything so far. When you respond to my email, I will be able to send you the files that way. I am not sure how to send files directly through email on here. I am guessing there is a way, but I have not done it before. I will read through the article again over the next few days, although I do not think that I will find any substantial to bring up here. Aoba47 (talk) 00:33, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Anne drew

[edit]

Background

  • Between May and July 2014, Bowie collaborated with the bandleader and composer Maria Schneider on "Sue (Or in a Season of Crime)", an experimental jazz song featuring Schneider's orchestra and an ensemble including the saxophonist Donny McCaslin and the drummer Mark Guiliana. Consider breaking this up into two sentences - it's quite long.

Recording

  • Monder described the environment as "really, really positive", saying that Bowie "truly respected what other people [had] to offer" and "really wanted to work with his collaborators". Maybe slightly overusing direct quotes here. Can any of this be paraphrased?
  • The final master mix was done by the English engineer Could wikilink Mastering (audio) here

Music and lyrics

  • "Blackstar uses music as staging and scenery, placing [Bowie's] dynamic voice in the context of noir atmosphere." Consider wikilinking Noir fiction here
  • Uncut's Michael Bonner argued that the album has "a less obvious thematic thread" due to the seven tracks originating from different sources. Slightly unclear. Less obvious than what, exactly?
  • Bowie's vocals are also less subdued and more "gregarious". Unclear who this quote is from.
  • for his novel A Clockwork Orange (1962),[g][49][69][48] Lots of footnotes here. Are they all needed?

Artwork and packaging

  • Barnbrook got the idea from a conversation with the writer William S. Burroughs and compared the use of the star symbol to Egyptian hieroglyphs and emojis, believing that the latter were becoming more common in everyday communication and with "people creating whole narratives out of them". Long sentence - consider breaking it up.
  • matt black Should be "matte black" I think?

Release

  • Its music video We could link out to the music videos mentioned in this section using the {{External media}} template. Just a thought!

Critical reception

  • Blackstar was positively compared to The Next Day, with Q magazine's Tom Doyle describing the former as "more concise" and "a far, far more intriguing" musical statement than the latter. This is a little bit ambiguous. "Former" and "latter" could be taken to refer to the order in which the albums were released.
  • Rosen wrote that with the band, Bowie and Visconti give Blackstar a "distinctively eerie, muscular stamp". Might just be a me problem, but I have no idea what "muscular stamp" is supposed to mean.

Commercial performance

  • As of April 2017, Blackstar has sold more than 1,900,000 copies. Can/should we get an updated figure as of 2025?

Legacy

  • Mojo magazine's Martin Aston argued that the message on "I Can't Give Everything Away" was "as pointed" to Bowie's audience as "Rock 'n' Roll Suicide" on Ziggy Stardust (1972). I feel like this prose, particularly the was "as pointed" to Bowie's audience as bit, can be made more readable.
  • The two musicians also shared the same birthday. Is this significant to the album's meaning or just trivia?

Track listing

  • music by Bowie, Maria Schneider, Paul Bateman and Bob Bhamra Should this be capitalized?

Lead

  • The album's lyrics feature themes of death throughout Can we wikilink Death?
  • Visconti described the album as Bowie's intended swan song and a "parting gift" for his fans before his death. I wonder if we should qualify this by saying he hoped to live long enough to create more music after this album.
  • Blackstar received universal acclaim Obviously it was received extremely well as an album, but it seems weird to use the term "universal acclaim" in the lead when there are some lukewarm reviews mentioned in the body. This seems to be a Metacritic designation, and the body properly attributes it rather than using Wikipedia's voice. Consider rephrasing to Blackstar received widespread acclaim as, Blackstar was acclaimed as, or similar.

Overall review

Overall, this is an exceptional article. It's comprehensive, nicely written, and well-sourced. I've called out a few minor issues above, and would be happy to support this nomination once addressed. Fair warning: some of my feedback may be incorrect. I am new to this process, so feel free to let me know if I got something wrong. Thanks, Anne drew (talk · contribs) 17:42, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Skyshifter

[edit]

Source review (quality-only, no spotcheck)

  • Would it possible to find the exact Q issue and reference it for 128? While it was posted by David Bowie's official account, it is still a Facebook post with a magazine screenshot (not even posted by Q; the reference formatting is even misleading as one may expect something posted by Q, and not David Bowie's account). I believe it would be much more appropriate to reference the magazine itself.
  • I have found no problems with other sources, which appear to be all reliable and well-establish for music-related FAs.

Skyshiftertalk 02:09, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State

[edit]
Nominator(s): Epicgenius (talk) 17:24, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a historic building in Manhattan, New York City, erected in the 1890s. The Appellate Division Courthouse of New York State is noted for the two dozen detailed sculptures on its facade, along with a mural-encrusted lobby and courtroom. It's easy to miss amid the skyscrapers that surround it, but the architecture has earned the courthouse city, state, and national landmark designations. Unlike counterparts such as the Tweed Courthouse and Surrogate's Courthouse downtown, the Appellate Division Courthouse has had a relatively uneventful existence and continues to operate as a courthouse.

This page was promoted as a Good Article nearly two years ago, for which I am very grateful. After some copyedits, I think it's up to FA quality, and I look forward to all comments and feedback. Epicgenius (talk) 17:24, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
Lead
  • Delink "New York City".
  • Link "Façade"?
  • You could link "25th Street" in the lead.
  • The Appellate Division Courthouse is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and its facade and interior are both New York City designated landmarks.
    • Do we need the comma in this sentence?
Site
  • You could change The Appellate Division Courthouse occupies the northeast corner of the intersection of Madison Avenue and 25th Street in the Flatiron District neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City, New York, U.S.

to The Appellate Division Courthouse occupies the northeast corner of the intersection of Madison Avenue and 25th Street in the Flatiron District neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City.

  • Delink "New York City" in the above sentence.
  • “occupies a site directly to the north” → “occupies the site directly to the north”

MSincccc (talk) 14:48, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the initial comments. I've done most of these, except "The Appellate Division Courthouse is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, and its facade and interior are both New York City designated landmarks." Per the essay WP:CINS, I think a comma there is preferable. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:50, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Architecture
  • The facade is made almost entirely of marble.
    • Why link "facade" to the article "Fonho"?
  • Link "New York Times" on first mention?
  • Link "Alabama marble" to Sylacauga marble?

MSincccc (talk) 19:28, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oops. I fixed all of these. – Epicgenius (talk) 19:59, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Architecture (continued)
  • Link The Baltimore Sun?
  • During the 20th century, the lobby had busts of lawyers Charles O'Conor and Bernard Botein, but O'Conor's bust was removed in 1982.
    • Is the reason for the removal known?
  • "Charles Yardley Turner designed two figures"→"Turner designed two figures"
    • Since the article doesn't say "The north wall contains Henry Siddons Mowbray 's mural Transmission of the Law,..."
  • "Robert Reid's artwork of justice"→"Reid's artwork of justice"

"William Metcalf's"→"Metcalf's"

    • Same as the previous point.
  • You could link "anteroom" to Vestibule (architecture).
  • "Mowbray's figures are painted in green, yellow, and blue and are superimposed on a blue background."→"Mowbray's figures, painted in green, yellow, and blue, are superimposed on a blue background."
    • Avoids using two "and"'s in close proximity.

MSincccc (talk) 10:07, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All done, except for the removal of O'Conor's bust. The explanation for that is in the History section: "A bust of 19th-century lawyer Charles O'Conor was moved from the courthouse's lobby to its basement in 1982 after the First Department's chief justice, Francis T. Murphy, learned that O'Conor had actively opposed freeing black slaves in New York state." – Epicgenius (talk) 14:43, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
History

MSincccc (talk) 17:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've done all of these, except "the Bronx". I'd note that, while some people do capitalize "The Bronx" mid-sentence, it is inconsistent; according to MOS:THECAPS, lowercase is correct in that situation. – Epicgenius (talk) 05:44, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
General
Reception
  • You could link to New-York Tribune, New York World and Scientific American.
  • "The same publication described the murals as merit-worthy but too "abstract and philosophical" for an American courthouse."→"SciAm/SA described the murals as merit-worthy but too "abstract and philosophical" for an American courthouse."
    • Similarly you could also mention within brackets that the Scientific American was also abbreviated as SciAm or SA (as you wish).
  • Eric P. Nash wrote in the Times in 1994 that...
    • Since you use The New York Times on four other instances in the article, using only the Times in this singular instance might lead the reader to confuse it with The Times, a British publication, without looking at the reference.
  • You could link to Progressive Era in the last sentence of this section.

Well, that's all from me. I hope my suggestions have been helpful. MSincccc (talk) 08:45, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments @MSincccc. I've done all of these where they appear in the text. For the citations, though, I prefer not to link the publications to reduce clutter. – Epicgenius (talk) 22:54, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bottom line

History of penicillin

[edit]
Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:48, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about penicillin, one of the earliest antibiotics, once considered a wonder drug. Considerable confusion was created by the juice of the mould that produced it and its active ingredient both being called "penicillin" (today only the latter is). The article chronicles its trajectory from research to development to mass production. Today, most is fed to animals in North America to improve their productivity. This article was well-received at DYK, prompting me to nominate it here. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:48, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive by comment by Noleander

[edit]

RoySmith

[edit]

This is a long article, so I'll poke at the review bit by bit over the next bunch of days.

(that takes me through the end of Discovery, I'll pick up again another time).

  • In 1939, at the Sir William Dunn School of Pathology ... might be a fruitful avenue of research.[49][50] overly-complex sentence could be broken up into smaller chunks.
    Split sentence in twain. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Howard Florey led an interdisciplinary research team ... Generally, use the full name the first time (i.e. in the previous sentence), then just the surname (here).
    Done. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Howard Florey approached the MRC in September 1939 Spell out Medical Research Council the first time and link to Medical Research Council (United Kingdom)
    Spelt out and linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • allocating £250 (equivalent to £20,000 in 2023) to launch the project, with £300 for salaries (equivalent to £23,000 in 2023) and £100 for expenses (equivalent to £8,000 in 2023) Maybe just say £1450 (equiv to ...) over three years for easier reading with no significant loss of information for this article's purposes.
    £250 + £300 + £100 = £650. I like the breakdown though. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Florey wrote in the application letter, "in addition to its theoretical importance, may have practical value for therapeutic purposes."[59] In the last paragraph, you said they didn't think it had any clinical application. I'm curious what changed their mind about this.
    Mellanby. Added a bit. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regarding £300 (equivalent to £21,000 in 2023), what I've done in the past is to use that construct the first time, then switch to the less verbose "$2 million ($70 million in 2024)" which is produced by $2{{nbsp}}million (${{format price|{{inflation|US|2000000|1908}}}} in {{Inflation/year|US}}). It's absurdly complicated in the source, but I think makes for easier reading in the end result. Just a suggestion.
    While working on Manned Orbiting Laboratory, where every sum was in the millions, I proposed enhancing the inflation template, but my proposal was rejected in favour of the cumbersome formula you describe. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The pH was lowered by the addition of phosphoric acid and the resulting liquid was cooled.[72] Chain determined that penicillin was stable only with a pH of between 5 and 8, but the process required one lower than that. This is confusing. If adding the phosphoric acid brought the solution out of the stable range, why was it done?
    Re-worded . Linked Dissociation (chemistry). Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It occurs to me that all the things described here (adjusting ph, temp, solvents, filtration, etc) are standard tools for doing chemical separations. I know that because I still have some dim memory of doing these things in organic chem lab, but to many of our readers it will probably totally mysterious why they tried these things. So, it might be worth a brief mention that these were common techniques and link to some article which talks about extraction/separation.
    Yes, totally routine for any chemist. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Short glass cylinders containing the penicillin-bearing fluid to be tested were then placed on them Unclear what "them" is referring to.
    Sigh. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • By then the fluid would have disappeared where did it go? Evaporated? Consumed?
    The source says:

    By the end of incubation most of the fluid in the cylinders has disappeared and each cylinder is surrounded by a circular zone where no bacterial growth has occurred.

    Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • fifty mice, half of whom received penicillin. All fifty of the control mice I assume either 100 mice total, or 25 controls?
    Oops. Should be 25, not 50. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • doses of penicillin were administered to two patients at the Presbyterian Hospital in New York City, Aaron Alston and Charles Aronson. what disease did they have?
    Bacterial endocarditis. Added and provided a link. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Penicillin was recovered from his urine as they say on the ISS, "Yesterday's Penicillin is tomorrow's Penicillin" :-)
    That it is excreted in this manner became important for the treatment of urinary tract infections. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Kembel, Bishop and Company delivered its first batch of 910 litres how many doses that that yield?
    Source doesn't say. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • a byproduct of the corn industry that the NRRL routinely tried in the hope of finding more uses for it. And here we are, 80 years later, still looking for ways to subsidise the corn industry.
  • 300 milligrams of penicillin per litre of mould per "liter of mould culture" perhaps?
    Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • (image caption) A 1957 fermentor used to grow Penicillium mould in the Science Museum, London clarify that it's just on display at the museum, not that they are growing mould in the museum. Or are they?
    Good question. They have a huge collection of moulds. (video) Re-worded to avoid confusion. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • By 1944, CSL was producing 400 million Oxford units per week Enough for how many doses, and/or to treat how many people?
    About 400. It takes about a million per treatment. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two 23,000-litre (5,000 imp gal) tanks became operational in 1948, followed by eight more what year did the other eight appear?
    Source doesn't say. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • and Glaxo ceased production in 1975 and CSL in 1980 the double "and" is awkward.
    Reworded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Likewise with and one was sent to Heinz Öppinger at Hoechst in Frankfurt, and he began conducting experiments with moulds ... and Öppinger developed a rotating drum
    Tweaked working. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fragner Pharmaceutical Company might be worth mentioning "Now Zentiva".
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • with plant and expertise from Canada it's not clear what "with plant" means in this context.
    Changed to physical plant and linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • to be built in Rome near the Sapienza University of Rome I'd drop the "of Rome"
    Deleted "in Rome". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • production shifted thereafter to a new plant that produced 300 million units per week.[151][152] In 1947 ICI decided to construct a new plant to produce 32,000 litres (7,000 imp gal) of penicillin per day by the deep submergence method.[153] Again, it's unclear how units and liters should be compared to each other. How many units in a litre? How many doses that that produce? I'll stop bugging you about that, but take a look at the whole article to see if there's other place this could apply to.
    It sort of depends on the purity. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • t in September 1943 it switch to using corn steep liquor switched (past tense)?
  • US penicillin production rose from 21.192 billion units in 1943, to 1,663 billion units in 1944, and an estimated 6,852 billion units in 1945 even if reporting production to five significant digits is justifed in the literature, I'd shy away from it here. It's just noise. 21 billion, 1.7 billion, 6.9 billion seems more user-friendly.

(I'll pick up with "In the field" next time)

OK, that does it for me. This is an exceptional article and it was a pleasure to read. All of the points noted above are really nits and I see no reason to hold up my Support waiting for you to address them. RoySmith (talk) 16:54, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sailing moose

[edit]

I am a microbiologist who studied antibiotic resistance for many years. This is a fantastic article explained at a level a non-specialist can understand. My only quibble: the following sentence with references to penicillins K and G comes out of nowhere; the different penicillins aren't discussed until much later in the article. "This produced more than twice the penicillin of X-1612, but in the form of the less desirable penicillin K.[c] Phenylacetic acid was added to switch it to producing the highly potent penicillin G. This strain could produce up to 550 milligrams of penicillin per litre.[126][120]"

I had trouble with this too, so I added footnote d, which says: "See § Chemical analysis for the different forms of penicillin" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Brass threepence

[edit]
Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about... the brass threepence, a small coin with a short but interesting history.Wehwalt (talk) 16:50, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hawkeye7

[edit]

What a delightful article! I had to think for a moment as to whether the King is descended from Henry VII. (Of course he is!) Nothing to add (numismatics is beyond my area of expertise.) One question:

  • Why are all the details about mass, diameter etc in the infobox but not the body?

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - pass

All good. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 22:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
Lead
  • You could consider adding the "Use British English" template.
  • Link the "Royal Mint"?
  • "12-sided. coin bearing a woman's head"→ “12-sided coin bearing a woman’s head"
  • Drop the commas before by and after Kitchener?
    • I meant changing The initial reverse design, by Frances Madge Kitchener, of a thrift plant, was altered... to The initial reverse design by Frances Madge Kitchener of a thrift plant, was altered.... MSincccc (talk) 15:24, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:50, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Inception
  • , it was unpopular in England, and especially in London, The penny
    • A comma splice.

MSincccc (talk) 04:06, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Designs

By the time of King Edward's abdication in December 1936,...

**By the above, I meant you could link to accession in this sentence: With the accession of Elizabeth II in 1952,... MSincccc (talk) 15:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say leave it be. We really aren't talking about the ceremonies and whatnot.
Production
  • Link "numismatics?
  • You have linked "Prince of Wales" in the previous section; consider doing so for "Duke of Windsor"?
  • “well-advanced” → “well advanced”
    • Since British usage avoids hyphenating "well" compounds when used after a verb.
Production (Edward VIII)
  • How about naming "Wallis Simpson" explicitly in this section?
I added Wallis.
Designs

By the time of King Edward's abdication in December 1936,...

Production
  • Link "numismatics?
  • You have linked "Prince of Wales" in the previous section; consider doing so for "Duke of Windsor"?
  • “well-advanced” → “well advanced”
    • Since British usage avoids hyphenating "well" compounds when used after a verb.
Production (Edward VIII)
  • How about naming "Wallis Simpson" explicitly in this section?
  • There is an article on John J. Ford Jr. of the New Netherlands Coin Company.

That's all for the time being. I hope these have been of help. MSincccc (talk) 08:12, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Great help, thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
General
  • As a matter of fact, even "legal tender" has a Wikipedia article on the subject.
Production (George VI)
  • According to Richard Farmer in his journal article on the introduction of the brass threepence,...
    • Is the name of the journal or the specific article known?
It's in the "Sources".

I've read upto the end of the Production section. MSincccc (talk) 15:39, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

OK, made those changes. If I've missed anything, please let me know.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:54, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The comma splice in the Inception section exists and the "Use British English" template is still missing from the mainspace. MSincccc (talk) 17:02, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the template and I think fixed the other.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:52, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Collecting
Bottom line

Except for a minor suggestion in the Collecting section (see above), the article is in good shape, and I enjoyed reading through it. Thank you for bringing it to FAC. Support. MSincccc (talk) 13:18, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thoughtful review. I'm grateful for it and for the support.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:44, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from MisawaSakura

[edit]

Now that Wehwalt has fixed MSincccc's concerns, I fully support. MisawaSakura (talk) 13:04, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review and support.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:45, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

"Old wine is a pleasure that’s hollow/When at your own table you sit/For you’re thinking each mouthful you swallow/Has cost you a threepenny-bit!" (W. S. Gilbert). A threepenny bit was worth having in the 1950s when I was a lad, and I'm delighted to make its acquaintance again in one of Wehwalt's characteristically thorough and engaging articles. No suggestions, quibbles or carps about the prose and the illustrations are excellent. Happy to support. – Tim riley talk 19:01, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks. A bit of an anachronism even for Gilbert, numismatically, even though he was referring to the silver one, but how can one quarrel when the whole country's numismatically named? Wehwalt (talk) 19:50, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review: PASS

[edit]

To follow shortly. - SchroCat (talk) 14:34, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting
  • Craig "Mint: a History" should be capital "A"
  • Craig and Dyer: "Cambridge, United Kingdom"; Spink: "London, England" can just be "Cambridge" and "London", respectively
  • Schwager: Is there any reason the title is in sentence case?
  • Bell & Sons Ltd, Catalogue Publishers Ltd, Seaby Ltd and Spink & Son Ltd: I think I'm right in saying we don't need the "Ltd" on any of these
Reliability
  • All sources are reliable and of good quality
Spot checks
  • I undertook spot checks on ten of the references (all online sources, either web pages or IA-held books). No issues were located
Thanks for that. I've done everything except I think Cambridge needs disambiguation, since we Yanks have one too that has an academic reputation.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:24, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How about "Cambridge, Cambridgeshire" to keep it nice and consistent? - SchroCat (talk) 19:44, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:53, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Moise

[edit]

I've got at least one of these in my collection. The one I'm remembering is a George VI. Anyways, on with the review!

  • Minor-suggestion: "600 tons of bronze coin annually": While "coin" maybe can be uncountable, it seems like countable is more common. Would "coins" be better/acceptable here? Moisejp (talk) 21:48, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I understand it (not having been present at the time) it was more common to weigh them than to count them, in quantity, and there were weights equivalent to an amount of bronze (and indeed silver).--Wehwalt (talk) 21:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, no worries! Moisejp (talk) 04:49, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "By proclamation dated 18 March 1937, the brass threepence was made legal tender for up to two shillings." Does this mean legally one could refuse to accept more than two shillings' worth of threepence coins as payment? Moisejp (talk) 04:49, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Legal tender really has more to do with what must be accepted in payment of a debt (not making a deal that involves payment for goods), and sometimes what the government will accept in payment of taxes and fees. But yes, if you wanted to pay on a debt in brass threepence pieces, the creditor could limit it to two shillings. This was more important in the 19th century. By 1937, it probably didn't matter much. Wehwalt (talk) 16:21, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there anything you can wiki-link to for "collars"? Moisejp (talk) 04:56, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    We don't have any specific articles that I can see. I hope it will be obvious from context. Wehwalt (talk) 16:24, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My final comments are very minor, I'm happy to support in any case.Moisejp (talk) 05:04, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the review and support. Wehwalt (talk) 16:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Animal Crackers (1930 film)

[edit]
Nominator(s): Jm307 (talk) 18:51, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Marx Brothers movie Animal Crackers. It was the last movie of theirs based on one of their stage plays, was instrumental to their resurgence in popularity in the 1970s, and remains one of their most popular films. It will become public domain on January 1, and I was hoping to have the article featured-quality by then - hopefully being good enough for TFA around the same time. The article received a GA review by Viriditas earlier this year, which it failed largely because the reviewer found issues with the citations. Feedback from that review suggested it would be acceptable to fix the issues they found and put the article up for FAC. I have made an effort to fix the issues identified, and was hoping to move to the next stage. Jm307 (talk) 18:51, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Donkey Kong (character)

[edit]
Nominator(s): JOEBRO64 10:20, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

One of the video game industry's oldest mascots, who's gone from a construction-site menace to a banana-obsessed oaf to a... professional boxer. Though he's frequently overshadowed by his frenemy, Donkey Kong still manages to steal the spotlight from time to time (most recently, this past July, when I coincidentally brought the article to GA). I brought the franchise article to FA at the beginning of the year, so I think it'd be fitting to cap it off with the character himself. Hope you enjoy! JOEBRO64 10:20, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

Here shall be an image review from me! Arconning (talk) 15:45, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • File:Donkey Kong character.png - Fair use
  • File:Cranky Kong.jpg - Fair use
  • File:Shigeru Miyamoto at E3 2013 1 (cropped).JPG - CC BY-SA 3.0 de
  • File:Donkey Kong design evolution.png - Fair use
  • File:Grant Kirkhope by Gage Skidmore.jpg - CC BY-SA 3.0
  • File:Seth Rogen at Collision 2019 - SM0 1823 (47106936404) (cropped).jpg - CC BY 2.0
  • File:King Kong 1933 Promotional Image.png - Public Domain
  • File:Monster Jam - 2008 - Tacoma, Wa (3453973810).jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
  • All of the images have appropriate alt-text for accessibility, all have proper captioning and are relevant to the article.
    • Happy to give a pass for the image review!

Source review (142/172 reviewed)

[edit]

Starting a source review. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:20, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • [2] Doesn't identify him as appearing in most Mario Kart or Party games (rephrase to just saying he appears in these series unless a source can be found to say he's in most of them)
  • [3] / [4] Minor note: doesn't specify it ended in 2000, just that it ran for two seasons and began in 1997. Can you cite the 2000 date, or say that it started in 1997 and ran for two seasons?
  • [5] What is this being used to cite in this sentence? "Mario and Princess Peach seek the Kongs' help to stop Bowser from invading the Mushroom Kingdom. The Kongs agree to help after Mario defeats Donkey Kong in an arena fight." I may be overlooking something. Also, this source is listed on the inconclusive discussions portion of the Video game WikiProject sources page. I believe that it has demonstrated reliability, based on its association with NBC News as its parent and staff having experience, but I would recommend opening a discussion to move it from inconclusive. Same with this source: [6]
  • [7] The source identifies the publisher as Fleetway Editions
  • [8] / [9] These sources don't exactly convey that the criticism was "scathing"
  • "Other names considered included "Kong Dong" and "Kong Holiday"." Looking at this, either [10] or [11] could support this sentence by itself.
  • [12] Riedel Software Productions isn't mentioned specifically

Valnet

Per WP:VALNET, sources published by Valnet should be met with heightened scrutiny, although they have been found to be acceptable on a case-by-case basis in past FACs. In the article, three Valnet sources are used, all from the website "TheGamer". Analyzing the three used, I've been able to identify that they are written before AI concerns regarding Valnet websites emerged, and all authors have been published in sources that we consider reliable (Adam Starkey: Rolling Stone UK, Stacey Henley: The Guardian, George Foster: RPGSite). As such, while non-Valnet sources are preferred and thus they are all at best situational, I find that these are acceptable articles to cite in an FAC. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:12, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments

  • While this is typically being followed, one sentence has the refs in the wrong order: "Miyamoto provided some suggestions"
  • Strongly recommend running the IABot to archive, as many are not archived.

Review by User:Cukie Gherkin

[edit]

Planting this here - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 16:21, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Character

  • "Country recast Donkey Kong as the protagonist.[1] He has been portrayed as heroic since, though he occasionally appears as an antagonist, such as in Mario vs. Donkey Kong (2004).[11]" I feel like this could be made into one sentence for better flow? Maybe something like "He was recast as a protagonist starting with Country, though he occasionally appears as an antagonist, such as in Mario vs. Donkey Kong.

Review by Pokelego999

[edit]

I will leave comments here sometime within the week, hopefully shortly. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 22:25, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Funk

[edit]
  • Why does the rather horizontal King Kong image use the upright parameter?

Early life and education of Donald Trump

[edit]
Nominator(s): elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:36, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the life of Donald Trump from 1946 to 1968. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 18:36, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TheNuggeteer

[edit]

I am new to the process of FA reviewing, so I might make some errors.

  • "where he became a corporal his sophomore year and a supply sergeant the following year." I believe you need to link "corporal" and "supply sergeant".
  • Kindly link "battalion training officer".
  • "A daughter of a rural fisherman-farmer in Stornoway, of the Outer Hebrides, Scotland, at eighteen Mary Anne emigrated to the United States." This sentence seems confusing.
  • "Fred indoctrinated Donald by repeating to him, "You are a king...You are a killer."" How is this relevant and is there any more context about this?
  • "The Trumps moved into the nine-room, Colonial-style mansion in 1948" I assume you need to uncapitalize "Colonial-style".
  • "but he was ornery and bored" who are you referring to: Freddy or Donald?
  • "Trump had a poor batting average of .056 in his final year, according to box scores" can you add how this is poor?
  • "Division III football club as a punter, but quit" kindly remove comma.
  • "notes in class, but" same with this.
  • "He participated in Fordham's Reserve Officers' Training Corps program, but" same with this.
  • "often elevated their grades ensure" to "often elevated their grades to ensure"
  • "insistent that his son graduate" to "insistent that his son had graduated"

This is my full prose review. This is a nice article, yet some issues remain. Regards, 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 00:21, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In order:
  1. I did not intentionally link "corporal" and "supply sergeant" because those are military ranks. The New York Military Academy used those ranks for their own purposes, but Trump was not actually in the military.
  2. There is no page for "battalion training officer".
  3. I did not write this and I went ahead and reworded it.
  4. I did not write this and I went ahead and reworded it.
  5. As far as I know, "Colonial" is capitalized when referring to Colonial America—a proper noun—and lowercase when it is used generally.
  6. I did not write this and I went ahead and reworded it. There was an aspect that you had missed, because "but" implies that he should not have been "ornery and bored".
  7. I'm not sure what you mean by this. It was a poor average.
  8. Fixed.
  9. Fixed.
  10. Fixed.
  11. Fixed.
  12. Not a mistake. Fred sought to it that his sons attend an Ivy League institution. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:05, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since you addressed all of the issues as well as another editor supporting the article, I will support this for FA. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 03:41, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MisawaSakura

[edit]
Fixed. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 17:06, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SusanLesch

[edit]

Thank you, this article is needed. The main Donald Trump biography where I have been contributing perennially runs into Wikipedia's WP:PEIS limit (tracking). It's nigh impossible to add much there.

Only one thing missing here that I know of. Biographers Kranish and Fisher write (p. 81) that Trump considered two people to be his mentors: his father and Norman Vincent Peale. Haberman and O'Brien and maybe Blair are additional sources for Peale. -SusanLesch (talk) 18:14, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I seem to recall something in Craig and Buettner about Peale's book, but perhaps I'm confusing it with Haberman. I'll take a look at some of the literature there. elijahpepe@wikipedia (he/him) 23:44, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Good work! -SusanLesch (talk) 21:25, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • All images are public domain (published in the US between 1930 and 1977 without a copyright notice). All have sufficient alt text.
  • Donald Trump NYMA.jpg
  • Donald Trump playing baseball (cropped) (cropped).jpg
  • 1964 NYMA - 5 students in uniform.jpg

Pass. -SusanLesch (talk) 21:25, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Canu Cadwallon

[edit]
Nominator(s): Tipcake (talk) 15:08, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a series of Middle Welsh poems, some of which may be ultimately contemporary to the seventh-century king Cadwallon ap Cadfan. I have exhaustively cited every work about the poems and hope it is up to standard. Tipcake (talk) 15:08, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

El Alma al Aire

[edit]
Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 18:12, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My last nomination for this article failed due to Commercial Performance being too list-y, so I brought it up for peer review and had it revamped thanks to a reviewer's input. This is part of my personal project of working Latin pop and tropical albums that either reached #1 or won a Grammy/Latin Grammy Award. I look forward to your comments. Erick (talk) 18:12, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

IanTEB

[edit]

I'll focus my review on the prose, but will point out other issues I find, if any.

Lead and infobox
  • sixth studio album recorded by Spanish singer-songwriter - is 'recorded' required here? I know its not uncommon usage (e.g. 'List of songs recorded by Artist' articles) but it seems a little redundant.
  • Latin Grammy Awards for Album of the Year and Best Male Pop Vocal Album and a Grammy nomination for Best Latin Pop Album in 2001 - there should be a comma after 'Best Male Pop Vocal Album' since 'and' to better distinguish the Latin Grammy and Grammies.
  • with music videos accompanying all three singles - we already know these are singles; 'all three.' is still understandable and prevents repetetion.
  • A special edition of the record was launched on 11 June 2001 - I've never seen 'launched' use for an album release before. It makes sense, but 'released' would be more simple and direct.
  • To further promote the album, Sanz embarked on El Alma al Aire Tour in 2001, where he performed in Latin America, Spain, and the US - I think '[...] in 2001, which spanned (or visited) Latin America, Spain, and the US' would flow better
  • El Alma al Aire has been regarded as one of Sanz's important works by music journalists. - 'Important' in what way? Influential? Impactful on his career?
Background and recording
  • It sold over six million copies and would eventually become the best-selling record of all time in Spain - this sentence makes it seems as if the album initially sold six million, and subsequently continued moving copies until it became the most sold record in Spain. My alternative would be: 'It sold over six million copies internationally and became the best-selling record of all time in Spain.'
  • Ruffinengo's comment in the second paragraph feels very PR-y. There's probably feel differently, but I would usually leave out comments like this if they don't elaborate on any particular detail of the recording/production process.
  • Sanz's quote at the start of the third paragraph should be paraphrased. As a rule of thumb, quotes should only be used if they help visualize the process, not only explain it. Since this quote is basically 'we had multiple studios', the quote itself does not create a mental image that cannot be achieved by paraphrasing.
Composition
  • El Alma al Aire is a pop album and consists of ten tracks - change the 'and' to 'that' for better flow, in my opinion. Also, the quote in source [15] should replace the quotation marks around Mas with apostrophes.
  • What is 'shared celebration'? I don't speak Spanish - and neither of the attached sources can be fully translated - so I can't view the original text, but do you mean, for example, festivities?
  • "Me Iré", with the latter described as "nostalgic" by - I would change ', with' to a semicolon. I also think 'lattermost' is more appropriate when there are more than two articles mentioned, but the text is still perfectly understandable regardless.
  • The audio sample includes a quote not found anywhere else in the article. Regardless, the audio file does not help illustrate the reviewers' point since its unclear what element of the song is supposed to be 'adult' or 'modest', so the usage fails WP:FAIRUSE.
Release and promotion
  • El Alma al Aire was re-released in 2007 and includes demos of - replace 'and includes' with 'with'
  • released on 14 September 2000 and directed by Sebastien Grousset - the 'and' is a little awkward here. I'd prefer something like 'The music video for "Cuando Nadie Me Ve", directed by Sebastien Grousset, was released on 14 September 2000.'
  • Several Spanish celebrities appear in the video, including Miguel Bosé, Santiago Segura, José Coronado, and Gabino Diego - I would at least introduce these people's occupations
  • A music video was released for the latter promotional single and filmed in the Iberian Peninsula - sort of the same advice as above, but I'd change this to something like: "A music video was released for the latter, filmed in the Iberian Peninsula."
  • I'd personally prefer if the Tour section was merged to below the first paragraph and the re-releases moved into their own sub-section, to help with chronology.
Critical reception
  • generally positive reactions is original research. Summary of reviewers require either an aggregator such as Metacritic or second-hand analysis of reception.
  • Maybe I'm misinterpreting this, but it feels a little weird to open a three/four star review with a negative comment (saying that songs either seem borrowed from an earlier work or are 'cautious baby steps' sounds like the reviewer is calling the album uninventive).
  • "some of the most beautiful songs of his career", citing songs such as "Cuando Nadie Me Ve" as a "sincere track" and the title track for its poetry and music - repetive usage of 'songs' and 'tracks'. Try to find replacements or rework the sentence
  • This section includes way to many quotations. Try to paraphrase where possible.
  • In 2021, Argentina website La Coope - Argentinian. Also italicize the website name, unless there is some specific reason not to
  • Why is the information of fusing pop, rock, and flamenco not mentioned in the Composition section?
  • In Sanz's native Spain the album achieved its greatest success, where it debuted atop... - Change to 'The album achieved its greatest success in Sanz's native Spain, where it debuted atop...'
  • Comma after 'shipping over 1.3 million copies'
  • Across Europe, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI)[77] certified the album had gone platinum after recognizing sales of over one million copies across the continent - repetetive usage of 'across'; you can open with just 'In Europe'. It could be further simplified by changing 'certified the album had gone platinum' to just 'certified the album platinum'.
Tables
  • Please add translations somewhere in the article. This could be in the body or the track listing section. Knowing the meaning of the titles would greatly help my understanding
  • There seems to be some odd dead space at the bottom of the Personnel and Charts sections.
  • Spanish guitar in "Quisiera Ser" - change to 'Spanish guitar on...' and do the same for all other instances of such wording

Those are my comments. Most are rather minor fixes that I hope won't take much time. The biggest issue would probably be paraphrasing quotations in the reception section. IanTEB (talk) 00:03, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@IanTEB Thank you so much! I think I got most, if not, all of them. I don't know how to fix the dead space at the Personnel and Charts sections. Erick (talk) 04:37, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Cartoon network freak

[edit]

Supporting this nomination as per my older review the first time around. Great job! I would kindly appreciate some thoughts on my own FAC, "Despre tine". Greets; Cartoon network freak (talk) 22:17, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jingtai Emperor

[edit]
Nominator(s): Min968 (talk) 11:05, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Jingtai Emperor, the seventh emperor of the Ming dynasty. I have tried to improve this article as well as the articles related to the Ming dynasty. Min968 (talk) 11:05, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by MisawaSakur

Ethan Hawke

[edit]
Nominator(s): 750h+ 14:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the American actor Ethan Hawke. This article used to be an FA, but it was demoted less than two years ago due to lack of information, which I believe i've addressed. All comments are welcome and appreciated; if successful this will be my 13th FA. 750h+ 14:22, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

[edit]

Ref 193 Yu, Brandon (October 16, 2025) and 208 have an error. Ref 147 (Collider) is a Valnet source so I'd suggest finding a replacement. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:38, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Vacant0:, thanks for these, should be fixed. 750h+ 14:43, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
Lead
  • “acheived” → “achieved”
    • Typo.
  • He earned critical acclaim and a nomination for Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor for portraying an amateur police officer
    • Hawke's character is a rookie cop, not an “amateur".

Read upto the end of the Early life section. MSincccc (talk) 17:27, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Career
  • Robert Ebert→ Roger Ebert
  • one of the survivors of Uruguayan Air Force Flight 571
    • Missing the definite article before "Uruguayan".
  • A New York Times writer observed→ Caryn James...
    • Since we know the author, who is notable enough.
  • Entertainment Weekly is linked twice in the same subsection.

MSincccc (talk) 10:26, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc thanks for these. 750h+ 12:29, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Career (continued)
  • while The New York Times noted that Hawke showed "a novelist's innate gifts...
    • Even this review was written by Caryn James.
  • with one from New York Daily News stating that Hawke and co-star Laurence Fishburne made the film work, "supported by a mostly strong cast".
    • Jami Bernard, of the New York Daily News, has a Wikipedia article and could be named here.
  • while Peter Travers, writing for Rolling Stone,...
    • Link "Rolling Stone"?
  • including New York Daily News reviewer
    • As a matter of fact, only "Daily News" is italicised in the article's title.
  • Replace "garnered" with "received"?

MSincccc (talk) 14:06, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: mostly done. Nothing wrong with ‘garnered’ I don’t think, adds a bit of variety. 750h+ 15:15, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, since it is an encyclopedia (more that it is a potential FA-in-the making) I thought "received" fits in more than "garnered" does even though I leave it for you to decide. MSincccc (talk) 16:02, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Career (continued)
  • “he and Delpy's character” → “his and Delpy’s characters”
  • “universal acclaim from critics” → “critical acclaim”
    • So as to keep it simple and encyclopediac.
  • "A writer for The Hollywood Reporter" → "The Hollywood Reporter"
    • Since the article has not been attributed to a specific individual.
  • "His role as abolitionist John Brown" → "His role as the abolitionist John Brown"
    • It would be better to avoid the false title here, though I leave it to you.
  • Collider said that Hawke played "at his best as the Grabber"
    • Link "collider"?
  • “writin in” → “writing in”

MSincccc (talk) 17:43, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: thanks for these! 750h+ 02:56, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Artistry and screen technique
  • You could link to "Esquire" magazine and "blockbuster".

A solitary suggestion for this section. MSincccc (talk) 06:19, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: done. 750h+ 10:53, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Personal life and other ventures
  • “A caucasian woman” → “A Caucasian woman”

MSincccc (talk) 18:11, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: done. 750h+ 01:45, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's a support from me. By the way, I have a GA nomination which has been open for quite some time now; you could take a look if interested. MSincccc (talk) 13:21, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Poirot09

[edit]

Just a few suggestions, since I'm not familiar with FAC.

  • I would remove the first quote box, since it feels a little like a pull quote. The tangible impact of Dead Poets Society on his career is already illustrated with a quote in the body (the one about offers).
  • I think a few more roles might be relevant to the lead—he got a lot of award wins for First Reformed and a few for Maudie; also The Magnificent Seven is one of his biggest box office hits as a lead actor (here).
  • Hawke has made nine films with Linklater and has often talked about their collaboration, so I feel that more info about that might be included in the Artistry and screen technique section. A few sources, for example, are: 1, 2, 3. I found the first two by searching on Google Scholar, there might be more.
  • I would incorporate in the lead the most important points of the Artistry and screen technique section, since the lead should be a summary of all main sections of the article (maybe about his versatility and the fact that he stars in both blockbusters and independent films).

Aside from those things, great article! Poirot09 (talk) 15:15, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Poirot09: thanks for the comments. thoughts? 750h+ 11:04, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I had a quick look at the references and those also seem to be good, so I support. Poirot09 (talk) 15:10, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Older nominations

[edit]

Elizabeth Lyon (criminal)

[edit]
Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 13:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Elizabeth Lyon was an 18th century thief and prostitute who made a habit of being in relationships with young men and turning them to a life of crime (except the ones that were already involved in a life of crime) She is best known for her activities with the popular and well-known rogue Jack Sheppard. This is a new article, but it covers all available sources and provides a decent biography of an interesting character. – SchroCat (talk) 13:34, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

Good grief! You don't let the grass grow under your feet. It's less than two hours since I posted my informal review of the article, and as all your replies to my minor quibbles were completely satisfactory I am happy to sign on the dotted line here. The article is fairly brief – though three times longer, if you please, than her article in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography – but looks to me to be pretty comprehensive. Well sourced, evidently neutral and balanced, a jolly good read and surprisingly well illustrated. Gladly supporting. Could we have a more salubrious subject next? One of your pioneering British cooks, perhaps? – Tim riley talk 15:02, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for your earlier comments, which helped a lot. More death com8ng up with my next one, I’m afraid, but I’ll have a cook along after that. - SchroCat (talk) 21:18, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from MisawaSakura

[edit]

I 100 percent agree with Tim riley. I am very impressed with this, especially since it was just posted to FAC. Images check out good too. MisawaSakura (talk) 19:36, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:59, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Jim

[edit]

A lovely lady! No criticisms from me, many thanks for this Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:26, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from UC

[edit]
  • A reader who gets to the end of the article is rewarded by the revelation that the lead image looks nothing like Lyon. Can we say that in the caption?
  • It might be worth footnoting on the first day-month date that Britain used the Julian Calendar until 1752, so e.g. 4 September in this article is not the same as 4 September today. On the other hand, we're still before most other places adopted the Gregorian Calendar, so I don't think this is essential.
  • We have "fl. 1722–1726" in the lead, but the first date on which we attest her existence is given as "1722 or 1723" in the body. We also raise a possible attestation in 1721. Suggest therefore sticking a "circa" on that first date.
  • At her instigation, Sheppard soon began his career in crime: it's good practice to restate the antecedent ("At Lyon's instigation"), as you do for a similar phrase in the next paragraph.
  • Lyon and his brother became his accomplices: "and Sheppard's own brother" is better, as we've put a new person in between, and avoids the momentary confusion as to whether Lyon is the antecedent of "his".
  • the pair broke out of New Prison into the adjoining Clerkenwell Bridewell prison, then breaking out of that to freedom: breaking isn't grammatical here, but we can just cut it.
  • men who were involved in housebreaking: a touch of "officer-involved shooting" here?
    I think it's worth keeping the slightly cumbersome phrasing here, as some were already involved and some were persuaded by Lyon. - SchroCat (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If that’s so, we need to rephrase somehow anyway, since our phrasing suggests they were all already involved. UndercoverClassicist T·C 11:46, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Tweaked. - SchroCat (talk) 13:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I had a look in the body for the material corresponding to seemingly accompanying them to assist in perpetrating the crimes -- wondering whether we could do without "seemingly" -- and couldn't find it at all. Could you help me out here? UndercoverClassicist T·C 14:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Because it's not clear she always did. There are certainly references to her accompanying a couple of the men, but not all (there's no reference with Little, for example). - SchroCat (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm raising the query under MOS:LEAD -- if it's mentioned in the lead, it should be stated, ideally in more detail, in the body. When I turn to the body, I don't see the same thing: I see her being convicted of going thieving with a shopkeeper's son, maybe persuading Little into crime (but no mention of actually committing crimes with him -- are you trying to suggest or allow for that in the lead?), and definitely going stealing with John Smith. It sounds as though either the lead needs adjusting or more material needs to be added to the body. UndercoverClassicist T·C 12:32, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    So sorry UC: I thought I had covered this one and was coming back to give you a nudge only to see it was my fault entirely! I've tweaked this to "sometimes accompanying them", which should cover the gap in the sources. - SchroCat (talk) 17:07, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • transported to the Province of Maryland: in lead and body, I'd add "in [British] North America", since a lot of the place names for colonial locations have changed over time, and transportation is usually associated with Australia.
  • Lyon's name and notoriety is based on her connection to Sheppard: are based, but I would suggest keeping the verb as is and cutting name and: "name" is ambiguous ("the fact that she was called Elizabeth Lyon"?) and I don't really see what it adds that's different from "notoriety".
  • or for stealing a gold ring—: I think the MoS is to put the citation on the near side of a dash, as we do for brackets, but it might be dubious when (as here) the dash is unspaced.
    I've been told at various FACs to swap it round, whichever position I initially place it! - SchroCat (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The gaoler had heard that Sheppard had escaped from his previous imprisonment, so fitted him with chains and weighed down with two weights: weighed him down.
  • When Lyon visited him the next day, she was arrested as a possible accomplice and held; they were both then placed in the New Prison in Clerkenwell; they claimed they were husband and wife and were therefore given a cell together: a long sentence. Suggest making at least one of thos two semicolons into a full stop.
  • After some friends visited and smuggled some tools to the couple: cut the second some?
  • drilling through a 9 inches (23 cm) oak beam: "a nine-inch oak beam", surely, but we really need to specify the dimension: "an oak beam 9 inches thick"?
  • The couple scaled the 22 feet (6.7 m) walls and escaped: similarly, singular foot here, surely? "The ship was fitted with three six-inch guns", for instance.
  • Jonathan Wild—a vigilante known as the "Thief-Taker General: are we in the time period when thief-taking was as close to official justice as existed? "Vigilante" without some sort of explanation implies "criminal", or at least someone operating outside the law: some context here would help.
    He very much was outside the law in all sorts of ways. I think an explanation would be too long for this article, but we have a half-decent article on him should anyone find themselves interested. - SchroCat (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • After the escape Lyon and Sheppard went to a tavern <in> Westminster and the to another in Holborn,: typos.
  • As Lyon had given details of his whereabout to Wild: whereabouts?
  • His execution was scheduled for 4 September and he was returned to Newgate where he was given the Condemned Hold, the cell given to prisoners awaiting the death sentence: they had already received the sentence of death, so we either need something like "the implementation of the death sentence" or, simply, "execution".
  • On 31 August he had created enough space to squeeze through: given the "had", I think we need the preposition to be "by".
  • . It was the last time the two would meet; Lyon was held for three months. She was arrested the day after his escape: I think this would be better in chronological order.
  • given emetics to force her to say where Sheppard was hiding: can we call this torture, as it clearly was?
    We can, but I don't see the need to add quite such a weighted, emotive term: we describe clearly what happened (per the sources), without adding too much to it. - SchroCat (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • seducing a shopkeeper's son to go a thieving with her: a-thieving, at least per MOS:CONFORM?
  • By the middle of the year, she was living with a painter, James Little. James Guthrie, the chaplain of Newgate, thought that Lyon "hurried him headlong to his destruction", although he had been involved in crime before the couple met: we seem to have missed something in the middle here -- presumably Little ended up in Newgate?
    That's not covered. He was star witness for the prosecution, so maybe not, but I'm not sure the sources clarify, although I'll check, obviously. - SchroCat (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Noting that I had a a go at this and couldn't find anything. UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:48, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @SchroCat: (pinging to make sure this isn't lost given the declaration): I had a second wind, and have done a bit better. Sugden cites this document, which is Guthrie's record of the men executed at Tyburn (specifically, on 3 November 1725). It was apparently a regular periodical. Little was hanged on that date, not being one of the two out of the seven people so sentenced to be granted clemency, for highway robbery that had taken place the previous year (as I understand "28th of August last"). Suggest that this ought to be added. UndercoverClassicist T·C 22:00, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Many thanks: I’ll sort this in the morning. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 22:49, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All done, bar where commented otherwise. - SchroCat (talk) 11:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:25, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's my lot, barring a minor ce in the article I've just made (closing up "pawnbroker", as it's spelled in both the OED and the Cambridge dictionary) which you're welcome to object to if you wish. A nice piece of work (the article, not its subject!). UndercoverClassicist T·C 21:48, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

Source formatting seems consistent. I take that the alternate use of OCLC and ISBN is because not every book cited has an ISBN? I looked at reviews and authors and publishers and I don't see anything problematic. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Jo-Jo. Yes, that's right - I default to ISBNs wherever possible, but for those too early, I go to the next best thing. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 11:30, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Igordebraga

[edit]

Co-ord note

[edit]

@FAC coordinators: Would it be possible to open a second nom? This one has been open for a couple of weeks, had three supports and has passed the source and image reviews. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:39, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:24, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Lovely - thank you very much! - SchroCat (talk) 18:40, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exile (American band)

[edit]
Nominator(s): Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:19, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a lot of 70s rock fans know Exile for "Kiss You All Over". It's definitely one I've heard countless times on oldies stations. But how many know of that band's early years on the rock and roll circuit, or their ten #1 hits on the country charts, or the fact that they're still recording to this day?

The band's history stretches back to the 60s, with a great deal of information coming from 50 Years of Exile alongside a mix of contemporary news and music magazine articles. I feel this is one of my most substantial articles especially compared to the GA-class Nitty Gritty Dirt Band, another band of similar vintage. Maybe they're not as well known as the subjects of other FA-class country music articles such as Randy Travis, but if something as obscure within the genre as 3 of Hearts (album) can be FA-class, then I think Exile should have a relatively easy path to FA.

Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:19, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Don't use fixed px size
  • File:Dick_Clark_(cropped).JPG: source link is dead

HF

[edit]

I'll take a look this weekend. Hog Farm Talk 01:15, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why exactly did Caldwell request the move to NYC?
  • "The band also produced a music video for "She's a Miracle", one of the first to be aired on the television network CMT" - this seems to be overstating the earliness a bit. The source just says that it was part of the early CMT rotation, which is a bit broader than just the immediate early days. CMT was launched in 1983 and the Kentucky Hearts album was released in 1984, so clearly there were quite a few videos shown on CMT before "She's a Miracle"
  • "Roger BonDurant briefly joined their touring band in late 1989 as a backing vocalist and rhythm guitarist, but was not considered an official member." - I can't access the source but it has a date of February 1989 so how can it support something happening in late 1989?
  • ", the fourth single, "There You Go", under-performed on the charts" - isn't it a bit more useful to tell the reader where the single charted rather than being a bit euphemistic like this? "under-performed" could mean anywhere down to barely charting. And it's not like this was a part of the band's career where they could expect every single to be top-5 or anything
  • "were unsuccessful due to radio backlash against Exile in the intervening years" - what exactly was Exile doing to create "radio backlash"?
  • "Despite this, the band's tour bus was robbed after a concert in 1993, " - the use of "despite this" seems odd to me. It suggests that this would be unexpected given the prior-discussed information, but there's no real contrast there between the events. Touring more as a late-career band doesn't make the bus less likely to be robbed
  • Some of the dates noted in the members section do not appear to be sourced directly in the article - for instance, the exact dates of Salyer
  • What's Westbrook's credentials? I'm not familiar with Acclaim Press, although it doesn't appear to be part of the tier of publishers that anything published by them could be presumed to be a high-quality RS as required by the FA criteria. The Acclaim author page for Westbrook doesn't appear to contain an actual bio. I don't think I would question this source for GA, but FA requires a higher standard.

This is my first batch of thoughts. Hog Farm Talk 21:13, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: Sorry for not responding sooner. My modem died and I only got it back last night, and I've also been battling severe allergies. I think I've taken care of most of your issues to this point. I always mess up timelines when I try to edit them, so I'll try to corroborate the dates and then someone else can fix the timeline graphic. (Actually, given that some of the shorter-lived members' tenures are unknown, would removing the timeline entirely be acceptable?)
Randy Westbrook is a music professor with a Ph.D in musicology. This is corroborated by this independent source, and further searching yielded even more sources corroborating his credentials. I admit I'm not well-versed on this level of source quality when it comes to FAs, but I would think a Ph.D in a topically relevant field lends credibility to the book. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For history books, we'd generally expect something more than just a Ph.D but admittedly music criticism is not an area that I am familiar with. My inclination is to hold off on a decision regarding the suitability of Westbrook until we can get a more familiar source reviewer there. The dates for members issue involves more than just the timeline - there are dates in the member section that aren't directly supported (again, Salyers is an example). It's also not immediately clear what the black lines in the timeline chart are intended to represent - are those albums the band put out? Hog Farm Talk 20:44, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I hope it is acceptable, because it'll kill like the entire first four paragraphs otherwise. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 01:44, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ETA: Usually when timelines are involved, the black lines do indicate album releases. That said, since some members are relatively unknown, I felt a timeline was too complicated. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 15:17, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ippantekina

[edit]

Prose review coming soon. I don't know much about this band, so my review should be NPOV. Ippantekina (talk) 22:04, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ippantekina: any progress here? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 16:57, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for the delay, my preliminary comments are below.
  • "in the state of Kentucky"
  • "Exile began a transition to country music" can be just transitioned to country music"
  • "the beginning of the 21st century" early 2000s decade makes more sense to me
  • "Exile has continued to tour and record independent albums under this lineup in the 2010s and 2020s." what does "independent" mean in this context?
  • "Songs of theirs have also been covered by Alabama, Huey Lewis and the News, Dave & Sugar, and the Forester Sisters. Additionally, LeMaire has written songs for Restless Heart, Diamond Rio, and Clay Walker." not sure if this is significant... Ippantekina (talk) 20:31, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

High and Low (1963 film)

[edit]
Nominator(s): Plifal (talk) 07:50, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The suspense is killing! This article is about the classic 1963 film High and Low by Akira Kurosawa. This is my first FAC, and my first major Wikipedia project. I started editing this article back in January/February of 2024, and have been scouring flea markets and book stores for any information on Kurosawa. With luck, this will be the first of many films by the master to grace this page. Please be ruthless but encouraging!

Courtesy pings to TompaDompa and David Fuchs for their invaluable help at peer review; LastJabberwocky for their thorough GAR; BigChrisKenney for their copyedit; and Eiga-Kevin2 and ErnestKrause who expressed interest at some point at looking over this article.--Plifal (talk) 07:50, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Valuable context, my only experience with FA reviewing process is a review of Tomorrow's Pioneers, where I'm the only person who voted for promotion :). BUT based on my assessment and, most importantly for me, great improvement of "Themes"—the article is almost flawless, where the word "almost" is just formality because nothing can be perfect. —LastJabberwocky (Rrarr) 08:29, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thank you kindly!--Plifal (talk) 12:32, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am impressed, considering this is your first nomination. My only critique is the "Further reading section", most Featured articles do without them and I myself have learned to just incorporate them into the main body of sources if I have access and can cite them. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:32, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Paleface Jack, thank you very much! all credit to everyone who looked over the article (most especially TompaDompa). the further reading section in this article contains two books and an article, all of which either don't mention high and low, or only mention it in passing. bock (1991) mentions it but all information contained within it (a couple of sentences) is found more extensively in other works. kurosawa (1983) is included for being the director's autobiography, but the biography ends in 1950, after information pertaining to the creation of rashomon. nogami (2001) is included as the english translation of nogami's original work detailing her life as a production assistant for kurosawa; the revised version which includes an extensive piece on high and low has only been published in japanese and is cited in the article.
it was my understanding that further readings don't necessarily have to pertain precisely to the topic, rather they can exist as supplemental materials for people to read around the topic to gain a greater understanding of it, which was the aim of inclusion here. i hope this makes sense! if you feel it should be excised though i have no issue with that.--Plifal (talk) 09:45, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We shall see if others agree, for the moment, keep it. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:49, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
i do apologise for disturbing and likely placing pressure on you both, but just in case this fell off your "to-do" lists, TechnoSquirrel69 and Generalissima, i have responded and have some queries still. if you have the time i would very much appreciate more guidance; otherwise please let me know if you are too busy at the moment!--Plifal (talk) 13:05, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping, Plifal, I had indeed let this slip my mind. You've done really good work addressing my concerns, and I've responded on the couple of questions you had. I don't think at this point that I'll be able to commit to any further comments, but good luck with the rest of the candidacy! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 21:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TechnoSquirrel69, no worries!! thank you kindly for looking over the article!!! i should have fixed most of the sourcing, i hope! best wishes.--Plifal (talk) 10:29, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • File:HIGH_AND_LOW_JP_.jpg needs a more expansive FUR
  • given the lack of concrete authorship i have been unable to ascertain whether this has been published in the usa, but i would hazard a guess that according to the hirtle chart it probably isn't in copyright for quite a while yet. i've replaced the image with a picture of the kodama express train, hopefully this should be ok and not in contravention of japanese panorama laws?--Plifal (talk) 13:41, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria, apologies, forgot to ping you initially.--Plifal (talk) 14:51, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Purely utilitarian objects don't generally get copyright protection so the train is fine. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:26, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TechnoSquirrel69

[edit]

Excited to see this here! I'd be more than happy to put down a few comments in the next week. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:07, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you for all your help and guidance to this point!!! you've been an excellent shadow contributor to this. i look forward to working with you again!!--Plifal (talk) 15:16, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And here we go! Here's a few prose comments to get us started. Please keep in mind that these are all suggestions; you very well may have reasons not to implement some of my comments (I'm no expert on this film), so please feel free to do so if that's the case. Citation numbers from this revision.

  • "the studio bought the rights ..." does not follow from "Produced by Toho". Maybe "The film was produced by Toho Studios, who bought the rights ..."?
  • done.
  • 2 September 1962, and took place → 2 September 1962, taking place (to reduce the and repetition in that sentence)
  • done.
  • Is the sentence about the single-shot sequence a significant enough detail to mention in the lead?
  • i decided to include a brief sentence highlighting this scene because every major source that talks about the film's production dedicates ~half of its content to this scene, the article dedicates a paragraph to this relatively short section of the film, and most other details are not generally so specific, so i don't think it's undue.
  • under a month, and after → under a month and, after
  • done.
  • I might swap the places of the "received generally positive reviews" and "highest-grossing film" bits for flow. I can elaborate if necessary.
  • done, i think, but if i misunderstood, please do elaborate!
  • A couple issues with the parenthetical inflation calculations: first, they should probably be in footnotes (you do this further down); second, they present an accessibility issue since the tooltips over the years cannot be seen by mobile readers. I realize the latter is actually a problem with the template, but I would recommend replacing instances of it for those reasons.
  • done.
  • I find § Themes to have quite a lot of technical jargon. For example, "Film scholar David Desser refers to High and Low as containing three chronological planes of action that "reveals Kurosawa's fascination with process". He notes this attention to process as part of a tension that occurs between Kurosawa's humanistic sentiment and formalistic tendencies." It's difficult for me to glean what Desser's argument is here. I know academics tend to use a lot of jargon, but it's our job to parse it and present it for a general audience. I would take a closer look through this section for issues like this.
  • should hopefully have fixed this specific instance, but i don't think i'm very good at doing this, either i overestimate or badly explain, and this is the fourth time someone's brought this up. i need more concrete examples and fixes i think. now reads: "Film scholar David Desser divides High and Low into three sections, describing the shift from Gondo's home, to the detectives investigating, and the kidnapper's world as "planes of action" that follow a chronology, moving from 'high' to 'low'. He notes the process of the police investigation as a thematic tension between Kurosawa's humanistic sentiment and formalistic tendencies." but i recognise this is still somewhat imperfect.
  • "have been analogised" in the image caption sounds weaselly. I would attribute the argument to Richie as in the prose.
  • done.
  • Mifune's Gondo
  • done.
  • Dante himself
  • done.
  • Is the reportedly in "kidnappings in Japan reportedly increased" supported by the source? We don't want to be casting doubt on something the source says explicitly.
  • wild says: "an apparent increase in the crime in Japan in the months following the film’s release." which i don't think is misrepresented by the use of "reportedly", but galbraith is more assertive, so i've axed the use of wild here and removed the word.
  • "In emphasising the lenient sentencing of Japanese kidnapping laws" reads like this detail was already mentioned earlier in the article, but I don't think it was.
  • changed to: "Kurosawa had intended to inspire harsher punishments by emphasising the crime's lenient sentencing, but was instead blamed for an increase in kidnapping cases."
  • "but was instead blamed" by whom?
  • unfortunately, galbraith doesn't elaborate.
  • sentences—but → sentences, but
  • done.
  • Considering "the Kurosawa household" is already mentioned, "director's daughter, Kazuko Kurosawa" could be "director's daughter Kazuko".
  • done.
  • Maybe we could use a different word than grounded , to avoid the implication that she was punished for whatever reason?
  • changed to: "forbidden from leaving the house"
  • 35mm prints → [[35 mm movie film|35&nbsp;mm prints]]
  • done.
  • "Awards and accolades" These are basically synonymous, so I would pick just one.
  • done, chosen 'awards'.
  • done.
  • The inflation calculations in the footnotes need citations. (I did similar digging for Princess Mononoke — maybe that source would be helpful here?) Lose the periods per MOS:CAPFRAG.
  • done.
  • Italicize the names of works in the citations per MOS:WEBITALICS — this also works inside {{sfn}}s.
  • done. i have left rotten tomatoes, golden globes, and edgar awards unitalicised though, since that seems generally consistent with their usage. i was also wondering about italicising BFI, which i have italicised, but wouldn't normally expect to see as such.
  • Slant Magazine seems to be the proper name of that publication, so use that in the {{sfn}}.
  • done.
  • Make sure titles of works (mostly just High and Low) are italicized in the citation titles and aren't inside quotes.
  • done.
  • I would suggest making the casing of the citation titles consistent.
    • (on this point i have a query: i write the titles as they're presented on the website/book. in this respect they're consistent? unless you mean in title case, for example.)
      This RfC recently established that following the casing used by sources individually was not considered a consistent citation style by the community. I would go with either sentence or title case. —TS
      • done i think!
  • The book citations mention the publication location inconsistently.
  • done.
  • The works are linked to their Wikipedia articles inconsistently (for example, Rotten Tomatoes isn't).
  • as with above, i will probably miss some of these last few on the point of standardising citations, but will do my best!

I'm considering doing a source review, but not sure if I'll have the time this week — I'll let you know, of course. Please let me know if you have any questions! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:24, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

thank you so far! i have a few questions, and i need to still go through the inflation calculators, but i've gone through most of these.--Plifal (talk) 11:56, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
TechnoSquirrel69, responses above.--Plifal (talk) 11:19, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Woo hoo! Thanks both. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:32, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Generalissima

[edit]

I plan to get to this sometime in the next week! Great seeing a new face around :) Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:08, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i look forward to working with you!! i've long seen you around wikipedia and have so much respect and admiration for your contributions (especially to chinese and japanese history), so thank you kindly for looking over this!!!--Plifal (talk) 15:17, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay! Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:21, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Generalissima, nosorry!! thank you so much! my responses are below.--Plifal (talk) 05:05, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lede is good, appreciate the use of interlanguage links. There's a bit of 'sea of blue' with all the actors listed. I don't edit film articles usually, so I'm unsure if its convention, but do we need to list a bunch of them at once, esp. if the infobox already includes them?
  • Official Selection is fine in the lede, but it isn't defined in the body, and I'm unsure what this actually means. Are only some Venice Film Festival films Official Selections?
  • yes. because the venice biennale is technically an exhibition, some films are shown in competition and some films are shown out of it. any film that's shown in competition is part of the official selection and nominated for any of the awards (unlike e.g. the oscars, where certain films are only eligible in certain categories via a nomination process). of these, the golden lion is the highest reward. i used the golden lion as a stand-in to indicate that it received the honour of being selected, but did not win anything. is there a better way to indicate this?
      • Hmm.. Maybe a parenthetical (allowing it to be shown in the competition) or something like that? Just for those unaware of how the festival works.-G
        • now reads: "In August 1963, the film was entered into the Venice Film Festival as part of the Official Selection (placing it competition for the festival's awards)."
  • No comments on plot
  • "Credited as Ed McBain" without the context that its his pen name makes it sound like they just got his name wrong lol
  • added.
  • Had Kurosawa worked with those co-screenwriters before?
  • yes, but i was under the impression it's not normal to mention it unless the sources make a point of it.
  • Also, how did he encounter this novel? Was it translated, or did he just read English? (I understand this may not be known)
  • kurosawa couldn't speak english (at least in his public appearances in america he used a translator). likely he read a translated version, but the sources don't say. i also added some clarifying information to this section in order to further elucidate other information given later.
  • This is legitimately so well written, I'm finding it hard to even nitpick.
  • i'm very glad to hear it!! all credit to others who have looked over it!

Source formatting nitpicks:

  • ISBNs are not consistent, but should be made so (some are 13 digit, some are 9. Several books lack ISBNs at all)
  • in all cases that the 13 digit isbn is available to me i've used it. otherwise i've used the 9 digit isbn. other books with no isbn identifier (as far as i can see ito 1976 and bock 1991) don't have one, ito in particular was really difficult to track down.
  • you're totally right about deleuze, completely missed that! hopefully should have got to these. i didn't know about worldcat!—but after checking both it and google books i have to conclude that bock (1991) and ito (1976) don't have clear isbns (though i did find an oclc for ito).
  • Burch 1979 has a sentence case title for some reason
  • i used the title as seen in the source, but switched to title case.
  • This is a common way of formatting it, but the MoS specifically says titles have to be made consistent across your bibliography (MOS:TITLECAPS)
  • fixed.
  • You include the publisher for the Kinema Junpo and Sight and Sound, but not any of the other magazines
  • done.
  • done.
  • Is The Illuminerdi a reliable source?
  • for factual reporting, no, but i'm using it here as a primary source for an interview, which i think should be ok.
    • Ah, i missed that. Go ahead.-G
  • Spotlight appears to be a journal (an undergrad journal, but its used sparingly enough I'd accept it)
  • yes i was a little unsure about this, but the fact that it had academic oversight from an associate professor led me to accept it. should i move it to the books and journals subsection?
      • Yeah, that'd probably be a good idea-G
        • re. this and the comment below, i realise now this is what you were referring to? i checked issn portal and couldn't find it. it appears that the original website has gone offline too, so i decided to just axe the source, it wasn't the highest quality and for the claim its making i'm confident in the two already there.
  • At least one journal and many newspapers are missing ISSNs
  • i apologise but i'm unsure which journal you're referring to. i hopefully should have fixed the newspapers.
  • Should the newspapers be under web, actually? They feel like their own thing
  • i categorised it based on how i found the information, which may not be correct but which made sense to me. all the references in news & magazines are either print copies i have in my possession or archive scans of print documents. everything in web is based on readily-accessible website links. the other thing that would confuse me is where to put articles from, e.g. filmmaker magazine, the a.v. club or slant magazine? these are online magazines, or articles which may only appear online even if there's a print version; i'm not sure i'd be able to verify whether the article was included in a print copy.
  • done.
  • done.
  • Just link Holt McDougal for " Holt, Rinehart and Winston of Canada"
  • done.

Comments from TompaDompa

[edit]

As noted in the nomination, I looked at this when it was at WP:Peer review/High and Low (1963 film)/archive1. I'll try to find the time to take another look at it here at WP:FAC, but I think I'll wait until the fresh sets of eyes from the reviewers above have gone over it—if I haven't weighed in when a week has passed since the others finished their reviews, feel free to ping me anew. My impression from PR is that this should not be very far off from WP:FA quality and, given the nominator's clear willingness and ability to collaborate productively with reviewers as well as their apparent in-depth familiarity with the sources, getting it that final stretch towards meeting all the WP:Featured article criteria should not be too much of a hassle. TompaDompa (talk) 16:04, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

again, thank you kindly!! your comments were such a help, and i do so appreciate your commitment. please take as long as you need!!--Plifal (talk) 22:51, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My initial comments follow. More to come later. TompaDompa (talk) 23:26, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

TompaDompa, responses below.--Plifal (talk) 04:31, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
General comments
  • For the record, I changed an instance where there were duplicate footnotes into a single reused one.
  • thank you!
Lead
  • Would it be possible to get an appropriate currency conversion for the budget? I understand if it might not be, given the intricacies of currency conversions and inflation adjustments (we would ideally want present-day USD, which could be too tall of an order).
    • i'm reluctant to do this for the reasons discussed below (i.e. adhering to the currencies used by the sources with additional messiness in footnotes and body). unless you think it's necessary, i think it makes more sense for people to check the modern exchange rate themselves if they're interested, considering that information is already provided.
  • "Only one attempt could be made to film the ransom exchange, because of the number of cameramen required, all other productions had to shut down for the day." – this is an anacoluthon: does the middle clause explain the first clause or the last clause?
    • changed to, "Only one attempt could be made to film the ransom exchange, on that day all other productions had to shut down due to the number of cameramen required."
      • That's a WP:COMMASPLICE, and it doesn't explain the situation particularly well. If I understand the body correctly, the reason only one attempt was possible was the use of the train, and the reason all other productions at Toho had to shut down was that all the cameramen were busy shooting this scene. TompaDompa (talk) 11:10, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        • how about, "Only one attempt could be made to film the ransom exchange. The shoot required multiple camermen, leading to all other film productions to be shut down for the day."?
  • "High and Low was released in Japan on 1 March 1963 and became the highest-grossing film at the Japanese domestic box office that year." – this is ambiguous: did it become the highest-grossing film of 1963 or did it set the all-time record in 1963?
    • changed to, "box office for that year"
  • "The film premiered overseas as part of the Official Selection for the Venice Film Festival" – if it premiered overseas there, that means that the first showing outside of Japan was at Venice. If this is correct, the date should be given—especially considering the US release in late November has already been mentioned in the WP:LEAD. I might suggest restructuring this slightly to put the events in chronological order.
    • done.
  • I would link humanism here, since it is a word with a specific meaning that is nonetheless taken by people unfamiliar with the term to mean the same thing as humaneness or humanitarianism with some regularity.
    • done.
Plot
  • "The kidnapper relates that he has no regrets for his actions" – "tells Gondo" would seem more natural than "relates". It also has less of a connotation of truthfulness, which would be an improvement in this case.
    • done.
Production
  • "after seeing Tsutomu Yamazaki portray the kidnapper with such passion" – Hm. That's putting a subjective assessment in WP:WikiVoice. Try to rephrase it so Wikipedia isn't saying that the performance was passionate.
    • decided to remove reference to "passionate", so it now reads, "but Kurosawa changed his mind while editing the film after seeing Tsutomu Yamazaki's performance."
  • "he described wanting to stress the leniency of Japanese kidnapping laws, as he felt the police did not adequately care for the life of the victim" – I'm not entirely clear on how these two things (the leniency of the laws and the police's insufficient care) are connected. Does the source make it clearer?
    • not especially. re-reading the source, it appears more likely that he's referring to the laws themselves not caring for the lives of the victims, but that he chose to represent this by focusing on the ruthlessness of the police pursuit in the film. changed to, "he described wanting to stress the leniency of Japanese kidnapping laws and their inadequate attention to the suffering of the victims."
  • "Even though he was shocked at the brazenness and cruelty of the crime depicted, Kurosawa felt that his criminal deserved sympathy in tandem with the sadistic impulses he was subjected to." – is "his" criminal here Hunter's or Kurosawa's?
    • kurosawa's. changed to "Yamazaki's character"
  • "Kurosawa felt that his criminal deserved sympathy in tandem with the sadistic impulses he was subjected to" – is "in tandem with" really the right way of putting it?
    • rephrased this sentence, "Kurosawa felt that Yamazaki's character deserved some sympathy, partially due to his background and situation."
  • "the sadistic impulses he was subjected to" – "subjected to"?
    • regarding the sympathetic portrayal of yamazaki's character, kurosawa said, "Well, if you try to be sadistic towards this man, you really cannot help being also a little bit sympathetic. I simply couldn't help it." also, see above.

Support from Jon698

[edit]
  • Link Yokohama in the lede
  • done.
  • "The film secured a budget of ¥230 million." -> Is it possible to add a yen to USD conversion with Template:JPYConvert?
  • not done, i think this would clutter the information and complicate the conversions. to me it makes more sense to adjust for inflation via its own currency unless stated by the source.
  • However film critic Atsushi Kobayashi -> Add comma after However
  • done.
  • done.
  • I think the Music section could be reworked for readability. I made an edit here to turn the single paragraph into three different ones. Please review this.
  • done something similar, kept the stuff related to Sato in one paragraph before splitting the information to talk about the use of music more generally.
  • Donald Richie, scholar and acquaintance of Kurosawa -> Is Richie a scholar of Kurosawa or he is just a scholar? If he is just a scholar then you should add "a" before scholar.
  • done.
  • In January and February 2023, the BFI -> Use the full name British Film Institute and then use the initials for "The British Film Institute released a DVD" later in the article
  • done.
  • High and Low's screenplay was co-written by Akira Kurosawa, Hideo Oguni, Eijiro Hisaita, and Ryūzō Kikushima. -> Link to Eijiro Hisaita's Japanese page as you did in the lede
  • done.
  • Include a wikilink to Evan Hunter in the photo description in the development section
  • done.
Jon698, addressed your concerns above. thank you for taking the time to review!! just fyi though, the {{xt|}} template shouldn't be used.--Plifal (talk) 11:19, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no further comments. Jon698 (talk) 14:51, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jon698, thanks again! do you support or oppose at this time, or reserve judgement?--Plifal (talk) 22:56, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Jon698 (talk) 01:50, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thank you very much!!--Plifal (talk) 14:23, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hundreds of Beavers

[edit]
Nominator(s): Jon698 (talk) 20:00, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the plot, production, release, and reception of the film Hundreds of Beavers. It was upgraded to GA status by me back in February. It is comparable in length to some other FA-class film articles. I have done intense research for this article since May 2024. I have used every possible news article or web page and created a Google alert solely for subjects related to this. Jon698 (talk) 20:00, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Paleface Jack

[edit]
Emerging from my place in the void to offer my comments on this second nomination. My only concern here and advice would be to split the awards and nominations of the film into its own article. This is due to the length, and there is a significant amount of accolades and nominations for the film, which takes away from the article. Paleface Jack (talk) 15:18, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I was initially concerned about the total number of awards not being enough to justify a page, but Hundreds of Beavers won or received nominations from 15 festivals/organizations while The Sixth Sense received it from 20. I will be making a page soon. Jon698 (talk) 03:27, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done List of accolades received by Hundreds of Beavers Jon698 (talk) 03:33, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Paleface Jack: Making sure you are notified. Jon698 (talk) 03:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Paleface Jack (talk) 15:29, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lynch Fragments

[edit]
Nominator(s): 19h00s (talk) 15:46, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article covers the abstract sculpture series by American artist Melvin Edwards, generally considered to be his most notable series of works. In addition to a historical background on the inspiration behind and creation of the works, it also details critical reception and analysis of the sculptures. I think I've covered every major historical/stylistic element and believe it should be featured as this series is an important part of American and African-American art history and modernism. Previously went through peer review, GA review, and DYK review. Thank you to any reviewers, and I apologize if I've mis-formatted anything in this nomination/candidacy, this is my first pass at the FA process :) --19h00s (talk) 15:49, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MisawaSakura

[edit]

Image review

Added! Thanks for reminding me on this :) 19h00s (talk) 13:31, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil

[edit]

Placeholder as a reminder to self. oh wow love the pieces and article. comments soon. Ceoil (talk) 17:53, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ceoil Nudge :-) . Gog the Mild (talk) 22:24, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UC

[edit]

Welcome to FAC -- and congratulations on your first nomination. Some points below, down to the end of the "Description" section. I need a bit of persuading on the prose: at the moment, it doesn't feel really clear to me or as useful as an FA needs to be as an introduction to the uninitiated. The Background section is very lengthy but not always particularly readable; I don't really feel like I come away with a full grasp of what these things are or where they came from. Conversely, the Description section gives me very little, well, description. When you compare it with other visual-arts FAs like The Four Stages of Cruelty (also on a series of works), the difference stands out. In part, I think greater use of illustration would go some way to solving this problem. UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:57, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First round of replies below, more tk before Saturday, thank you for this. On the illustration front, I would say that this feels far more complicated to me than just finding a few images of these sculptures; I've always interpreted the language in the non-free content guidelines and upload wizard for copyrighted 3-d buildings and sculptures to mean that photographs of non-free 3-d works must themselves be freely licensed. I've always assumed we needed someone to go make a freely licensed image that we could then use, scaled down. I was under the impression that we can't just take any old image of the sculpture and scale it down as fair use (I've already searched high and low for free photos of Some Bright Morning, and I've not encountered it in person to make my own photos [or, not yet, lol]). Have I been misunderstanding the nuances there? --19h00s (talk) 23:08, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We can use non-free media under certain conditions -- the general rule being that it adds important encyclopaedic value which cannot be obtained from a free work that exists or might reasonably be created. There is a "more free" provision that says we should prefer (for example) a GFDL-released photo of a copyrighted artwork to a photo that is itself in copyright, but I don't think there's anything in the NFCC that absolutely prohibits using a non-free photo if the encyclopaedic rationale is solid. Nikkimaria is the expert here, and as she's already in the review, she may be able to advise? UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:21, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ahhhhhh OK, I guess I was getting tripped up on the "more free" provision, I misremembered that as a prohibition as opposed to a preference. I'll go ahead and grab a picture of the work to scale down, pending confirmation from Nikkimaria that this is the case. Thanks for clearing that up for me! 19h00s (talk) 18:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added another round of replies/edits! Will add an image once NikkiMaria confirms and I'll grab a few more visual descriptions from cited reviews to flesh out the "description and process" section a bit. Thanks again! --19h00s (talk) 00:08, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Non-free images are permissible, but the "double" non-free makes it harder to argue that a freer alternative could not be created. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:52, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added a sized down fair use image of Some Bright Morning last night, searching for some additional images to help break up the text. A few ideas I had: maybe one additional image of a sculpture for the description section once it's fleshed out; an image of/relating to Ronald Stokes; the front cover of Ginzburg's book depending on copyright; an image of Edwards that's different from his article infobox; images of the Gonzalez or Smith works depending on copyright; and possibly a few images of people named in the titles of works (this feels like low hanging fruit to me, though). Any other suggestions or thoughts on images? 19h00s (talk) 13:59, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Still need to do some more addition to the description section but I added several additional images after some searching. Would love feedback on whether the restructure is a good direction before I jump into the descriptions. Thanks again y'all! 19h00s (talk) 22:33, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't want to give the impression that any particular structure or scheme has to be followed -- all that matters is that we cover the necessary ground and do so in a way that's clear to an uninitiated reader. UndercoverClassicist T·C 16:01, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Adjusted the structure again, made it more time-based but still integrated the timeline with the social/political context. Would love suggestions on how best to format the images to avoid sandwiching text or making odd space gaps. Also asked for some insight from @Rollinginhisgrave as we've worked on a few reviews together in the past, RIHG's comments largely mirror what others have said + a few more specifics; RIHG agreed with a comment from the DYK review about the use of quotes in the "Reception and analysis" section, so I'll work on some paraphrasing/generalizations to cut that down (I do struggle with that kind of meta-analysis sometimes tho and I worry it crosses the line into original research, but I recognize the validity of the feedback, especially now that two editors have said the same thing). 19h00s (talk) 17:22, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The artist began the series in 1963 and has continued it throughout his entire career, aside from two periods in the 1960s and 1970s.: This confused me a little, so I read through the article, and I'm still a bit confused. Has he been working constantly on this series except during those two breaks? If not, how do we differentiate the time between sculptures from breaks in the process? If he's actually produced at least one in every year except those noted, I think that might be a clearer way of saying things: I notice that he seems to have actively decided to stop in January 1967, but I don't see the same for 1973.
    • Yes, per the literature, he has been working on them constantly since 1963, except for 1967-1972 and 1974-1977. There is no exact date on the end of the 1973 sculptures, Brenson and Craft only say he stopped by the end of the year. I've never read anyone explicitly say "in every single year in this date range he completed at least one work from the series", I've only read language to the effect of "he has worked continuously since..." or "the series has been ongoing since...", with caveats about the pauses. It does seem quite possible to me that he has gone at least a year at some point without completing one of these sculptures, but the information about his process (working on pieces over several years) implies that even if he wasn't completing a work in any given year, he was still working on them. Whereas during the pauses, he intentionally stopped work on any of them at all. - 19h00s
  • In 1963, this experimentation resulted in a small relief sculpture that began his Lynch Fragments series. The first work in the series, titled Some Bright Morning, comprises: is this all talking about the same sculpture? It's not wonderfully clear. As that sculpture is discussed in detail in the text, you could consider adding a fair-use image.
    • Yes, this is the same work; I think maybe changing "The first work..." to "This first work..." could clear that up? And I wish I could add an image but I do not have a freely licensed image to scale down for fair use. Haven't seen this sculpture irl myself to make a photo and haven't found any free images on Flickr/etc. (but per my note up top, have I been incorrectly assuming that photographs of 3-d works must themselves be freely licensed?) - 19h00s
  • All footnotes should end in full stops (I noticed notes 9 and 10 don't).
    • Done. And not pushing back here, but for my own reference in the future, I'm wondering where this is written in the MOS or a Wikipedia guideline - couldn't find anything documented, I had always thought it was preference. - 19h00s
  • The title of the first sculpture in the series, Some Bright Morning, alludes to an account in Ginzburg's anthology. Writing in 1982, Edwards described the narrative of the referenced story:: we probably don't need to introduce the sculpture again. I'd also suggest trying to get all the discussion together -- we explain the genesis of this work twice, in different ways. Firstly it's an outgrowth of his welding experiments, then it's a response to police violence.
    • See below. - 19h00s
  • Some Bright Morning is a piece dedicated to a black family: I think we need to be clear that he's talking about the Ginzburg work here, not the Edwards one. Or is he talking about his own work? That would resolve the "error" you note a bit later.
    • It's kind of hard to put this plainly without using the quotes or copying what I wrote, but: The Edwards quote is indeed about his own work, the sculpture, while the family he is referring to is the family from the Florida story in Ginzburg's anthology. But he must have mixed up the stories and phrases in the anthology when creating/titling the sculpture and writing his explanations about its genesis, because the phrase "some bright morning" does not actually appear in the story about the Florida family. That phrase appears in a different story concerning a man in Georgia from the same anthology by Ginzburg, per Craft's explanation. So Edwards did make an error, as Craft notes, attributing the phrase to one story (Florida) instead of the actual narrative it came from (Georgia); it's not like a moral error or anything but it seems important to note that the explicit connection between the title of the sculpture and the Florida story is not textually accurate. - 19h00s
  • quoted in Brenson, Michael, "Lynch Fragments", in Gedeon, Lucinda H. (ed.). Melvin Edwards Sculpture: A Thirty-Year Retrospective, 1963–1993 (1993): these long in-text attributions for the blockquotes are distracting, and they don't seem necessary when we have a footnote to give all this information anyway.
    • Adjusted to just be the author, title, year, let me know if you think they should be shorter. - 19h00s
  • He has reiterated several times that he did not want the sculptures to be understood purely in a formalist context: what does that mean, bearing MOS:NOFORCELINK in mind?
    • He didn't want critics to view the sculptures solely in the context of formalist art discourse, or the study of art purely through a visual lens without historical or social contextualization; he wanted critics to understand the sculptures' social context as inextricable from their visual content. Fully defining formalism in the article - which is kinda the only way to further explain this - seems like asking for trouble though, that would take up so much space. - 19h00s
      • You could probably rework the first sentence of your reply here into something that would fit well. UndercoverClassicist T·C 17:34, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done, let me know if that seems clean enough. Feels a bit of a run-on sentence but it is a complex thought. - 19h00s
  • González's peasant mother and child of 1936-37: endash here, not hyphen.
    • Done. - 19h00s
  • so he turned his focus to his other bodies of work, saying that the move from California was also an opportunity to move past his old work: two things: can we give an idea of what he did instead, and can we avoid the repetition of work ... work?
    • Added details on what he moved on to (outdoor painted works, barbed wire/chain), rephrased to avoid repetition - 19h00s
  • As I read through the "Background and history" section -- it's very long and starts to meander a bit. Suggest splitting it up and adding some images (see above, perhaps) to break down the "wall of text" effect.
    • (this is the "see below" reply) OK, I took kind of a big swing here. Not sure if this was the best approach, but I tried splitting it up into a few subsections (alternate section headings welcome) - the timeline of the creation of the works, the meaning/intent behind the titles along with the political/social context that informed them, and the artistic inspirations. I think it both breaks up a bit of the wall of text issue (before adding image[s]) and makes it feel a bit less meandering. But I would love feedback on whether or not the divisions seem clean. Importantly, I did make an adjustment to the phrasing on the social/political background to the sculptures after going back to the sources again based on your comment. He was not really inspired to start the series by the Civil Rights Movement and death of Stokes, but rather was inspired by these things to title the series as he did, in order to imbue the works with the social/political context/implication. I think it's a subtle but key difference. Let me know what you think about this overall restructure. - 19h00s
  • Edwards mounted a retrospective exhibition at the Studio Museum in Harlem, giving him the opportunity to view a large number of the Lynch Fragments sculptures together for the first time in several years: the note says sixteen -- is that really a large number? Also, could he not have seen them in his studio, or wherever they were before being put into the museum?
    • Adjusted the phrasing to be more clear; it was the first time he had seen a large number installed together, as opposed to just in his studio/in small numbers. 16 does appear to have been a "large" number for him at the time. Craft actually has a footnote on this point which notes that Edwards only had a "small number" in his studio at the time, small in comparison to 16; added that footnote to the citation location for clarity. - 19h00s
  • Note 27 quotes Edwards, but needs to explicitly say that it's doing so.
    • Done; and adjusted two others that weren't explicit. - 19h00s
  • a Shona word for elder or grandfather: MOS:WORDSASWORDS, so italicise or use double quotes.
    • Done. - 19h00s
  • the Lynch Fragments sculptures from post-1978 do reference: not quite grammatical: from after 1978 is better.
    • Done. - 19h00s
  • among which are the Soweto uprising and the Iraq War.: suggest putting dates on these, as they're quite far apart, and potentially explaining their relevance per MOS:NOFORCELINK.
    • Added dates and very slightly rephrased, happy to add more context if you think necessary. - 19h00s
  • in the 1970s, '80s, and beyond: not sure this is quite encyclopaedic phrasing, and we don't usually abbreviate '80s etc (WP:TONE; WP:NOTPAPER).
    • Done. - 19h00s
  • The pieces in the series are among Edwards's best-known and celebrated: most celebrated or similar needed here.
    • OK thank you haha, that's how I had it originally but someone else adjusted it to the current state, I'm glad my first instinct was right. Done. - 19h00s
  • Suggest converting the various imperial measurements for non-US readers.
    • Done, I think I converted them all. - 19h00s
  • the works needed to be spaced three feet apart, preferably installed in groups of multiples of 16: MOS:NUM would prefer both numbers to be in words or figures.
    • Done. - 19h00s
  • Having found the Background section a bit word-heavy, I'm finding the Description section very sparse. Most of the discussion here isn't actually describing the sculptures, but rather how Edwards made them and how he likes to have them exhibited. We get very little sense of what they actually look like.
    • Added a bit more visual description and moved some details on process up to a different section. "Description and installation method" is still much shorter than the background section, but it's more detailed than before. I think part of my problem here is that I just really don't want to veer into "wannabe critic" territory by getting too detailed/florid with visual descriptions. -19h00s

Mary Fortune

[edit]
Nominator(s): MCE89 (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a 19th-century Australian writer who was probably the first woman to write detective fiction. She wrote pseudonymously throughout her career—likely in part due to her scandalous past—with her identity only rediscovered several decades after her death. The details of her life have only recently been unearthed by Lucy Sussex, whose research I have relied on heavily in writing this article.

I'm very grateful to @LEvalyn for their GA review, to @Noleander for their feedback as an FAC mentor, and to @Jimfbleak for their comments. This is my first FA nomination, and I am very much looking forward to feedback. MCE89 (talk) 22:22, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Borsoka

[edit]

Congratulations on your first FAC! As this is your first, please remember that you can accept or reject any of my suggestions — just let me know your reasoning so we can keep things clear. Borsoka (talk) 11:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • ...historians believe that her writing suggests that she was likely... "Believe, suggest, likely" - I think one of them is enough to indicate uncertainty.
    • Cut "suggest" and "likely"
  • The historian Lucy Sussex has speculated... See MOS:SAY for "speculated". Why present perfect instead of present simple?
    • Changed to present simple. In this case I think "speculated" is probably appropriate, as Sussex herself uses a lot of caution in how she presents this (e.g. she says "This is conjectural", "I do not know for certain, but I think not", "The most likely explanation"). MOS:SAID says to be cautious of using "speculated" because it can carry implications that are not verifiable, but in this case I think Sussex is explicit about the fact that what she is doing is engaging in speculation
  • She likely travelled by rail to Maine and then by ship to England, before embarking on a voyage from Glasgow to Melbourne aboard the ship Briseis. Do we need to know these details in an encyclopedic article?
    • Fair point, removed
  • The day after Fortune's arrival in Australia, she... Could you rephrase it? (I thought that "she" is somebody else.)
    • Done
  • ...who had opened a store in one of the goldfields settlements...he had opened a store near Castlemaine... I would rephrase the first text to avoid repetition of the same info ("who had settled in one of the goldfields settlements", or something similar.
    • Done
  • She first lived in Kangaroo Flat near Mount Alexander... I would clarify, that she settled somewhere near her father.
    • Clarified that the town near Castlemaine where her father had opened a store was Kangaroo Flat
  • ...panoramic journalism ... Is this a term borrowed from the cited scholar?
    • Brown describes the genre of Fortune's journalism as panoramic, ethnographic, as flânerie, and a few other descriptors largely interchangeably across different sources. I've added quotes around "panoramic" and added a citation to another one of Brown's papers where she uses the term panoramic explicitly
  • ...it is believed that Fortune may have begun to work... By whom? "Believed, may" - I think one of them is enough to indicate uncertainty.
    • Upon another reading it turns out the source actually states this as fact, so I've removed both "believed" and "may"
  • Fortune attempted to have him released, but without success. ... Fortune's application for George's release was ultimately refused. Repetition of the same info.
    • Removed the repetition
  • The historians Lucy Sussex and Megan Brown have speculated ... Sussex is alredy introduced in a previous section. See MOS:SAY for "speculated". Why present perfect instead of present simple?
    • Changed to present simple and to "believe"
  • But by the time the book was published, her appeal for George's release had already been refused. I would delete it.
    • Done
  • Upon reaching the "Writing" section, I noticed that some information is repeated from earlier sections. As a general rule, I would recommend keeping it only here and deleting it from the previous sections. Borsoka (talk) 11:47, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks @Borsoka! I've responded to all of your comments above. I've also tried to further minimise the repetition between the "Biography" and "Writing" sections by moving details about the contents of her work out of the biography section. MCE89 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

Not much from me. This is an admirably well-written article, and ultimately what a sad one! I shouldn't myself hyphenate "the newly-founded Australian Journal" or "locally-written fiction", but I do not press the point. Otherwise the article meets all the FA criteria as far as I can see, and I am glad to have read it. Thank you, MCE89, and I hope we can look forward to more articles from you here. – Tim riley talk 14:29, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much @Tim riley! I've de-hyphenated in those two places. MCE89 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support and comments from Jim

[edit]

Not a great deal to add to my pre-nom comments

  • I agree with @Tim riley:, I don't think -ly adverbs should ever be followed by a hyphen
  • "Scholar" is overworked and vague, you refer to almost all the people commentating as such, in the case of Brown and Sussex multiple times. I'd suggest some variation, such as historian or biographer, and only using a descriptor once for each writer.
  • Linking Sussex twice in consecutive items of Short story collections is a bit excessive.
Otherwise excellent, good luck Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:33, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the review @Jimfbleak! All fixed. MCE89 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
Lead
  • “who is believed to have been the first woman” → “widely regarded as the first woman”
General
  • Is it necessary to describe Lucy Sussex as "the historian" on four occasions?
  • The text includes "the historian Megan Brown", "the scholar Megan Brown", and "the researcher Megan Brown".
    • Since they all refer to the same person, introduce Brown once each in the lead and the body (as appropriate), and thereafter refer to her simply as "Brown". You might consider doing the same for Sussex.

MSincccc (talk) 10:47, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @MSincccc! I've edited the lead per your suggestion, but have left out "widely" as I think that would be overstating the evidence slightly. I've also removed the excess introductions of Sussex and Brown. MCE89 (talk) 14:43, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Biography
  • In 1856 Fortune and her father moved their store to the town of Buninyong near Ballarat.


Here a comma has not been used.
In 1855, she moved with her son to Australia...
In a similar case, a comma has been used.

    • How about bringing consistency in the usage of commas?
  • "November of that year"→"November that year"

A few more. MSincccc (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removed all of those commas that had slipped in, and changed to "November that year". MCE89 (talk) 01:14, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Writing
  • You could reduce the number of times "Mary Fortune" is used and simply use "Fortune" instead.
  • "Mary Fortune wrote at least six serial novels during her career." → “Fortune wrote at least six serial novels during her career.”
    • “a number of” is wordy.
  • ...as perhaps Australia's first truly gothic novel.
Themes and style
  • “gothic elements” → “Gothic elements”
  • “in the course of just one year” → “in just one year”
  • “Fortune's autobiographical writing and journalism demonstrates” → “…demonstrate”
    • Plural subject.

MSincccc (talk) 04:55, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done, although I kept "Mary Fortune" in a few places where it might otherwise create confusion with George. MCE89 (talk) 05:02, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bottom line
My interest in the works of Christie and Conan Doyle brought me here. At this juncture, I'm a support. MSincccc (talk) 08:08, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
@MCE89 You could include 'journalist' in the short description, since she earned an income from it; it’s also mentioned in the lead’s first sentence. MSincccc (talk) 11:51, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the suggestion, but the short description is already 39 characters so per WP:SD40 I'd prefer not to add to its length. I think her nationality, primary genre and lifespan are probably the key things to include. MCE89 (talk) 09:55, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

First Jewish–Roman War

[edit]
Nominator(s): Mariamnei (talk) 07:14, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article covers the first revolt in Judaea against Roman rule, one of the best-documented wars of antiquity. The conflict had a lasting impact on Jewish history, the development of Judaism and Christianity, the history of the Levant, and Roman politics. The article achieved GA status last May after a comprehensive review by @Borsoka:, and received more feedback from the Military History A-Class review by @Hawkeye7: and @Hog Farm:.

This is my first FA nomination, and I'm looking forward to learning from the process. After extensive trimming and refinement, it still runs about 10.7k words, a bit above the recommended 9k mark, but I think the depth of historical research and the scope of the topic justify the length. Comparable FAs on other classical period subjects, such as Augustus (12.6k) and Cleopatra (13.2k), follow a similar scale. I've worked carefully to ensure the article meets FA criteria for accuracy, balance, and comprehensiveness, and I hope it will be considered worthy of FA status. Mariamnei (talk) 07:14, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith

[edit]

I made a few minor copyedits.

Ante bellum
[edit]
  • Under Pilate (c. 26–36 CE), incidents such as "Under Pilate's reign ..." to make it clear that the dates are when he ruled, not birth/death).
  • once ruled by his grandfather, Herod, as a client king clarify if it was the grandfather or the grandson who was the client king
  • but after his death in 44 CE. Who's death? Claudius or Herod Agrippa?\
  • The second provincial era began stably but soon fell into disorder I think "second provincial era" is referring back to "Judaea reverted to direct Roman rule" from the previous paragraph, but not 100% sure of that, so clarify.
  • This desire was partially fueled by memories of the successful Maccabean revolt against the Seleucids If I'm following the chronology correctly, that was 200 years earlier, so certainly beyond any person's memory. Maybe there's some better way to phrase that?

(will pick up with Initial stages of war another time)

Initial stages of war
[edit]
  • When young Jews resisted, Florus backed the Greek I don't understand what they were "resisting". Also, the last time you talked about Florus was the previous section and I had to search backwards to remember who that was. So perhaps re-introduce him here?
  • Prominent Jews paid Florus eight talents as is common with these types of article, I have no clue if eight talents is a lot of money or not. If you could put this into some familiar context (is it, say, a week's wages for a typical person?) that would be helpful.
  • On Shabbat, a Greek desecrated the synagogue many readers may be unfamiliar with the term "Shabbat", so explain what it is.
  • sacrificing a bird on a chamber pot Huh? Are we talking Chamber pot as in toilet?
  • Local cavalry failed to intervene What does "cavalry" mean in this context? I'm used to Cavalry meaning soldiers on hoseback, but I suspect that's not what you mean here.
  • Agrippa II hurried from Alexandria to calm the unrest,[96][97][92] this is just one example of where you have three or even four citations for a sentence. Why do you need three sources to back up the simple statement that "Agrippa II hurried from Alexandria to calm the unrest" See WP:OVERCITE.

(next up, Vespasian's campaigns)

Vespasian's campaigns
[edit]
  • Left among the last two, Josephus chose to surrender rather than die you should mention that this story gave rise to the Josephus problem.
Siege of Jerusalem and conclusion of the war
[edit]
  • You've used the word "scourged" a couple of time. I don't know what that means. I suggest you define it the first time you use it.
  • in 72/73 or 73/74 CE this is confusing. If you're not sure what year, why not just "circa 73 CE"?
Aftermath
[edit]
  • Titus faced demands to expel the Jews but refused who was making these demands?
Legacy
[edit]
  • The causes were rooted in the Temple's destruction and the Jewish Tax why is Jewish Tax capitalized?

OK, that's a full read-through. Overall, I like it. The prose is well written (if somewhat long). There's a few general comments I'll make, however:

  • The last section, "Sources" is interesting, but perhaps oddly named. Going into it, I assumed it was an analysis of the sources used to write this article. Maybe "Historical treatments" or "Analysis of historical literature", or something along those lines?
  • As I mentioned above, the use of multiple citations in many places is distracting. You have many places where you cite three or even four sources for what appears to be a single uncontroversial fact. Is this necessary?
  • There's a few places where you use Jewish terms (I think I mentioned Shabbat above) which may be unfamiliar to many readers, so consider giving them a short in-line explanation. You do a good job of explaining that Mishnah and Talmud are religious texts, but leave the reader wondering what a mitzvah is. Torah could use explaning. There's probably others. There's some Roman terms like legion that likewise could use explaination. When I read "military standards" I assumed that meant Standard operating procedure, not Roman military standards, which had me confused for a little while.

Three comments by Choliamb about the arches of Titus in Rome

[edit]

I don't have the knowledge to comment on the blow-by-blow account of the war itself, but I did spot a few minor inaccuracies in the descriptions of the two commemorative arches erected in Rome in the aftermath of the war (in the section "Roman commemoration of the victory"):

  • the Arch of Titus in the Forum, completed after his death in 81 CE. The surviving Arch of Titus referred to here, and shown in one of the photos in the article, is not "in the Forum", but a short distance up the slope to the southeast of the Forum, on the Velia, a low saddle of land between the Palatine and Oppian hills. The arch spanned the Sacra Via, the road that ran down from the Velia to the Forum, at its highest point, an area sometimes called the summa Sacra via ("the highest point on the Sacred Way") in literary sources. It's not far from the Forum (and it falls right on the edge of the modern Forum excavation zone), but it is emphatically not part of the Forum itself as the Romans defined it.
  • The first, still standing ... was dedicated by the Senate and People of Rome to the divine Vespasian and Titus. This is not true, at least not according to the dedicatory inscription (CIL VI 945; photo here), which states that the arch was dedicated to Titus alone, not to Titus and Vespasian. Vespasian is not mentioned in the inscription except as Titus's father. (The translation in the Arch of Titus article is correct.)
  • another at the Circus Maximus ... The second arch's inscription proclaims ..." The wording and the present tense of the verb "proclaims" make it sound as if the location of this arch is certain and the inscription can still be read, but that's not the case. Nothing at all remains of the arch, and the inscription (CIL VI 944) survives only in a mediaeval copy included in the Einsiedeln codex, probably written near the end of the 8th century, which may or may not be accurate. The inscription was said to have been seen near the Circus Maximus, and most scholars assume that the arch stood there, but it's an assumption, not a fact. Perhaps add "probably" here to hedge your bets, and change "proclaims" to past tense?

Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 20:56, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Choliamb, I've made the important corrections you suggested, all three are now done. Thank you! Mariamnei (talk) 07:46, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note

[edit]

This has been open for more than three weeks and has picked up just a single support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:35, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild, I've asked a few more people to provide feedback (tagging here too @Hawkeye7, @Hog Farm, @UndercoverClassicist). Hopefully, this will help generate some more movement in the next few days. Thanks again for all your help! Mariamnei (talk) 11:49, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Borsoka

[edit]

I rarely submit FAC reviews for articles I have already passed at GAN, but I am making an exception this time. This article covers a topic that attracts over 800 pageviews a day (around 280,000 a year) and was nominated by a new contributor. It would be a real shame if the nomination were archived simply due to a lack of FAC reviewer activity. If we want to remain competitive with AI-generated encyclopedias, we need to be more inclusive. Borsoka (talk) 01:52, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

My main concern is still the article's length, so I will suggest some ways to make it more concise.

  • ..., who vied for the throne after the death of their mother, Queen Salome Alexandra Delete, and introduce his sons in the previous text as "brothers" or "brother-kings".
  • Recognizing the nationalist character of Hasmonean rule, the Romans sought to suppress it by instituting a new, loyal dynasty. Delete, because this is clearly a scholarly PoV and the subsequent sentences explain neutrally the circumstances of the emergence of a new dynasty. A short reference to the end of Hasmoneans would be sufficient.
  • I would add the full name of Pilate (Pontius Pilate) or refer to his governorship ("During Pilate's governorship,...").
  • ...was initially stable under restored Roman rule but... Delete.
  • I would name Poppaea Sabina.
  • ..., a rare instance of indigenous sovereignty in this period,... Delete.
  • ...their adoption of the "freedom of Israel" era... I am not sure I understand.
  • They symbolically adopted a new era, using it as a form of ideological calendar, to mark and celebrate their struggle for independence, similar to the French Republican calendar or the Juche calendar. I've changed the text to say: Historian David Goodblatt points to similarities between the rebels' actions and ideology and those of modern national liberation movements, citing the rebels' struggle to free Judaea, their minting of coins inscribed with "Israel", and their adoption of a new symbolic era, called the "freedom of Israel," as examples. Mariamnei (talk) 08:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ..., first manifested by Judas' "Fourth Philosophy" Delete.
  • ...he departed for Sebaste without intervening... Rephrase to avoid unnecessary reference to his departure for Sebaste ("...he failed to intervene...").
  • ...a Greek desecrated the synagogue entrance by sacrificing birds on an upturned pot... Rephrase to make clear the statement and avoid unnecessary reference to the pot (...a Greek desecrated the synagogue by sacrificing birds at the entrance...).
  • A link to "legionaries"?
  • A second massacre occurred when Jews greeting two arriving cohorts were met with silence. I do not understand.
  • Now changed to A second massacre occurred when two cohorts (cavalry squadrons) arrived in the city. The Jews went to greet them peacefully, but were met with silence. Hope that's clearer now. Mariamnei (talk) 08:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • A link to "wood-gathering festival"? Make it clear that this is a Jewish festival.
  • After appearing in royal attire in public, Menahem was captured, tortured, and executed by Eleazar ben Hanania's faction... I would rephrase: "Menahem appeared in royal attire in public, but he was soon captured, tortured, and executed by Eleazar ben hanania's faction..." or something similar.
  • Thanks so much, @Borsoka:! I really appreciate all your work. You'll find my responses above. Mariamnei (talk) 08:06, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...two to three legions from vassal kings... Can we call them "legions"? I would shorten the sentence, stating that the (named) vassal king sent thousands of troops (both infantry and cavalry)
  • ... the Galilee... I would delete the definite article.
  • ...to have assembled 100,000 men... Who?
    • That was not my problem. I referred to the subject of the article. Josephus? In what capacity?
      • That's clarified earlier in the article, five paragraphs up, where the provisional government's appointments are outlined: Josephus was appointed commander of Galilee and Gaulanitis, with an efn adding that At the time, Josephus was a 30-year-old priest and had no prior military experience. Mariamnei (talk) 18:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...Galilee's capital and the second-largest Jewish city in the country after Jerusalem... I would only say that it was the second-largest Jewish city after Jerusalem.
  • ...the Romans faced a significant challenge, as... I would delete.
  • ...—reportedly out of animosity toward the Jews and in retaliation for Gallus' defeat I would delete.
  • ...(Yodefat/Iotapata)...(Panias)... Are these useful/necessary?
  • With the conclusion of the Galilee campaign... I would say "With the conclusion of Vespasian's campaign..."
  • I get the instinct, but that would be misleading here: Vespasian kept campaigning afterward, just in other regions: Judea, Idumaea, and so on. "Galilee campaign" is more precise for this point in the narrative. Mariamnei (talk) 09:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • High Priest or high priest?
    Let's stick with High Priest, for consistency with Emperor and other capitalized offices in the article. I've standardized the instances. Mariamnei (talk) 09:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...they summoned the Idumaeans... Who are the Idumaeans? Why did they ally with the Zealots?
    There's an efn on first mention, which say they "were a people south of Judea, converted to Judaism under John Hyrcanus after his 2nd-century BCE conquest." The Idumaeans were summoned by the Zealots through a letter claiming that Ananus had betrayed Jerusalem to Rome and portraying themselves as the city's last defenders, and this message persuaded the Idumaeans to intervene. Do you think that should be added to the article? Mariamnei (talk) 09:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...others went on to join Simon bar Giora Where?
    In the following section I lay out Bar Giora's operations and campaigns. Mariamnei (talk) 09:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ..., holding tribunals and murdering moderates, including Niger the Perean and Joseph ben Gurion I would delete.
  • Since both are introduced earlier, I prefer keeping this, since this is where their deaths occur, and it helps readers track the story.
  • ...that the God of the Jews was delivering them into Roman hands without any effort, and... I would delete.
  • ...Legio V... I assume this is Legio V Macedonica.
  • ...and tested its buoyancy by throwing bound non-swimmers into the water... I would delete it.
  • Following this, commander Lucius Annius was sent to Gerasa (likely a textual error for Gezer), where after capturing the city, he executed many young men, enslaved women and children, plundered and burned the homes, and destroyed surrounding villages, slaughtering those who could not escape. I would drastically shorten this long sentence. Borsoka (talk) 11:52, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Revised: Commander Lucius Annius then took Gerasa (likely a textual error for Gezer), executing many young men, enslaving women and children, burning homes, and razing nearby villages, killing those who could not flee. Mariamnei (talk) 09:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link "auxiliary" to Auxilia when the term is first mentioned in section "Vespasian's Galilee campaign".
  • On 14 Nisan, with the onset of Passover, the Romans exploited a halt in Jewish attacks to position their siege forces. I would rephrase it to clarify that the Jews stopped their attacks in observance of Passover.
  • Meanwhile, John's faction... Could the timeframe be more specific? Do we know why they could overcame the Zealots?
  • Rogers writes: "On the first night of the Passover festival Eleazar and his followers had opened the gates of the Temple, which they still controlled, permitting citizens to worship within the building during the commemorative celebration of the Jews’ liberation and exodus from Egypt. Taking advantage of Eleazar’s pious gesture, John managed to insinuate some of his supporters among the worshippers who were admitted into the Temple. These men carried concealed weapons. ... John offered a truce to the Zealots who had taken refuge within the vaults. The Zealots accepted." Revised: That night, as the sanctuary’s inner gates were opened to worshippers, John's faction infiltrated the inner court, concealing their weapons, and overpowered the Zealots, who then accepted a truce. I hope that's clearer now! Mariamnei (talk) 18:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...while searching for hidden valuables I would delete it.
  • ...when it caught fire, he reportedly rushed from a nap and... I would delete it.
  • ..., including tapestries, gemstones, statues, and animals I would delete it.
  • ...Jewish captives were paraded "to display their own destruction" Who is quoted? (Name the author in the text, alternatively rephrase the quote.)
  • ..., including ruined cities, destroyed fortresses, and defeated enemies I would delete it.
  • ...the new legate of Judaea... No legate is mentioned in the previous sentences. A link to "legate"?
  • ..., with Josephus offering only a brief mention of its surrender I would delete it.
  • The rebels capitulated after Eleazar, a young man from a prominent Jewish family who had ventured outside the fort, was captured, stripped, and scourged in full view of the defenders in preparation for crucifixion. The insurgents then negotiated their surrender, securing assurances of safe passage for the Jewish defenders. I would radically shorten the text. Borsoka (talk) 15:37, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done, shortened to The rebels capitulated after witnessing the Romans prepare Eleazar, a well-born young man who had ventured outside the fort, for crucifixion. They then negotiated terms, securing assurances of safe passage for the Jewish defenders. Mariamnei (talk) 18:02, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...due to warfare, civil strife, famine, disease and massacres in the mixed cities Delete (the sectio's first sentence summarises the same causes).
  • ...the toparchy of Orine Some explanation for the name or a link?
  • ...enforcement worsened Worsened? Was more or less tax collected?
  • ...Jerusalem's ruins were garrisoned by Legio X Fretensis, which remained stationed there for nearly two centuries I would delete the reference to the ruins because it raises the question why the ruins were protected by a whole legion for two centuries.
  • ...in diaspora communities... Delete.
  • Introduce Judah ha-Nasi with one or two words.
  • Appointed commander of Galilee in 66 CE, he was tasked with preparing the region for the revolt but surrendered after the siege of Yodfat in 67 CE. Escaping a suicide pact, he saved his life by prophesying Vespasian's rise to emperor. Held captive for two years, he later gained freedom after Vespasian's accession in 69 CE, and accompanied Titus during the siege of Jerusalem in 70 CE. In 71 CE, he moved to Rome, where he received Roman citizenship and the name Flavius Josephus. Shorten radically to avoid repetition of info mentioned in previous sections.
  • The first volume covers events in the two centuries preceding the revolt, while the rest detail the war and its aftermath. Delete.
  • Delete notes d, e, l, y, the second sentence from note ac.
  • Introduce Nathanael Andrade with one or two words.

I am glad to support the promotion of this professionally written and comprehensive article. Borsoka (talk) 01:48, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jens

[edit]

Will take a look. Having reviewed other articles of the author at GAN, I do not expect to find many issues here.

  • Herod ruled Judaea as a client kingdom,[17] taxed heavily, murdered family members, controlled Jewish institutions, and fueled resentment – Isn't this a unilaterally negative description of Herod? Does that reflect scholarly consensus? He is also called "Herod the Great", so there must have been positive attributes as well? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 01:45, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • You raise a fair point. Absolutely, Herod is known for major achievements, most notably his grand architectural program (including Caesarea Maritima and its harbor, Masada, Herodium, and perhaps most famously, the rebuilding of the Temple and expansion of the Temple Mount). Politically, many scholars note his skill in navigating Roman politics to preserve a measure of autonomy (perhaps as opposed to his descendants: the epithet "the Great" primarily distinguishes him from later Herodian rulers, most of whom governed smaller territories, maybe besides Herod Agrippa, often as tetrarchs rather than kings, and held shorter or lesser reigns). That said, this background section has a narrower aim: it summarizes factors relevant to the outbreak of the First Jewish–Roman War, focusing on interactions between Rome and its representatives vis-à-vis the Jewish population, rather than assessing Herod's reign in full. We can change the text to say something like Herod ruled Judaea as a client kingdom. While renowned for large-scale building projects and political acumen, his heavy taxation, harsh repression—including executions of family members—and control over Jewish institutions fostered deep resentment. What do you think? Mariamnei (talk) 07:10, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How about Herod ruled Judaea as a client kingdom. Although he succeeded in preserving a measure of autonomy, his heavy taxation, harsh repression—including executions of family members—and control over Jewish institutions fostered deep resentment to mention only what is relevant for this article? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good, adding this to the article! Mariamnei (talk) 07:40, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • News of the massacre promted Jewish groups … – You are still referring to the Garrison massacre, right? That could be clarified (by simply specifying "Garrison massacre")
  • while extremists destroyed the porticoes – What "extremists" is this talking about? The Sicarii?
  • The primary source, Josephus, doesn't name a specific faction, just "the seditious" (i.e., those stirring up rebellion). Smallwood says "extremists", and Rogers uses "rebels". I’ve changed it to "rebels" now, let me know if you have any other thought. Mariamnei (talk) 07:38, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • and the violence of 66 CE was a consequence of rising tensions rather than the root cause of the revolt. – it is the first time that the article mentioned "The violence of 66 CE" so you could briefly clarify maybe; reading the article from top to bottom I could not follow here. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 11:19, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • That refers to the ethnic violence in Caesarea and other mixed cities at the start of the revolt. I've changed it to: the ethnic violence that erupted in these cities in 66 CE" to make it clearer. Mariamnei (talk) 07:38, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

[edit]
  • The treatment of ancient sources is unsatisfactory. They should not be listed in the bibliography as links to Wikipedia articles. You do not indicate which edition you are using or use dated 19C ones which are not reliable sources. You should cite modern scholarly editions with full bibliographic details and page numbers in the citations.
  • You link, archive and provide access dates to a random selection of book titles. I do not remember seeing this done before and I do not think it is necessary, but you should be consistent and do it for all or none.
  • "mop-up operations" is too colloquial. Reliable sources such as the Cambridge History of Christianity and Beard's SPQR just show the dates of the war as 66 to 73, and I think this is much better.
  • " In 67 CE, commander Vespasian was sent to suppress the revolt". "commander" sounds like a title. I would delete as command is implied in the sentence.
  • "they celebrated a triumph in Rome". Who is "they"?
  • "The sages emerged as leading figure". "sages" needs some words of explanation. An article should be clear without following links.
  • "Roman policy in Judaea underwent a brief disruption". I am not sure what you mean here. Your account suggests continued problems but not a major change.
  • "was executed by procurator Fadus". What does "procurator" mean here? You should clarify. You describe him as a governor below.
  • 'Causes and motivations' section. You start by saying that the causes were purely nationalistic and then go on to discuss other explanations. It would be helpful to clarify at the start that nationalism is only one theory.
  • "the fall of the fourth imperial power, which people believed was Rome". Which people?
  • "Archaeological evidence confirms destruction in Gerasa and Gadara,[119] while Josephus describes Sebaste, Ashkelon, Anthedon, and Gaza as destroyed by fire, this account may be exaggerated." This is ungrammatical and unclear.
  • More to follow. Done to Gallus' campaign and defeat. Dudley Miles (talk) 19:33, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Phil Mead

[edit]
Nominator(s): AA (talk) 10:49, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Phil Mead, who is considered one of the greatest first-class cricketers of all time. Mead had a substantial career in English county cricket with Hampshire, spanning 31 years. He is Hampshire's leading run-scorer in first-class cricket and has the distinction of scoring the most runs for any first-class team. A prolific run-scorer, he made 153 centuries during his career, ranking him fourth on the all-time list of century makers. In the County Championship, Mead is the all-time leading run-scorer in the competition, a record which will never be broken due to the advent of the one-day and T20 games in modern cricket; his 2,843 runs in the 1928 County Championship also constitutes a record for the most runs scored in a Championship season. Mead also played Test cricket for England, making 17 appearances with some success. Given his standing as a first-class batsman, his relative lack of Test appearances is credited with Plum Warner not being fond of him and an exceptionally strong choice of batsmen to chose from at the time. He would later play minor counties cricket for Suffolk, alongside coaching at Framlingham College. In later life he would go blind, retiring to Bournemouth where he died in March 1958. An interesting cricketer and one of the most important batsmen in the history of the first-class game, who is surprisingly lesser well known than his contemporaries.

This article has been informally reviewed by WP:CRIC members. Thanks for taking the time to review. AA (talk) 10:49, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:1193390_Phil_Mead.jpg: the UK tag in use requires that the image description include details of how authorship was investigated
  • File:StateLibQld_1_233112_English_cricket_team_at_the_test_match_held_in_Brisbane,_1928.jpg is tagged as lacking author information and is missing a US tag and info on publication history. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:46, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All tagged and have added some details about inquiring on the authorship of File:1193390_Phil_Mead.jpg. AA (talk) 08:30, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
When and where was the second of these first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:59, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It comes from a photo album (author unknown) spanning from 1928 to 1932. The Test match took place from 30 November to 5 December 1928. Published presumably in Australia by the content of the album, exact date not specific. AA (talk) 17:30, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is it known to have been published by 1930? If no, the tagging may need adjustment. The Australian tag also requires info on first publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:02, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It appears to have first been published in 1928 according to the State Library of Queensland: "Original version: photographic print : black & white 1928". Would you be able to point me in the direction of adding the info on the Australian tag... sorry, Commons isn't my forte! Thanks! AA (talk) 17:10, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Is that publication, though, or just creation?
If the former, you'd add it here. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:22, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It's a bit ambiguously worded. There is no definitive date of publication given, just an insinuation that it was 1928. AA (talk) 22:01, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Tim riley

[edit]

I'll be back with detailed comments after a thorough perusal, but from a quick first glace I notice a persistent and not very welcome tendency to write "he would" when a plain past tense is what is wanted. It becomes rather wearisome for the reader. To summarise Fowler, "would" used in this way expresses habitual action in the past ('These he would produce with a flourish during our Wednesday and Sunday-evening sessions') and the future in the past ('She realised they would have to come back at some point and face the music'). Fine for such constructions, but these thirty or so extracts from the article don't need anything other than "he joined Hampshire", "his Test career was sporadic" and so on:

  • Overlooked by Surrey, he would join Hampshire
  • His Test career would be sporadic
  • This would be attributed to hostility toward his status as a professional batsman,
  • Mead would continue to play
  • He would then play two seasons of minor counties cricket for Suffolk in 1938 and 1939, whilst employed as a cricket coach at Framlingham College.
  • He would retire to Bournemouth, where he died in hospital in March 1958, following an operation for internal bleeding.
  • He would also play for the combined London School's team.
  • He would be spotted playing in a school's match at The Oval by C. B. Fry, who encouraged him to pursue cricket as a profession.
  • Aged 15, Mead would join the staff at Surrey
  • He would make his first-class debut for Hampshire in 1905
  • (a feat he would repeat for the next 27 consecutive seasons)
  • He would take a further 27 wickets
  • Warner's hostility toward Mead, which would remain for the rest of his career
  • he would score seven centuries during the season. His highest score of the season,
  • he would score nine centuries.
  • He would again record two centuries
  • first-class cricket in England would be suspended until 1919.
  • Mead would be rejected from active service during the conflict because of varicose veins, alongside other medical issues.
  • During the war, he would play for Frank Hopkins
  • Mead would have his most successful season
  • For Hampshire, he would make scores of 224 and 113
  • He would make a half century (66 runs) in the Fifth Test
  • Mead would end the 1923 season
  • Mead would make 3,027 runs
  • he would make thirteen centuries
  • and would not appear in Test cricket again
  • His average would drop to 38.37
  • Bill Frindall would later write
  • Arlott would later write
  • he would score two thousand runs in a season
  • He would take 277 wickets at a bowling average of 34.70

I think these need fixing if the article is to meet FA criterion 1a. More anon. Tim riley talk 10:43, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All eliminated/reworded! AA (talk) 12:28, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Detailed comments

Very little more from me. The article seems to me of FA quality; I particularly admire the way the main author has avoided trotting out a litany of statistics and has given us a real narrative. A few minor points on the prose:

  • "the combined London School's team" – the possessive looks a bit odd: I suspect just Schools is correct here.
  • "Two weeks after being released by Surrey, the county decided to offer Mead a contract, however he had been to Hampshire" – two points here. First, the sentence opens with a dangling modifier: it was Mead, and not "the county", that was released. Secondly, "however" needs a stronger stop than a comma in front of it.
  • Done. I have added a semi-colon on the second point. The first now reads "A fortnight after Mead was released, Surrey attempted to reverse their decision by offering him a contract". It did briefly read "A fortnight after being released, Surrey attempted to reverse their decision by offering Mead a contract"... though I felt the latter version was again dangling! AA (talk) 21:44, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the same amount of matches the following season" – can you have an amount of plural things? Perhaps the same number of matches?
  • "considered the strongest touring team to be sent to Australia at the time" – I'm unsure of your meaning here. Is it that the team was considered at the time to be the strongest ever sent to Australia?
  • Comment. Your interpretation is correct. At the time it was considered to be the strongest England team to be sent to Australia. I have done a slight rewording of this sentence: "...his form led him to be selected for the MCC's 1911–12 tour of Australia, led by Plum Warner and was considered to be the strongest touring team that had been sent to Australia at the time."
  • "he was not chosen to partake in the 1912 Triangular Tournament" – "partake in" strikes me as odd. I think you mean "take part in".
  • "He again record two centuries against Leicestershire" – "recorded", rather than "record"?
  • "all five Test matches in the tours itinerary" – "tour's" needs a possessive apostrophe
  • "Mead was unable to play in the first two Test matches" – you don't tell us why: was it just that he wasn't chosen or was he unavailable for some reason?
  • Done. So I was unable to uncover some newspaper sources that shed more light on this than the book sources and obituaries I have to hand. He was not selected in the 12-man squad for the First Test, but his recall came ahead of the Second Test. However, in a County Championship match days before, Mead injured his hand and was ruled out. The start of the paragraph now reflects that with additional references. AA (talk) 21:44, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "went onto win the match by 155 runs" – "on to" needs to be two words here.
  • Afterthought: Lord Tennyson could do with a blue link at the first of his three mentions.

That's all from me. I'll be looking in again to support and sign off. Tim riley talk 07:19, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley. Many thanks for your review and your kind words at the start of the review. Please find above my responses. Thanks for pointing out my "he would" repetition that has crept into my writing, I have no idea where it has come from as none of my previous FA's have it!!! Have made me recheck my recent contributions and low and behold, Jack Newman and Alec Kennedy were full of it. I am now acutely aware of that unwelcome new habit! AA (talk) 21:49, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
We all have bad habits in our prose writing that we need to be prodded about. I was told off as a schoolboy for opening a subordinate clause with a comma and neglecting to close it with one at the other end and dammit I'm still doing it sixty years later. But I digress. Very happy to support the elevation of this article to FA. There must be something about cricket that attracts good writing (of footer and the rest I say no more) and this article upholds the standard. Highly readable, comprehensive but concise, neutral in tone, as well illustrated as I suppose it is possible to be given copyright rules, and, as far as I can see, well and widely sourced. Gladly signing on the dotted line. More, please. Tim riley talk 12:18, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Who knows what other habits I have picked up over the years! Though having been late to academic writing, I'm hopeful I have improved somewhat. Thanks for your support. Cricket articles do seem to have attracted some good writers over the years. Sarastro1 (sadly inactive for the last 3 years) and YellowMonkey (15 years AWOL) spring to mind. Glad you enjoyed the article :) Many thanks for the support. I have many more lined up... this chap hopefully next! AA (talk) 16:37, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Serves me right for interfering, but I took the liberty of asking the wizards in the Photo Workshop if they could clean up the top image a bit. Instead they've replaced it with a slightly different shot. If you don't like it, by all means revert the image to its original state when first uploaded and accept my apologies for putting my oar in. Tim riley talk 11:58, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I like it. It shows him in full batting flow. Much appreciated "putting your oar in"!!! Hoping the 2nd image in the article can be kept, very important one given it captures the last time he took to the field in Test cricket. AA (talk) 22:16, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SC

Comments to follow shortly(ish) - SchroCat (talk) 19:34, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • "He is the fourth-highest run-scorer in first-class cricket,": I think you need "As at 2025 he is the..." (formatted as "{{As of|alt=As at 2025|2025}}") per some bit of the MOS
  • Comment. I'm not too sure about adding a year, mainly because with the advent of limited-overs cricket, his tally will never be surpassed as less first-class is now played. AA (talk) 21:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "bowling was utilised by Hampshire", "was utilised less", "He utilised clever", "Mead was utilised as a": anything wrong with "used"?
  • "five wicket haul" – hyphenated, I think
Test debut
  • "MCC's 1911–12 tour of Australia": I think you need something (possibly even just a footnote) that explains that the MCC was the England team at the time. You interchange the terms a little (perfectly correctly and reasonably), but it won't be clear to many
  • Done. Good point, this will be less obvious that the two were the same entity to people are less familiar with cricket, and cricket of that era. I've added a footnote with ref. AA (talk) 21:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Australia, led by Plum Warner and was considered to be the": the grammar goes a little awry in this sentence with a feeling of a run-on happening at the point quoted
Personal life
  • Comment. I have broken the sentence into two, and reworded: "...his form led him to be selected for the MCC's 1911–12 tour of Australia.[note 1] Under the captaincy of Plum Warner, it was considered the strongest touring team that had been sent to Australia at the time." How does this read now? AA (talk) 21:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He had a variety of business ventures": the last 'he' mentioned is Frank Englefield

That's my lot. Nicely written and nice to see a sporting article that doesn't just rely on lists of stats to get the story across. – SchroCat (talk) 12:05, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@SchroCat Many thanks for your review, much appreciated. Please find my responses above. Pleased you enjoyed the article and the story it tells of a remarkable cricketer. AA (talk) 21:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. All good from me, although I do think you should reconsider the “As at 2025” point, per WP:AS AT. That, however, is not enough to stop my support. - SchroCat (talk) 20:48, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Cheers :) Is the "as at" the wording required, or could a more specific date be entered? Just to reflect that his tally won't be surpassed by anyone... unless first-class cricket becomes as popular once again... I can but dream! AA (talk) 19:44, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Critchley

[edit]
Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:35, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a South Australian politician who served in the state lower house then in the Australian Senate where he was Senate opposition whip for seven years. He came to my attention via a honour roll at the state parliament which lists all the state parliamentarians who have seen war service, and having already brought a couple to FA (Ernest Roberts (Australian politician) and Bill Denny), I thought I'd see what I could do with Jack. He is the first state politician I have brought to FAC who doesn't have an entry in the Australian Dictionary of Biography. Have at it. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:35, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Hi Nikkimaria, it's working for me...? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:53, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, nope, still not for me. Is it possible it's geolocked or something? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:53, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I have no idea why it would be Nikkimaria, but it's possible I suppose. It's to the National Library of Australia and the entry says:

Portrait of John Critchley, Senate for South Australia [picture]

Call Number PIC Box PS 15113 #PIC/7852/1-2 Created/Published [ca. 1950] Extent 2 photographs : gelatin silver ; 15.8 x 11.7 cm. Physical Context

PIC Box PS 15113 #PIC/7852/1-2-Portrait of John Critchley, Senate for South Australia [picture]. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:16, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HF

[edit]

I'll try to review this weekend. Hog Farm Talk 03:25, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Critchley's first speech to the assembly was brief, " - this is sourced to the Hansard only. Is it a truly obvious statement to be able to refer to this as brief, when the source won't be (presumably) describing it as such?
I was working on the basis of WP:BLUE, the other first speeches on the adjacent pages of Hansard were a fair bit longer, but happy to delete. Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:13, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is the Carr website considered to be a high-quality RS?
For what it provides, yes. He's a respected journalist and psephologist with a PhD in Australian history. His psephos website is an expert SPS and has been archived by the National Library of Australia. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:13, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Critchley was particularly concerned for the mental health needs of those suffering from what was then known as "war neurosis" " - again, I'm a bit uncomfortable drawing the conclusion that it was a particular concern of his only from a few Hansard transcriptions, although I'm sure it's true
Have reworded to make it about the content of his speeches. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:13, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to his family, when the ALP split over the issue of communism in 1955, Critchley refused to join the Catholic-dominated breakaway Australian Labor Party (Anti-Communist) – later the Democratic Labour Party – despite being offered the position of party leader in the Senate." - source does not support that the breakaway party was Catholic-dominated that I'm seeing?
Well picked up, its sort of common knowledge politically in Australia, but I agree it should be cited. Added Maddox and cited to her. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:20, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "John Victor Ryan, Senator (19 June 1956). "Question: Question: Compensation Payments to Trainee". Parliamentary Debates (Hansard). Commonwealth of Australia: Senate. p. 1605." - source link is not working for me - is this content only available in Australia
Yeah, I don't know what is going on there. It works for me. The wording of the question is:

Senator RYAN.—Will the Minister representing the Minister for the Army supply the following information relative to representations made by Senator Critchley and myself concerning the compensation claim of E. Luxton of Moonta, South Australia, for physical disabilities occasioned during his national service training

. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:38, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I will note that a lot of the article is actually derived from the Haskett source, with primary source Hansard proceedings inserted as additional sources where Haskett points out particular points. Hog Farm Talk 02:21, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haskett is essentially the official biographical entry for Critchley as a senator, and while I acknowledge it is a tertiary source, it is well footnoted and is akin to a national dictionary of biography entry. Of course instead of using Haskett directly, I could use the citations that Haskett used in the biographical entry, but I'm not sure that either advances the quality of the article or is worth the effort given the material isn't controversial in any significant way. I agree there is a quite a bit from Hansard, which I have used to flesh out what he spoke about during his career. There are however, plenty of contemporary newspaper articles about various aspects of his life which are used. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:38, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
G'day Hog Farm, thanks for having a look and apologies for the delay in responding. I think I have addressed your comments? See what you think? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:39, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Supporting - sourcing seems to be on the thin side in many areas but I'm not seeing evidence of sources that should be used that aren't and the sourcing is generally appropriate for what it is supporting (given that the Hansard usage can be backed up by the other sources for significance). Hog Farm Talk 22:07, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MCE89

[edit]

A few comments below. (I'm pretty new to FAC reviewing, so please feel free to disregard any of these suggestions!) MCE89 (talk) 14:17, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • ...but was defeated in 1933 after the Labor Party split over austerity measures and his expulsion from the party - I think the syntax here could be made clearer (i.e. to make it clear that the party didn't split over his expulsion)
Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:04, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • He also argued for fertile land in the south east of the state to be compulsorily acquired and used to settle unemployed people, sought to reduce the number of members of the assembly and sought to abolish the state upper house, the Legislative Council - Missing a verb in the final item of the list
Thanks, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • A practising Catholic, he nevertheless opposed the Communist Party Dissolution Bill when it was presented by the government of Prime Minister Robert Menzies in 1950. - I think this could use slightly more of an explanation of why the fact that he was a Catholic makes it unusual that he would oppose the bill. At the moment I imagine that this could read as a bit of a non sequitur to those unfamiliar with that historical context
Good point. Added a bit cited to Duncan. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:23, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • A vehement supporter of the ALP's banking policies... - Could a sentence be added on what these policies were? I think that would help give a bit more context to the later discussion of how he helped block the Menzies government's banking bills
Great point, added some more from Duncan. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:30, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...and was elected sixth of the ten seats available - The grammar here sounds a little awkward to my ear, perhaps "elected to the sixth of the ten available seats" or "was the sixth of ten candidates elected"? The same goes for "and was elected first of the five seats available"
Adjusted as suggested.

Thanks for taking a look, MCE89. See what you think of my responses. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:33, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note

[edit]

This has been open for almost four weeks and has yet to gain a support. Unless there's notable progress towards a consensus for promotion within the next few days, I'm afraid it will be archived. FrB.TG (talk) 21:06, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nick-D

[edit]

I'm afraid that I've never heard of Critchley before, but it's good to see this article here. I'd like to offer the following comments:

  • " Joining the Australian Labor Party (ALP),[2] he became president and then secretary of the local party committee," - it would be good to comment on why he joined the party, and that it was (and officially remains) the political wing of the Australian union movement - more background on the party and its status at the time and during the early years of Critchley's political career would help to put things in perspective, especially for readers not familiar with Australian political history.
  • "unsuccessful candidate for South Ward " - should this be "the South Ward"? This would seem to read better.
  • The sentence starting with " Critchley worked as a motor registration clerk" is over-complex.
  • The first para of the 'Federal politics' section should note that the ALP was in power at the time Critchley entered the Senate
  • Do any sources comment on why he didn't serve as a minister or shadow minister despite his considerable political experience and prominent position in the SA Labor Party? Was he seen more as a loyalist and enforcer type character than an administrator?
  • The ALP tends to laud its stalwarts more than is common for other Australian political parties: can anything be said about how Critchley has been memorialised by the party? Nick-D (talk) 09:50, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking a look, Nick. I will address these points in the next couple of days. Cheeers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:18, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Gordon Cooper

[edit]
Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (discuss) and QuicksmartTortoise513 (talk) 01:17, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Gordon Cooper, one of the Mercury Seven astronauts. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 01:17, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
Early life and education
  • “the only child of Leroy Gordon Cooper Sr. and his wife, Hattie Lee Herd” – fine, but “his wife” could be dropped; “Hattie Lee Herd” is sufficient.
  • "Pacific theater" → "Pacific Theater"

MSincccc (talk) 13:30, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for commenting! I have capitalised "Pacific Theater". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:26, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Later life
Links made. QuicksmartTortoise513 (talk) 16:26, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
UFO sightings
  • You could mention the full form of "NASA" at least once in the article.
  • Introduce "Bruce Henderson" briefly?
  • “ground breaking technology” → “groundbreaking technology” (compound adjective).

MSincccc (talk) 13:59, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Full form written. I'm not sure what you mean by introducing Bruce Henderson. Also, where's the term "ground breaking technology" used? QuicksmartTortoise513 (talk) 21:03, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • By introducing Henderson, I meant specifying his role in the article — as "the author" or the "journalist".
  • ...understanding how someone so connected with ground breaking technology and science...
MSincccc (talk) 03:36, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Added that Bruce Henderson was a journalist and author. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:28, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
MOS:SIC: Quotations must be verifiably attributed, and the wording of the quoted text must be faithfully reproduced. Two words in the source Changed to a single word. We will see if anyone complains. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 04:37, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
General
  • Reference no. 81 – The access date precedes the article’s publication date.
  • “He believed these anomalies may be the locations…” mixes “may be” with past tense (“he believed”). It might read more clearly as “might have been”.
Overall, the article is well written. Looking forward to your response. MSincccc (talk) 10:33, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hawkeye7 and @QuicksmartTortoise513 Two more comments above, but the article is good and hence support the nomination. MSincccc (talk) 03:39, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Corrected ref #81, which was a duplicate of #71. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:59, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment

[edit]

Three weeks in and this has gained little attention. Unless this nomination makes significant further progress towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:49, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Wehwalt

[edit]

Support: Just a few things.

  • Do we really need so much material on Cooper Sr.?
  • "senior high school year" "senior year in high school" feels more natural in Among.
    Changed as suggested. We don't use junior/senior etc in Australia, as high schools are six years or 4+2, and university undergraduate courses are three years long. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:32, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he played halfback in the state football championship." I might phrase as "he played halfback, and his team played in the state football championship."
    Tweaked the wording. In Texas playing at state was a really big deal. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:32, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The UFO section is as long as the section on his Apollo involvement.
    The Apollo section would have been longer if he had actually flown. I did cut back the UFO nonsense. Leap of Faith contains a lot more. In later life, Cooper enjoyed being a celebrity to the UFO movement. An astonishingly large percentage of Americans believe that aliens visit Earth. [13] Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:32, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Didn't Cooper give a ticked-off press conference upon his non selection for Apollo 13/14?
    I have no source for that. The tiddlywinks remark was after he was forced to pull out of the 24 Hours of Daytona race. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:32, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's it.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:41, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]
  • No problem if the source doesn't specify, but "He unofficially soloed when he was 12 years old" is interesting -- do we know if he just took the plane up without anyone's permission at all?
    His father let him fly the plane. Set him up with cushions so he could see out the windows and blocks on the pedals.

    By the time I was eight, with the help of blocks Dad built for the rudder pedals and lots of cushions so I could see out the window, I was allowed to take over the controls from the front seat with Dad behind me in the main cockpit... The head of the Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) in that region of Oklahoma was a close friend of my father's (my mother and father seemed to know just about everybody in the area). He knew I was flying without a licence - I was a long way from sixteen, the mandatory age to get a licence - and never said a thing. By the time I was twelve I was flying solo, even though I had not yet had any formal lessons.

    Added a bit more about this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do we know why Marcus Cooper recommended that Cooper not volunteer for astronaut training?
    "I don't want my best pilots involved in some idiotic program." Added this.
  • "however, this debacle did not make Cooper popular with senior NASA management": "debacle" seems a bit strong -- maybe just "incident"?
    Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Did Cooper buzz Hanger S because of the argument with Williams?
    Yes. Clarified this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest retitling the "Later life" section, since some of it relates to his activities while still an astronaut. Perhaps "Other activities and later life"?
    Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are date available for his involvement with GCR and Teletest?
    Yes. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The ashes were then launched on the Explorers orbital mission on August 3, 2008": suggest linking "Explorers" to Celestis#Flights.
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The 2017 Discovery Channel docu-series Cooper's Treasure followed by Darrell Miklos as he searched through Cooper's files to discover the location of the suspected shipwrecks": something wrong with the syntax here -- a missing word?
    Deleted "by". Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest combining the last three short paragraphs.
    Reordered and combined the short paragraphs. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:05, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Looks very good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:04, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:32, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review

[edit]

Now about the files:

I can't see any ALT text anywhere. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:56, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sigh. Added ALT text. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:50, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Volcano rabbit

[edit]
Nominator(s): -- Reconrabbit 19:06, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is all about the volcano rabbit, an ancient, rather small species of endangered Mexican rabbit with a rather small distribution. I've worked on a few mammal articles over the past couple years and believe this to be the closest among those I've developed to be around featured article status. -- Reconrabbit 19:06, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by EF5

[edit]

Should go quick, so I'll get to it tomorrow (busy tonight). EF5 20:54, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll check the licensing when I get home this afternoon; Commons is blocked on our network. EF5 12:57, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added more to the highway's alt text and clarified the relevance of Pinus hartwegii. If the sandwiching is a major issue, I would prefer to remove the image rather than move it elsewhere, since it pertains to the taxonomy more than anything else. -- Reconrabbit 20:27, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Commented out for the time being. -- Reconrabbit 19:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@EF5; have you had the chance to check the image licenses? -- Reconrabbit 21:12, 13 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, image licenses look good, so this is a pass on images. EF5 15:30, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]

I'm not sure if I'll do a full review, but I did just notice something that may need tweaking.

  • " there is evidence that the species loses a significant amount of genetic diversity when it reproduces in such conditions": this phrasing makes it appear that it's the nature of the captive environment that causes the loss of diversity in some way. I can't access the source, but I would expect this to be because the captive population have not been bred as part of a breeding program designed to retain genetic diversity. With a small captive population, inbreeding is almost guaranteed without a management plan. That's the standard approach for captive breeding, and I think the article needs to make it clearer what the cause is of the lack of diversity. If I'm wrong and there really is something else causing the loss of genes, I think we should say what that is.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:52, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Montiel et al state in their 2009 work that "The results of this study differ from what was expected", though it does seem self evident that the small founding group of the captive population is the main source of lower genetic variability, they suggest something else contributes. The conclusion gives that "some alleles of the wild population have been lost in the Chapultepec colony, with the average heterozygosis approximately 2.17% greater in the wild population" - is this something that can be readily explained in the text beyond just "evidence"? I tried to expand on what the "significant loss in diversity" is, but genetics are not something I know a lot about -- Reconrabbit 17:45, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's surprising. I can't access the paper; would you mind sending me a copy, or screenshots of the relevant pages? I'll send you a Wikipedia email so you have my email address. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:48, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Here's what I think is the relevant quote: "Although there has been interest in the reproduction of the species both in laboratory conditions and semi-captivity, at this time the only known reproductive nucleus is located in Chapultepec Zoo in Mexico City, which originates from a small number of founders in a random breeding structure during 20 generations. Given this situation, the objective of this study was to estimate the loss of genetic variability in a captive population in relation to the wild population of Romerolagus diazi through the use of a RAPD analysis." This is a clear statement that there was no managed breeding, and a small gene pool to begin with. I would suggest rephrasing the last two sentences of the first "Conservation" paragraph to something like "Since then, further attempts have been met with varying success, but captive-bred infants have high mortality. The only breeding group in captivity, in Chapultepec Zoo, began with a small number of rabbits, and over the course of 20 generations has lost genetic diversity in comparison with the wild population." Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:15, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This has helped a lot. I will adopt this wording. Captibe breeding is an unfamiliar subject to me, especially since it does not come up often in the main reference book I am using (Smith et al 2018), where it is only referenced in regards to the Columbia Basin pygmy rabbit and Corsican hare, which I haven't really researched. -- Reconrabbit 11:24, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Additional comments:

  • "Its type locality was "near San Martín Texmelusán, northeastern slope of Volcán Iztaccíhuatl [Ixtaccíhuatl, Puebla], Mexico": I can see why you might use past tense for the type locality, but I think present tense makes more sense. I also don't think you need to keep quotes when so much of what's quoted is place names which are not paraphrasable. How about rephrasing to avoid the issue: "The type specimen was collected on the northeastern slopes of [Ixtaccíhuatl], a volcano near San Martín Texmelucan, in Puebla, Mexico"? And I see that the "s" in Texmelusán is in the source; I don't think that matters -- it might be a typo or alternate spelling but it's not meaningful so we don't have to preserve it.
    • I'm used to a preference where the type locality is quoted directly when the specific names don't match up to the current day, but the suggestion sounds better to me. -RR
  • "The article noted a type specimen that was collected at "Mt. Popocatepetl, Mexico (altitude 3,350 meters or 11,000 feet)" by Edward William Nelson, an American naturalist for whom the species was named." Suggest "Merriam noted a type specimen that was collected on Popocatépetl, a volcano about 10 miles (16 km) south of Ixtaccíhuatl, at an altitude 3,350 meters (11,000 feet) by Edward William Nelson, an American naturalist for whom Merriam named the species."
  • "This is a result of agouti-like coloration, with each hair being black at the base and tip and antimony yellow in the middle." The source doesn't mention agoutis, as far as I can see -- at least I searched the text for "aguti" and didn't find it. The colour description doesn't seem to match either -- the only mention of antimony yellow in the article seems to be El Romerolagus presenta el dorso, costados y corona, de color Antimony yellow (amarillo antimonio), fuertemente veteado de negro; los lados de la nariz y las áreas orbitarias son Light buff (ante claro> ; la base de las orejas es Warm buff (ante calido) which Google Translate turns into The Romerolagus has an Antimony yellow back, sides and crown, heavily veined with black; the sides of the nose and orbital areas are Light buff; the base of the ears is Warm buff. This doesn't seem to match what you have in the article.
    • I used the agouti term not as directly referenced but to describe the type of fur pattern (as a general descriptor of "hairs that have banded color"). Velazquez and Gopar-Merino (2018) state "The dorsal pelage is a yellowish brown, and individual hairs are black at both the tip and the base", and Rojas Mendoza's thesis (as quoted above de color Antimony yellow (amarillo antimonio), fuertemente veteado de negro) corroborates this (though the buff details could be added). If "agouti-like" is an undue descriptor I can remove it. -RR
      Hmm. I follow you; I'm having to think about the sourcing. If you used "rainbow-like coloration" for something in which the source did not mention rainbows, I wouldn't expect a source. In this case though I don't think the descriptor adds much since most people won't know that this is a characteristic of agouti hairs. I speak as one of the (probably small number of) readers who already know what an agouti is and what it looks like. I think you could cut it, but if you think it's worth it you could find a source for this description of agouti hairs and draw the comparison more explicitly. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:52, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      I'll cut this descriptor. The exact wording isn't used elsewhere in the texts I can search through, research on the gene has been focused on Oryctolagus, Sylvilagus, and Pentalagus, and it's hard to look for it online due to the existence of the agoutis. -- Reconrabbit 18:42, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... as do other rabbits[48] besides the European rabbit." Does this mean that some rabbits do this, but not the European rabbit? If so I would simplify this to "... as do some other species of rabbit".
    • That is fair - I wanted to single the European rabbit out since it's well known for making burrows and isn't included in this "other rabbits", but "some other species" is just as well. Changed. -RR
  • "a behavior unique among rabbits, but similar to those produced by pikas": it's too easy to parse "those" as referring to "behavior", so perhaps make this "a behavior unique among rabbits, but also seen in pikas".
  • "Female volcano rabbits are more dominant than males, with aggression between females being more violent and occurring more often than aggression between female and male rabbits." This doesn't mention a couple of points in the source that I think are worth including: that dominant individuals in groups were always females, and that males were never aggressive to females, but females could be aggressive towards both sexes. And why is this sentence in the middle of a sequence of sentences about reproductive behaviour? I think a short paragraph of two or three sentences about aggression behaviour could be split out from the paragraph on reproduction.
    • As a single sentence I didn't have a good place to put it. It seems strange to add a whole paragraph on the dominant behaviour of female rabbits, but the supporting evidence is there in Cervantes, so I'll expand on that. I don't find it mentioned in Romero and Velazquez 1994 but it does come up in the 2018 text. -RR
  • "The young wean off the mother until they are roughly 28 days old": this doesn't make sense, since "wean" means to stop a young mammal from taking milk from the mother. Do you mean "The young are not weaned until ..."?
  • "These nests are 11 centimetres (4.3 in) in depth and 15 centimetres (5.9 in) wide." The source says this is an average, and we need to say that too; that also means the conversion to inches is too precise.
    • Changed. -RR
  • "When little undergrowth is available, as can be the case when the animal is kept in enclosures, breeding is more difficult." This is a bit vague. Does the source give more details?
    • The source isn't precise, but I tried rewording (has a preference towards areas with dense cover). I've added page numbers for Fa 1992 as well. Hoth & Granados (1987) is cited here only based on the introduction - for specifics I'd have to get access later, which I'll try to get. -RR
  • "but it does not actually provide the necessary energy and protein needs of the rabbits": I was going to copyedit this to something like "but by itself does not provide the rabbits with sufficient energy and protein", but I would want to check with the source first to make sure the new wording was still supported. I started to look but that's a 12-page paper. You might consider giving more specific citations to page ranges within the papers; 12 pages is too much to scan through looking for the supporting material. I know scientific articles don't usually do this so up to you.
    • Page numbers provided - there were some confounding parts of this that I removed later on but "does not provide with sufficient energy and protein" is fairly soundly supported, but I did copyedit - and a new sentence after that states "other more digestible plants" make up the rest of it, implied that the analysis didn't pick up on that. -RR
  • "The rest of the rabbit's required nutrition is obtained from 15 other forms of plant life": this makes it sounds as if this is all they ever eat; presumably this is just the list of plants that they've actually been observed eating.
    • Martinez does state that The botanical composition of the diet of R. diazi comprises up to 15 plant species but I have reworded. -RR
  • "In captivity, volcano rabbits are often given pellet food typical for chinchillas": the source does not support "often".
    • Supplementing this since Martinez gives other feed options. -RR

I'm going to pause there to let you respond to these. I'm a bit concerned about the slight imprecisions I've found; I'm not opposing at this point but if I were to keep finding issues like this I would oppose. I would suggest that whoever does a spotcheck for this article keeps an eye out for this sort of thing. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:01, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have responses all over - my main question is how the use of "agouti-like" can be interpreted (possibly as synthesis of how the fur is from its descriptions). I was confused how I came to the conclusions I did reading Martinez-Garcia et al., 2012, only to find that was another part that I didn't write. -- Reconrabbit 19:03, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fixes look good; one point left above. I will read further and hope to get more comments entered tonight or tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 02:01, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing:

  • "It is parasitized by the mites Cheyletiella mexicana and Cheyletiella parasitovorax, which is notable as mites in genus Cheyletiella do not tend to occur on the same host". I took a moment to parse this. Does this mean that for any given host species, there is typically only one Cheyletiella mite that is a parasite of that species? Or that for any given animal parasitized by Cheyletiella mites, there is usually only one species of Cheyletiella mite on that animal? I think the former must be what's intended. If so, how about "It is parasitized by the mites Cheyletiella mexicana and Cheyletiella parasitovorax, which is notable as there is usually only one species of Cheyletiella mite found on any given host species"?
    • That's correct. I was trying to avoid what the source text says ("the occurrence of these two mites on one host species is unique because otherwise species of Cheyletiella exclude each other") and ended up with some awkward phrasing, I'll use that instead. -RR
  • "Unsound management policies of its habitat in National Parks and outside, mainly by afforestation, have also threatened volcano rabbit populations": Just checking that "afforestation" is correct, rather than deforestation -- this is surprising because in the habitat section it appears the rabbits like alder and pine forests.
    • Velazquez and Gopar-Merino describe "the most striking management practice significantly impacting the quality of the habitat of the volcano rabbit" as the digging of (ineffective) water infiltration ditches and reforesting alpine grasslands with pine trees that have not grown there in 30,000 years. Hoth criticises the poorly-evaluated programs of the CONANP commission that has been doing this in the cited conference presentation (YouTube video). There is a paper published through SCIRP (yes, I know, but I'm not using it in the article) that goes more in depth (but doesn't discuss the volcano rabbit) here. It's more frequently referred to as reforestation (in the 2018 work at least) but Hoth notes as early as 1987 that a region with heavily depleted soil that was being re-afforested had no present Romerolagus. -RR
  • The first paragraph of "Threats and decline" gives a summary of the threats, but some are then repeated with more detail. For example that paragraph mentions livestock grazing and urban expansion, and then when Mexico City is mentioned, we say "rapid agricultural and urban expansion". How about moving this summary paragraph to the end, and have it only mention those threats that have not been covered by the other paragraphs?
    • I got rid of the summary paragraph and distributed the relevant information throughout the rest of the section (I have trouble with this kind of small summary a lot). Highway construction has been lumped in with urban expansion. -RR
  • "it is unclear if the volcano rabbit is being pushed to their mountain habitats due to": singular "is" doesn't work with plural "their".
    • Changes and made this "other species" but could be made more specific to "rabbit species" if that helps -RR
  • "It is illegal to hunt under Mexican law": this sounds like a general prohibition; if as I suspect the intended meaning is that it's illegal to hunt these rabbits then that needs to be clear.
    • Reworded this starting with "Under Mexican law, it is illegal to hunt the volcano rabbit..." -RR
  • "though the colony failed as the only male successfully brought to the colony died of coccidiosis": you could avoid the repetition of "colony" by making this "successfully brought to Durrell's zoo", and linking to Jersey Zoo.
    • Done -RR
  • "The IUCN created an action plan for the volcano rabbit in 1990 proposed several measures to conserve the species": looks like a missing word?
    • Added the missing "that" after 1990 -RR

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:54, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Fixes look good. I will look through one more time and expect to support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:19, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A few minor points from a final read-through. These are all minor.

  • Why the square brackets around Ixtaccihuatl? Did you mean to link it?
    • It was part of the exact wording from Hoffmann & Smith 2005 as the type locality - since we reworded it, the brackets don't make sense to keep. -RR
  • It's a pity the image has poor contrast with the background. What do you think of this image? I cropped and rotated it from another one on Commons.
  • "would be one that credits Ferrari-Pérez as well, which has been accepted ever since. The current scientific name and authority of the volcano rabbit is Romerolagus diazi (Ferrari-Pérez in A. Díaz, 1893)". Can we make this "would be one that credits Ferrari-Pérez as well. Since then the scientific name and authority of the volcano rabbit has been Romerolagus diazi (Ferrari-Pérez in A. Díaz, 1893)"?
    • Done -RR
  • "Volcano rabbits are endemic to Mexico.[34] Specifically, the rabbit is native to the alpine scrublands surrounding four volcanoes (Cerro Tláloc, Popocatépetl, Iztaccíhuatl, and El Pelado) just southeast of Mexico City[36] in an area of only 386 square kilometres (149 sq mi)." I think these could be shortened by combining them: "Volcano rabbits are endemic to an area of only 386 square kilometres (149 sq mi) just southeast of Mexico City, in the alpine scrublands surrounding four volcanoes (Cerro Tláloc, Popocatépetl, Iztaccíhuatl, and El Pelado)."
    • Changed to your suggestion -RR
  • "As of 2019, the International Union for Conservation of Nature no longer mentions": perhaps "mentioned", given this is in the past.
    • How is "By 2019, the IUCN no longer mentioned"? -RR
  • Is the article in British or American English? I see both "colour" and "behavior".
    • I wasn't sure what was best but settled on American English just because of Latin American ties (had to switch unit conversion spellings). -RR
  • "In captivity, the first confrontation between a male and female volcano rabbit resulted in the female attacking the male, but later conflicts were less violent": from the phrasing I would guess this is not a statement about all volcano rabbits but about a particular captive group. If so perhaps "In observations of a group in a captivity, ..."?
    • Changed to make this clearer -RR
  • Our article on Cheyletiella does not list Cheyletiella mexicana, which is given here as a parasite. This is not your problem, but if you happen to know if it's a synonym of one of the species given there perhaps we can make it a redirect.
    • Fain & Bochkov, 2001 actually recommend that the species described as Cheyletiella mexicana was the same as a previously described species Bicheyletiella romerolagi, which is the currently accepted Chelyletiella romerolagi. I added a citation, since Velazquez 2018 didn't pick up on that. -RR

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:14, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Fixes look good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 09:33, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Spotcheck from LittleJerry

[edit]

I checked the first sentence of "Behavior and ecology". We have "The volcano rabbit lives in groups of 2 to 5 individuals" vs "Zacatuches live in groups of two to five individuals" The wording is too close, see WP:PARAPHRASE. I'd rewrite it as "[volcano rabbit] groups consist of between two and five members". Its still early, so I would check the paraphrasing in the rest of the article to be safe. I made a slight change here. LittleJerry (talk) 16:48, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I did another spotcheck and the term "...relatively slow and vulnerable in open habitats" is taken directly from the source. I will have to oppose this nomination until my concerns are taken seriously. LittleJerry (talk) 23:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am going to review the entire text as it was before I started working on it in December 2024. I am confident in my ability to summarize sources without copying and any instances of this are almost definitely going to come from the article as it was in this revision. I will ping you once I am done. -- Reconrabbit 14:25, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@LittleJerry I have tried my best to excise the text from the article as it once was and make source-text integrity more solid in those places where there was close paraphrasing or copied text. -- Reconrabbit 17:01, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I checked two more and they're fine. Switched to support. LittleJerry (talk) 17:43, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Noleander

[edit]
  • subtraction "2.0.3.31.0.2.3 × 2 = 28 — two" The m-dash after "28" kinda looks like a subtraction sign, as if the arithmetic is continuing after 28 (minus 2?). Is there a way to re-phrase so readers will clearly understand that the numbers end after "28"?
    Does substituting the m-dash with ", indicating that it has..." to clarify that the following information is a description of the dental formula in words?
Yes, that would work ... anything other than a hyphen or number. Noleander (talk) 16:37, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Volcano name "Mt. Pelaco" - Google maps says the name is "Volcán Pelado ", is the latter a better name?
    Where does Mt. Pelaco appear? Velázquez (and this later thesis) refers to the mountain as El Pelado, which is why I used that name in the list of habitats "(Cerro Tláloc, Popocatépetl, Iztaccíhuatl, and El Pelado)". A 2018 paper refers to it as simply Pelado. I discounted Volcán because it is often used in texts not as a title, just describing that the feature is a volcano.
  • The range/location map: very difficult to see the tiny dots. Much better would be using the Template:Location map many. To use this kind of map within the InfoBox (e.g. range_map = Romerolagus diazi distribution.png ) probably need to do a screen capture into a PNG File If you need assistance with that, I can help. E.g.
    Would a solution like that which I provided on Helan Shan pika work? In that case, I went to OpenStreetMap and took a screenshot, then overlaid the IUCN range map on top of it. -RR
Yes, that Helan Shan pika solution looks excellent. The current map in Volcano Rabbit article is File:Romerolagus diazi distribution.svg which is a vector diagram that contains the range boundaries, tho probably not in lat/long coords. (PS: I am commenting-out the three sample maps above, because the WP:FAC page transcludes all active nominations, and it is considered rude to have graphics in the nominations. ) Noleander (talk) 16:37, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The result is at File:Romerolagus diazi topo range.png. Could crop it differently or change the overlay transparency, etc. -- Reconrabbit 19:58, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cite page number error: The page # field looks wrong: pages=e030738 Cite journal |last1=Iraçabal |first1=Leandro |last2=Barbosa |first2=Matheus R. |last3=Selvatti |first3=Alexandre Pedro |last4=Russo |first4=Claudia Augusta de Moraes |date=2024 |title=Molecular time estimates for the Lagomorpha diversification |journal=[[PLOS One]] |volume=19 |issue=9 | pages=e0307380 |doi=10.1371/journal.pone.0307380 |doi-access=free |issn=1932-6203 |pmc=11379240 |pmid=39241029
    Changed to article-number.
  • Citation page # range inconsistent format : end with period or not? Needs to be uniform. Rojas Mendoza 1952, p. 22. vs Rojas Mendoza 1952, p. 65 [no period]. I'm guessing the article is using both sfn (includes a period) and harvnb (omits period). It is okay to use both, but you'll need to manually add periods after the harvnb's: e.g. {{harvnb|smith|2003|p=35}}.'
    I didn't even notice that, I've standardized all citation templates to harvnb.
  • Book citations inconsistent: some include location and some do not: {{{1}}}. Needs to be uniform. Probably easiest to remove the location fields.
    Locations removed. I also noted that the ISBNS were inconsistently hyphenated, and some were ISBN-10 rather than 13, so that should be standardized now.
  • Page number in "Red list" cite looks wrong: page=e.T19742A45180356 In: Velázquez, A.; Guerrero, J.A. (2019). "Romerolagus diazi". IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 2019 e.T19742A45180356. doi:10.2305/IUCN.UK.2019-2.RLTS.T19742A45180356.en
    This one has also been changed to an article-number parameter.
  • Alphabetize categories: Although not required for FA, alphabetizing the categories (at bottom of article) may look nicer than random order.
    Done.
  • Prose and MOS: I've gone thru the entire article again, and cannot find anything that could be improved. I did not check images or sources. I am not a biologist or rabbit expert. On prose and MOS: Support. Noleander (talk) 23:51, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pokelego999

[edit]

Will leave comments here sometime in the next few days. Not super familiar with animal article writing so I will be reviewing from the perspective of an outsider to the topic; if there's anything I bring up that is covered within Project or topic guidelines, feel free to disregard those comments. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:14, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the wait! Will begin.
  • Is it possible to hyperlink runways (Or, if not, define it briefly) in the lead? It's unclear to me exactly what this means as someone out of the sphere.
    • No suitable link exists because this is a pretty simple concept - only really comes up in the context of pest control, but a runway is just a path that is traveled often enough to have the vegetation worn down more from being run over so much. I quickly defined it. -RR
  • Is the dental formula really necessary here? It seems like a small detail when this information about the rabbit's skull dimensions can easily be communicated without the jargon.
    • Since it's not unique from other rabbits (like Pentalagus) I could omit it or place the actual formula in an efn; dental formulae do show up pretty often though in similar articles (Sea otter, European hare, Canada lynx). -RR
  • "and the vegetation includes Nearctic and Neotropical varieties." What does this mean?
  • In the same section as above, I'd advise moving the temperature line earlier up, as I feel the vegetation discussion should probably be kept together. (I.e, the bits about particular plant species and the bits about the Nearctic stuff)

Honestly beyond small gripes I have very few issues with this article, the prose is very solid and despite heavy usage of terms inherent to this sphere I found it was very understandable. Excellent work overall, happy to support once the above small issues are addressed. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 20:04, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999, I've reorganized and provided my reasoning for the other few things you had comments on. -- Reconrabbit 15:17, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pokelego999 🐇? -- Reconrabbit 15:43, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Reconrabbit oh I'm so sorry, I completely forgot to send a reply to this. I am good to Support. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 23:58, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

I see it was mostly handled by LittleJerry and Mike Christie above, so only a few things. There are a bunch of seemingly spurious harvnb errors. "Romerolagus diazi (id=1001120)" is not the title of the webpage. What makes "Hoth, J. (2015). "A ciegas entre reyes tuertos: comentarios a la conservación de suelo y ecosistemas templados en México" [Blindly among one-eyed kings: comments on the conservation of soil and temperate ecosystems in Mexico]. YouTube. Año Internacional del suelo. 5a Semana de la Diversidad Biológica de CONABIO (in Spanish)." a reliable source? Nothing else that jumps out, probably some inconsistent IDs but that's a question for the bots. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:36, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The id comes from the cite mdd template. I removed it as redundant. The video from Jurgen Hoth (who is the primary author of two other works cited in this article) is only used to provide additional support to statements where other references are already present, if necessary it can be removed. There was a follow-up that includes similar information to his lecture but is more broad and doesn't discuss the volcano rabbit, plus it's published by SCIRP so I wouldn't use it anyway. Which IDs are a concern? ISBNs and DOIs should be standardized across all places where they're relevant. -- Reconrabbit 18:22, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I guess. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:43, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Hemiauchenia

[edit]

I've removed the fossil record in the taxobox because as far as I can tell as stated in the article, there is no fossil record of the Volcano rabbit nor Romerolagus more broadly. Fossil ranges in taxoboxes should not be used for the time of genetic divergence, but for actual fossils. There is also a contradiction between "Velázquez & Gopar-Merino 2018" being cited for the volcano rabbit being the most basal, or most primitive, species among the living leporids (the source itself states:"Although no fossil data are available to indicate when Romerolagus diverged from other leporids, it is considered by many scientists to be the most primitive of living rabbits and hares."), while the phylogenetic tree from Iraçabal et al. 2024 (which is also supported by the genome-based genetic study of Cano-Sánchez et al. 2022 [15]) later in the section shows the volcano rabbit to be considerably nested within Leporidae, and the striped and bunyoro rabbits and red rock hares as the most basal living leporids, not the volcano rabbit. I think just paring back to "most primitive" would be best, as this makes no claim about its phylogenetic position, or at least directly noting in the text that genetic data from Iraçabal et al. 2024 (and also Cano-Sánchez et al. 2022) contradicts it. Hemiauchenia (talk) 17:06, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I had not seen Cano-Sánchez et al. 2022, which makes the case more obvious that the more primitive genera are Pronolagus and Nesolagus. I was basing my judgment on "most primitive" from the 2018 work (described as "the most primitive") and Iraçabal et al. 2024 (because although Pronolagus, Poelagus and Nesolagus have an earlier common ancestor than Romerolagus, the extant species are placed later than it in chronology). I wasn't aware that the fossil range shouldn't be used if fossils aren't known - kind of obvious now that i think about it. Though it wouldn't fit in a simplified lead because the language would need explaining, is it more accurate to replace "the most basal, or most primitive, species among the living leporids" with "the most primitive leporid species and sister to the most basal leporid clade(efn: this clade contains poelagus, pronolagus, and nesolagus according to the cladogram)"? That could be reworked to be more readable, though. -- Reconrabbit 20:33, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I think describing the volcano rabbit as being "the most morphologically primitive living leporid species" is the most accurate way to convey the information from Velázquez & Gopar-Merino 2018 and the genetic papers. Hemiauchenia (talk) 23:08, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's much more elegant. Thank you, I've changed it. As it is, could the text be construed as contradictory in the part that states "the volcano rabbit is sister to the clade containing Oryctolagus and Lepus", which is immediately followed by the cladogram that doesn't explicitly place those genera as sister (or has more options to consider)? -- Reconrabbit 16:48, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the sentence because it's contradicted by the cladogram and the cladogram itself better conveys this information. Hope this is okay. Hemiauchenia (talk) 18:40, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I don't have any objections, it's more straightforward without that sentence. -- Reconrabbit 21:23, 10 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

John Fressh

[edit]
Nominator(s): —Fortuna, imperatrix 12:51, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another medieval chap, this time a Mayor of London who encouraged a mob to burn down a prison, who was sacked, imprisoned, promoted and sacked again, all the while managing not to get executed for treason. Clever chap. I'm sure there are plenty of improvements that can be made, though, and I welcome comments and suggestions! —Fortuna, imperatrix 12:51, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS: It has also received a GA review.

Image review

  • Don't use fixed px size
Thanks Nikkimaria! —Fortuna, imperatrix 14:21, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Kimikel

[edit]

Hello, I will be taking a look at this article soon. It may take me a couple days. Kimikel (talk) 00:34, 8 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lead section

  • I see "Fresche" and "Froysh" are verified by citation #5 but not Fresshe, unless I'm missing something
You're not; I missed a cite (Jefferson 2008).
  • mercers' > capitalize
Done.
  • within the city of London's > "the city of" feels superfluous here, would be smoother with just "London's"

I agree with trimming it, but if you don't mind, I've gone with " the city's political machinery", due to mentioning London three times in the preceding paragraph.

  • In revenge, the reformer > appears to be WP:ELEVAR; just state who it is to improve clarity
Agreed.
  • During his mayoralty, he was accused of imprisoning citizens who criticised him, and he heard the curious > "criticised him and heard the curious..." to make it into one more cohesive sentence. I would also consider dropping the word "curious" as that's an opinionated, not factual, descriptor
Done.

Political background

Tweaked.
  • largest employer in fifteenth-century England". > splitting hairs but if Fressh died in the 14th century, does this really apply to him or his background?
Splitting hairs, very accurately! I've fudged the end of the quote, replacing it with Late Med Eng.
  • only a few years later > only a few years later from when?
Removed.
  • had also been hit heaviest > was also hit heaviest
Done.
  • London was governed and administered by men such as John Fressh. > I'm not sure about this sentence since we really don't know much about what John Fressh was like yet at this point in the article. As such, i don't think it conveys a lot of information
Fair points; I've completely recast the sentence(s), which hopefully clarifies things.
  • political predominance > political dominance
Done.
  • Medievalist Shannon McSheffrey > The medievalist Shannon McSheffrey (false title)
Removed as unnecessarily clunky; but have you seen MOS:FALSETITLE?
  • into and beyond Fressh's lifetime and until Richard lost his throne in 1399. > throughout and beyond Fressh's lifetime, until Richard lost his throne in 1399. or something to that effect, i think it reads a little better
Good choice!

More to come soon! Kimikel (talk) 22:32, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

  • that, since he later > remove comma
Done.
  • to her father > specify whose father
Done.

Career

  • This was a pivotal moment in the history of the revolt. > somewhat editorialized, i would lead this in by acknowledging that this is someone's opinion (ie "According to the author xyz...")
I removed it.
  • an orgy of violence and carnage began. > feel free to disagree but I feel this is not an encyclopedic way to phrase this, as it's a little vulgar and imprecise
Fair point. I've replaced it with a contemporary quote about murders, arson, etc.
  • of medievalist Ruth Bird > of the medievalist Ruth Bird [false title]
Check.
  • election of a radical, John Northampton. > in what way was he radical?
I've clarified (hopefully) on what distinguished him from the traditionalists.
  • as historian Anthony Steel > as the historian Anthony Steel [false title]
Check.
Thanks very much for these points, Kimikel, all of them choice. Hopefully, I've addressed them satisfactorily. (But see: MOS!) —Fortuna, imperatrix 14:44, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the responses, I'll get back to this one very soon. I had no clue about that bit about false titles, thank you. Kimikel (talk) 02:09, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah; to be fair, it was only added in August. —Fortuna, imperatrix 13:39, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Later career

  • On 22 June 1392 Fressh, as a Common Councillor and with his colleagues received > this could use an extra comma at least; maybe a rewrite for clarity. Perhaps something like: On 22 June 1392 Fressh, as a Common Councillor, received a royal summons to attend upon the King in Northampton alongside his colleagues.
Tweaked.
  • pain of forfeiture of life A bit of a euphemism; I would recommend just saying pain of death.
Yes, that was a curiously roundabout way of putting it!
  • Fressh was elected Mayor > Since the last paragraph is about how the King revoked the city's right to elect a mayor, specifying how Fressh was able to become mayor in spite of that would be helpful. I'm guessing part of the liberties returned at the end of note 15 may be related, so mentioning that in the body would clear that up.
Great catch. So I've clarified in the previous section that their Mayorlessness only lasted a few months, and added a sentence to the next per your suggestion.
  • discovered flagrante delicto > believe it would be in flagrante delicto here. Also wikilink
Done both.
  • John Britby, in Cheapside > remove comma, there's already quite a few in this sentence
Agree!
  • In a writ dated 13 November 1393 > I would move this back a section; I don't think it fits in mayoralty if he wasn't elected until 1394.
True. The stuff about a 1393 writ unnecessarily confused things, because he didn't actually sit until January the next year, which is the important bit. It kind of hangs a bit at the end of the previous section, but I don't see a way around that.

Personal life

  • Knightrider Street, to John Newton > remove comma
Done.
  • St. Benet Sherehog > you put a period after "St" here but not when you mentioned it earlier
Done.
  • Fressh's Inquisition post mortem > I would merge this with the previous paragraph to avoid having a floating single sentence
Agreed.

@Fortuna imperatrix mundi: I've finished with my review of the prose; once you get a chance to reply to these, I'll take another look as well as give the article a quick source review. Thank you for your work on this! Kimikel (talk) 12:25, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again Kimikel, all done, I hope! Let me know what ye think. —Fortuna, imperatrix 13:39, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for my inactivity, I've been preparing for a trip on which I'm about to go. I'll not be on much for the next 2 weeks but if for some reason my decision is needed during that time, I'm leaning towards support. If not, then I'll finish out my review later. Sorry again and thanks for your contributions here! Kimikel (talk) 23:50, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support from Tim riley

[edit]

I'll be back for a thorough rereading of the text, but meanwhile here are a few minor comments after a quick canter-through for spelling and suchlike:

  • "colored schematic of London around 1381" – could do with English spelling of "coloured".
Curious! Done.
  • "the subtantial sum" – you mean substantial
Yes, yes I do.
  • "13 sarples of wool to Calais.[note 10]" – I think perhaps you're making your reader do too much work here. With the aid of a calculator and the OED's definition I worked out that this means approx 13,500 kilos of wool: if you could check this and mention it in the text (or even in the footnote) it would, I think, be helpful.
Right, I've tweaked the footnote and put my faith in your calculator...
  • "William Walderne … Waldern … Walderne" – make up your mind.
Done, +e.
  • "by the nightwatch" – the OED makes "night watch" two words (though "nightwatchman" is a single word, heigh ho!)
Done.
  • "quitrent from a tenement" – hyphenated in the OED.
Ditto.
  • "rector of St Benet Sherehog on Poultry" – "in Poultry" unless you mean the one in Winnebago, Minnesota.
Right!
  • "Medievalist Shannon McSheffrey" – clunky false title
Removed the good, if clunky, prof completely.
  • "at some point he was naturalised citizen in England" – this sentence doesn't really work. I take it to mean "at some point he became a naturalised English citizen" (though whether "citizen" rather than "subject" is appropriate for the period is something I'll defer to you about).
I've borrowed your phrasing Tim, and IO think you're correct about subject over citizen (although denizenship might not have been so easy...)
  • "gain the good will" – one word in the OED
Done.
  • "A sarple, or sarplier, is a phenomenally ill-defined archaic term for a bale" – I chuckled at this, but I think the adverb had better go.
Perhaps a little florid.
  • "so-named due to is compilation" – "is" should be "its", and you know my view that "due to" has not so far gained acceptance in formal BrE as a compound preposition on a par with "owing to", and would be better as "owing to" or, preferably, "because of".
Both done!
  • "split in two due to excessive overcrowding" – ditto.
Indeed ditto.

That's all for now. Back anon. – Tim riley talk 09:24, 14 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Concluding comments from Tim
  • "the mercers' Company" – capitalisation looks lopsided.
Yes, capped.
  • "making himself a lot of money in the process and, by acting as a broker for his colleagues, them as well" – I can see what you're getting at but "them as well" doesn't really anchor itself to the rest of the sentence. Perhaps something on the lines of "in the process making a lot of money for himself and for colleagues for whom he acted as a broker"?
Another excellent piece of phrasing, thanks!
  • "he heard the curious Rykener case in the mayoral court" – I wonder about "curious" here? A bit editorial, perhaps. "Unusual" might be more neutral.
Good point, noted by the other review too.
  • "poll taxes of 1376–81" – I believe the luminaries who run our manual of style now demand full years in such date ranges: "1376–1381".
Ah, OK thanks.
  • "King and city had mutually poor opinions of the other" – "mutually" is superfluous here. Something like "King and city had poor opinions of each other"?
Done.
  • "brought him not only a respectable dower" – I think the primary meaning of "dower" relates to provision for widows, and "dowry" would be the more usual term for the money that the wife brings to the husband at the start of the marriage.
Absolutely, and extremely annoyed to have confused them—particularly when my (I think) only second ever FAC contains a very fat footnote on the topic of dower.
  • "an orgy of violence and carnage began" – a graphic phrase, but what's the difference between violence and carnage?
True; per the above reviewer, I replaced that with a contemporary quote on the carnage, etc.
  • "people fasted for around a quarter of the year, and as such, London required a plentiful supply of cheap, fresh fish" – "as such" seems out of place here. Do you mean "accordingly", "therefore", "so" or similar?
Yes, accordingly is nice.
  • Afterthought: "fasted for around a quarter of the year" might lead the reader to suppose this was a continuous quarter of the year. Perhaps "fasted for a quarter of the days each year"? Tim riley talk 13:16, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm wondering whether I could actually reduce it to something like "around 90 days of the year" for concision?
  • "upon the King in Northampton, upon royal summons" – two upons in close proximity: you might make the first a plain "on".
Tweaked.
  • "In May 1392, he removed the Court of Common Pleas" – the "he" was presumably the King, but between the last mention of him and this sentence we've had reference to Fressh, who gramatically could reasonably be assumed to be the removal man.
Ah, the Pickfords' chap of his day. Clarified.
  • "Particularly considering his previous sour relations with the King, Fressh had no objection to lending Richard £200" – do you mean it's striking/odd/remarkable that despite their previous sour relations Fressh had no objection to lending Richard the money?
Yes, hopefully it reads better now.
  • "Fressh [sic], as one of the richest citizens of the day" – I can't see why the "sic"
Well spotted! That was a hangover from when it was at its original title, John Frosh, before I moved it to its current name.
  • "Another married grocer and alderman Walter Newenton" – clunky false title.
Done.

I hope these comments are of use. Tim riley talk 09:35, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Tim riley, all really good points as usual. I've tried to address them satisfactorily; let me know if I have/haven't done so?! —Fortuna, imperatrix 15:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Fortuna Imperator Mundi, a gentle nudge. FrB.TG (talk) 10:34, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks FrB.TG, apologies for the delay. Lots of PC problems lately. Unfortunately, I didn't get your ping, but to be fair, you re-gendered me correctly  ;) —Fortuna, imperatrix 15:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to support the promotion of this article to FA. It seems to me to meet all the criteria. – Tim riley talk 16:49, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers Tim, appreciated! (As ever!) —Fortuna, imperatrix 16:55, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
SC

Comments to follow. - SchroCat (talk) 06:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Some of those bolded names don’t have redirects to this page. Is it worth creating them?
Great idea, done them all now.
  • Lots of letters dotted over the map, but no key to explain what they signify
Ugh, my fault for lifting the map from elsewhere without customising it... the height of laziness. I've tweaked the map so it's hopefully more applicable to the places in the article.
  • ”two messuages”: maybe a quick explanation of what that is, to save clicking away. Either inline or as a footnote would be great.
Cheers—added a footnote!
  • ”The estate that Fressh held by his wife”: I’m not sure I’m understand what this means
Yes, that's bizarrely convoluted. I've simplified to just "This estate was probably worth..."
  • ”Fressh was bailed until January 1384”: you haven’t said he was arrested yet - unless there was a different process back then (which is highly likely). If it was different, then maybe a footnote to clarify?
No, I just missed something out quite important—certainly for him—he spent a couple of months cooling his heels in the Tower. I've added a sentence to hopefully explain this.
  • ”jubilee year, 1376-7”: needs a tweak to be MOS compliant
  • ”Although the charges against him had been less severe than those against his colleagues”: you’ve told us this in the previous sentence. Maybe just “Despite the less severe charges, he was the last to be released.”
Done, thanks.
  • ”the latter's mayoral rights by October,”: as this is a new section, I think we can allow ourselves the luxury of adding the year
Added.

Scant fare from an excellent piece. - SchroCat (talk) 20:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the review and the generous words, SchroCat, I've addressed your points, I think, and the article is imprived for them  :) —Fortuna, imperatrix 18:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers SchroCat! —Fortuna, imperatrix 19:24, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support comment from MisawaSakura

[edit]
Ha! Thanks very much, Eagle Eyes  :) —Fortuna, imperatrix 18:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support now with this and fixed to SchroCat's comments. MisawaSakura (talk) 18:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's very kind, MisawaSakura, thank you! —Fortuna, imperatrix 19:24, 4 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The One Where Michael Leaves

[edit]
Nominator(s): Crystal Drawers (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"I'm afraid I just blue myself"

Ah, season two of Arrested Development, possibly the finest television season of all time. I've been editing Wikipedia for a few months now, and Arrested Development articles have been a significant part of my editing since the very beginning. No episodes of Arrested Development are at FA status yet, and I find that lack of the Bluths to be quite disturbing, so here I am to change that! The article details the second season premiere of the series, going in-depth into it's development with several behind the scenes details, offering poignant analysis of multiple different faucets of the episode, and is held together by a solid reception section

I’m sure concerns will be raised over it's length, so I’d just like to note that there are certainly shorter television episode FAs, and short FAs have been a staple of the process for years at this point. What it lacks in length it more than makes up for in comprehensiveness. Crystal Drawers (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy ping to @Pokelego999:, the original reviewer of the article's GAN, in case they want to give feedback Crystal Drawers (talk) 21:12, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • Suggest adding alt text
  • Don't use fixed px size
Thank you for the image review :)
I have added alt text to both images, and have greatly expanded File:The One Where Michael Leaves.png's sections (purpose, description, etc). Please let me know if any more work is needed Crystal Drawers (talk) 04:29, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Nikkimaria:, just wanted to check if the article has passed or still needs work on the image review? Crystal Drawers (talk) 19:26, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, thanks. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:09, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Reconrabbit

[edit]

I know nothing of Arrested Development, so I hope to provide an impartial view. -- Reconrabbit 18:38, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Typically on these articles (as far as I have seen), the actors playing characters are mentioned in the leading paragraphs (ex. the first time they are introduced) rather than in parentheticals in the Plot section.
Done
  • It may flow better to use two commas rather than two 'and's in the sentence that ends "and written by series creator Mitchell Hurwitz and co-executive producer Richard Rosenstock".
I apologize, but I’m not quite sure what you’d want me to change this to? Could you elaborate on what it should become?
I misinterpreted the meaning of this sentence and will strike it out, my mistake - I thought it was "co-executive produced" somehow
  • Is "Complete Second Season DVD" a proper title for this collection?
The proper title is Complete Second Season, DVD is not part of the title
Okay, makes sense. Thank you.
  • Fragment starting with "The use of security footage..." - "has been called" by whom?
Done
  • "Gob's insistence that he has never admitted to a mistake in his life perpetuates his inability to accept his true, selfish nature. He doesn't see a need to be truthful about his actions, and chooses to instead coast through life believing his own lies" This needs to be attributed in some way - currently it is a jarring transition to have this be presented as fact.
Done
  • "It was Hurwitz's ninth writing credit for the series, and was the first episode of the season to be filmed" only needs the first 'was'
Done
  • "open marriage" and "open-marriage" are both used in the article, so decide on one
Done
  • "and it's "ironic" reference to Friends" should be 'its'
Done
  • "the Arrested Development alumni Russo Brothers" could read better as "Arrested Development alumni the Russo Brothers".
Done
  • "and was unable to film the appearance, although he expressed sorrow at his inability to do so" The word 'although' is a non-sequitur (there isn't any reason to expect him to be happy to not film the appearance, or ascribe any other emotion to it). Omit this or connect it separately ("he later expressed sorrow at being unable to do so"?).
Done
  • "people—often while driving—will shout," the 'often while driving' seems like it would break up this sentence less if it was appended at the end instead ("will shout, "I just blue myself" at him, often while driving"). A potential clarification would be if Cross or the shouting people are the drivers (or both?).
Done
  • This might be my personal preference but the use of "revealed" throughout the article is a little strange, even when it's accurate.
Done
@Reconrabbit: Thank you for taking the time to review the article, I have fixed the majority of them and left comments/questions for the ones I didn't understand. Please let me know if you take issue with any of my changes Crystal Drawers (talk) 19:16, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for pinging. The meaning of the text is now clearer in many places. I noticed that Ian Roberts' name is now only present in the infobox since his parenthetical was removed. This one could be re-added. -- Reconrabbit 19:35, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All should be good now Crystal Drawers (talk) 19:48, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I give this FAC my support. -- Reconrabbit 20:04, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Cukie Gherkin

[edit]

Saw this on the Yoshi's New Island FAC, and as a big fan of the series, I figured I would take the time to review this. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 22:36, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cukie Gherkin: thank you for the comments! I have implemented the suggestions (minus one where I was confused on what you were asking; I left a comment on that one) Crystal Drawers (talk) 01:29, 7 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again for the comments! All the new comments should be addressed. Best wishes, Crystal Drawers (talk) 11:59, 10 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Cukie Gherkin:, just wondering if you had any more comments since it’s been over a week since your last ones? No pressure, of course, just wondering Crystal Drawers (talk) 10:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Entirely my bad; had a funeral to set up, so it slipped my mind. Will you please ping me later today to remind me? - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 10:47, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No worries, I’m fine waiting longer if you need more time. And yes, ill ping you later today :) Crystal Drawers (talk) 12:42, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukie Gherkin: pinging as asked :) Crystal Drawers (talk) 20:05, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cukie Gherkin: Just checking in, I apologize for being annoying about this Crystal Drawers (talk) 17:14, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're not annoying lmao, I'm just pretty scatterbrained. I'll finish the FAC review today. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 17:15, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, I was a little worried about how I was coming off lol. No worries, though, take as long as you need, no rush! Crystal Drawers (talk) 17:17, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox

  1. Is there a reference for Harrington and Bramwell's involvement in the episode?
Sadly, I have not been able to find one
  1. I'm not familiar with how episodes are handled; however, I feel it important that the guest appearances should be mentioned in the plot section, or be removed. I would also recommend that you be consistent with whether the character's first mention is associated with their actor (i.e., Ian Roberts is mentioned in plot, but not Henry Winkler).
Should I remove all the guest star mentions in the infobox or only the ones not mentioned in the plot?; implemented the latter suggestion
If guest stars are routinely featured in the infobox, I think that's reasonable. The only ones I would suggest removing either way are ones not mentioned in the plot section.
Done

Lead

  1. I'm not certain whether the hatnote is necessary. That being said, if it is included, I think you can just limit it to "Not to be confused with The Office episode, "Goodbye, Michael""
done
  1. I'm not sure how verifying the genre of the work is handled with episodes; I would suggest finding a comfortable spot in "Production" to state the genre of Arrested Development and cite that. Also, is satirical accurate?
I've never seen a television episode describe the show's genre in the production section, I’ve always seen it in the lead right before the show's name.. The series is described a satirical sitcom on every one of its relating Wikipedia article, so I've kept it like that. I think satirical is accurate, since the series is known for its satire of multiple different things.
  1. The explanation of the plot does feel a little jumpy; could you tighten it up to help the plot details' explanation flow better?
Done
  1. "Critics praised the episode's humor, but it drew criticism for its sub-plots." Consider: "Critics praised the episode's humor, but its sub-plots drew criticism."
Done
  1. "The episode contains the reappearance of Lucille's double wink, which was first utilized in "Pilot"." Feels too minor to feature in the lead
Done

Plot

  1. The semicolons make the flow a little weird; consider switching it up to say this: "Lucille is questioned by a documentary filmmaker, who inquires about the family's patriotism, asking whether she'd ever enlist her son or daughter in the army, [causing her to immediately sign her son Buster up]/[and she immediately signs her son Buster up." and "The police try to arrest Oscar, thinking he is George Sr. Michael explains the mixup, and Oscar leaves."
Done

Production

  1. Some of the placement is a little weird, and should be rearranged. For example, Cross' difficulty with the paint comes before discussing how the idea of Tobias to blue himself came about, which I think would make more sense to appear first. Further, there are multiple comments not related to blue Tobias found in the middle of these things.
Fixed (combined the Blue Man Group stuff together and kept the other comments in it's own paragraph)
  1. "The episode features Lucille's double wink, a callback to when she did the same thing in "Pilot"." I believe you can just say "a callback to "Pilot""
Done

Release

  1. "It received a 2.4% share among adults between the ages of 18 and 49, meaning that it was seen by 2.4% of all households in that demographic." Is it necessary to explain what 2.4% share means?
That is the way I've seen it written in every other television episode I've seen so I left it that way. If needed, I can remove it

Reception

  1. "The A.V. Club writer Noel Murray praised the episode, noting Gob's many humorous lines as a highlight." I feel like this reads like POV, even though it isn't. Consider this instead: "The A.V. Club writer Noel Murray praised the episode, identifying Gob as the highlight of the episode. Murray stated that he had some of the "funniest and telling moments" of the episode." I feel this works better too, because upon reading, the author appears to identify more than dialogue but also story moments as to why Gob is such a highlight.
Done
  1. "Blue painted body" should be hyphenated
Done
  1. "Conversely, Austin Smith of New York Post gave the episode a negative review, finding it overall to be vastly inferior to the quality of the first season." "overall to be" feels extraneous. Also, I would recommend expanding on why Smith felt this way.
Done
  1. The Collider source feels too weak to be included, per Wikipedia:WikiProject Film/Resources#Questionable sources.
I feel the source is decent enough to be included, and I’ve noticed other articles (such as Big Boys (song)) use Collider heavily, so I assumed it would be okay to use. But, I’m fine removing it if you still feel it shouldn’t be included, as it doesn’t really do much for the article overall.

See also

  1. I believe "see also" is meant for articles not linked?
You’re right, I think I added those just to pad the article. I’ve removed the two already linked in the article, and I’ve decided to add Production of Avengers: Infinity War and Avengers: Endgame as it mentions the planned cameo as discussed in the article.

Others

  1. The image in the lead. No major issue, just would be worthwhile to state in the image file description that it's Michael opposite Tobias, as well as who plays them.
done
Hi Crystal Drawers, have you finished addressing Cukie Gherkin's comments? If so, could you ping them? This has been open for nearly five weeks and has not yet achieved a consensus to promote. A lack of movement in that direction over the next 2 or 3 days may lead to the nomination being archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:14, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Don't worry, I'm actively commenting (I added a comment shortly before this). The review will be finished momentarily. Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:26, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Gog the Mild:, the article has now gained another support and a source review, is it still at risk of being archived? Crystal Drawers (talk) 10:16, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Good, that takes the immediate pressure off. It could do with a further couple of thorough reviews over the next week or so though. I have put it on Urgents, and paste my standard boilerplate on finding reviewers below, in case it includes anything you haven't already tried.

Reviewers are more happy to review articles from people whose name they see on other reviews (although I should say there is definitely no quid pro quo system on FAC). Reviewers are a scarce resource at FAC, unfortunately, and the more you put into the process, the more you are likely to get out. Personally, when browsing the list for an article to review, I am more likely to select one by an editor whom I recognise as a frequent reviewer. Critically reviewing other people's work may also have a beneficial impact on your own writing and your understanding of the FAC process.

Sometimes placing a polite neutrally phrased request on the talk pages of a few of the more frequent reviewers helps. Or on the talk pages of relevant Wikiprojects. Or of editors you know are interested in the topic of the nomination. Or who have contributed at PR, or assessed at GAN, or edited the article. Sometimes one struggles to get reviews because potential reviewers have read the article and decided that it requires too much work to get up to FA standard. I am not saying this is the case here - I have not read the article - just noting a frequent issue.

Gog the Mild (talk) 13:56, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: sorry for pinging again, but I was wondering if the article was good to go? I’ve seen other FACs pass with similar amounts of support (the article has gained another support since your last comment) and it’s been open for a good amount of time. Just wondering so I know if I should start asking around for help if you think more is necessary Crystal Drawers (talk) 16:47, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies, I thought I had responded to this. Things are ticking along very nicely but I would like a further in depth review, preferably by someone who knows little or nothing about the series, or even the general area. Pinging @SchroCat, Noleander, Tim riley, 750h+, and Wehwalt: one of whom may be willing to oblige. If they are you will owe them a favour, which I urge them not to be shy about redeeming. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:00, 5 November 2025 (UTC) @FAC coordinators: for information as this is a bit hidden away. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:02, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As I'm asked (thank you, Gog) I have no quarrel with this as a prospective featured article. Does it meet criterion 1a? I don't feel qualified to comment about an article written in AmE about a television series of which I've never heard. I find the use of the possessive of names ending in s a bit weird: Cross', series', Tobias' and so on, but I understand that's acceptable in Amerenglish. I also find the use of false titles jarringly clunky but, again, I gather that is permissible in AmE. That apart, I really have no comment to offer. – Tim riley talk 19:29, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments

I feel that all issues raised about the article have been addressed, and all issues found with the spot check have been addressed. I am willing to support this candidacy. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, @Crystal Drawers:, I plan to nominate a few articles for FAC; would it be acceptable to ping you on any of these? Cukie Gherkin (talk) 15:19, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'd be happy to help you with any FACs! I know you have a peer review up for an episode of television, so I'd prefer if you pinged me for that FA since that’s my area of editing (but I’m fine doing any, just ping me!) Crystal Drawers (talk) 15:29, 29 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Cukie Gherkin

[edit]

Next, I'll do a source review to ensure the article's accuracy. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:33, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  1. I would recommend adding |url-status= (live or dead), as some, such as this source, are not (despite being archived thankfully). - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 19:57, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Done
@Cukie Gherkin: thank you for doing the source review! I have addressed all your comments now (both for the regular review and the source review), and everything is done (minus the Collider one, but, as said, I’m fine removing it if you feel it should be axed). Best wishes, Crystal Drawers (talk) 20:59, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  1. [16] This should be tweaked: The episode features Lucille's double wink, a callback to "Pilot". Actress Jessica Walter, who portrays Lucille, claims that the wink was added to the script after she discovered she had the ability to do it." I might be confused, but to me, it seems like it's saying that Walter discovered that she was able to do it in relation to the show, but the interview suggests that it's just something she could do and thus wanted to work into the script.
Done (but I’m not sure I worded it in a satisfactory way, so let me know if it is still confusing)
  1. [17] Does it exclude anyone except executive producers in terms of people Hurwitz was worried about leaks over? If not, it might be worth rephrasing that to just say that they were concerned about internal leaks.
Done
  1. [18] Minor nitpick: it doesn't specify hand prints in the article
Done
  1. [19] Doesn't mention Richard Rosenstock's contributions (I'm not able to find his name in the book at least)
Done — it mentions Rosenstock’s writing in the WGA source for Hurwitz, so I added that on as a source
  1. "The scenes of Michael telling his family that he's leaving them to teach them a lesson showcase his insecurities and need to feel validated with his family's approval, motifs that have been in the series since the first episode." It feels like this sentence is written in such a way to continue on from the previous sentence; however, I believe that it should be clarified that this is an unrelated opinion by a different author by attributing it to Barton's writing.
Done
  1. [20] Citation info erroneously states this was published on October 13, but was in fact posted on October 12 according to the archive link and current link.
Done
  1. [21] As with the above, the source states a different publishing date (should be November 4 instead of November 7). Also, the wrong word is used: it should say 'desperation' instead of 'depression'.
Done
  1. [22] Obviously not an issue, but you could use this source to verify blue hand prints.
I'm not sure that would be verifiable, since the source doesn’t verify any production info and simply states blue hand prints were in the episode
Eh, I suppose that's fair.
  1. [23] Verifiability is fine, but I still feel that it would be advisable to not include, even if it has been included elsewhere. It would be one thing if the author had worked elsewhere, but she appears to only work on Valnet-affiliated websites.
Done, I’m fine removing it as I do agree the site’s content seemed to be lower quality than most
  1. [24] Wrong date (should be September 27). Also, I feel like the praise could be more specific. It doesn't really talk about the absurdist humor in the paragraph about this episode; consider instead talking about the subversive nature of the Saddam Hussein plot and reference the "funny and transgressive" part.
Done
  1. [25] This is Collider, but I also can't find any source covering this in full, and I verified that this information is correct. Plus, I don't think Collider is known for outright fabrication.
I actually looked for a possible replacement source for this once you brought up the previous Collider one, but didn’t find anything else for it. I think the source is alright since it’s a direct interview

Support from Pokelego999

[edit]

Support as GAN reviewer. I did a quick once over and it looks about the same if not better than when I passed, so I'm happy to Support this given I already did a thorough review which can be found at Talk:The One Where Michael Leaves/GA1. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 14:03, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Noleander

[edit]
  • Overall, the prose seems professional, solid, and FA-quality.
  • Clarify: Multiple smudges were added to the walls ... Not clear what kind of "smudges". Can it be clarified, e.g. "smudges of blue paint" or similar?
Done
  • Clarify: commending its commitment to transgressive humor ... I have no idea what " transgressive humor" is. Suggest either supply a wikilink or define it parenthetically.
Done
  • Ambiguous ... in his Blue Man Group ensemble from the episode... "ensemble" could mean "outfit" or "musical group". Suggest add word(s) to disambiguate.
Done
  • Passive: The use of security footage to showcase George Sr.'s illicit acts have been called by Barton as an... Some people think "have been" is not as good as "were". I'm not a grammar expert, but I do agree that fewer words is always better, if they convey the same info.
Done
  • Clarify The episode continues the running gag of Tobias' sexuality, ... Does that mean the gag was initiated during season one? In one or more episodes? Or was the gag only in "Michael Leaves" episode? Consider adding words to clarify.
The gag has been going on since the pilot, I changed it to "long running gag", but let me know if there could be a better way to phrase that
  • Better phrasing? Lindsay and Tobias attempting an open marriage despite Tobias' insistence that they never work has been cited by authors Jessica Flanigan and Christopher Freiman in their book Libertarianism: The Basics as an example of irrational desires taking control of relationships. The bolded text is essentially a single noun in this sentence, but it has so many words, some readers may have a hard time parsing the full sentence. This sentence is not quite FA quality. Maybe this could be broken into two sentences?
I agree the sentence is a bit janky, I have made the first part it's own separate sentence, and the analysis part of it is now it's own, as well
  • Section title? Legacy - Not sure that accurately represents the content of that section. Legacy implies permanent impact to the wider world. I understand that other TV articles maty have a "Legacy" section ... but that does not trump the fact that the title still needs to match the content. Consider another word that is more appropriate, such as "Aftermath" or "Following events" or similar.
Done
  • Summary: The prose is fairly good. Once the above issues have been addressed, I would say the prose is FA quality. The article also has appropriate compliance with MOS; and I looked at the source/cite formatting and it looks consistent & decent quality. I have not examined the images for free-to-use, nor looked at the original sources. The article does not have much gravitas as, say, Saturn or Punic Wars, but that is not bar to FA status. Noleander (talk) 19:31, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you so much for the review! All comments have been addressed, and everything is implemented Crystal Drawers (talk) 21:01, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose and MOS. Noleander (talk) 22:15, 5 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comments

[edit]
  • "A cameo of Cross dressed in his Blue Man Group attire from the episode was intended to appear in Avengers: Infinity War, but ceased due to Cross' other directing work." 1. Ceased implies that it started, which doesn't really work here. Maybe 'was cancelled' or 'was written out' or similar? ('was blue pencilled'?) 2. Suggest deleting "other" as there is no prior mention of directing for this to be other to. Maybe 'due to Cross' directing commitments'? 3. Insert ',the film,' between "in" and "Avengers".
Done
Good catch! Done
@Gog the Mild: Thank you for the comments! All have been fixed :)

Spot check

[edit]

On this version:

  • 5 OK
  • 6 OK
  • 8 Not seeing the blue things in the source.
I’m assuming you mean "smudges of blue paint". It says in the source that there is blue all over the apartment, referring to blue paint prominently featured in the episode. Let me know if I am looking at the wrong “blue things” Crystal Drawers (talk) 12:51, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 11 Can you quote this somewhere? The Google Books snippet is only barely adequate.
  • 12 Can you quote this somewhere?
Sure, this quote is used in a chapter examining the theories of humor: "The set-up of expectation, followed by a surprising twist, is a common comedic tool. In Michael's case, the omission of the word 'away, as in 'to blow away,' results in a new infinitive, 'to blow,' whose new meaning is too fallacious a truth for him to consider. This joke is a transformation of an earlier joke, in which an ambiguity of the same verb in the past tense is exploited as the character Tobias, covered in blue body-paint, responds to Michael's assumption that he is in the Blue Man Group. Tobias corrects: "I'm afraid I just blue myself.""
  • 13 Can you quote this somewhere?
  • 15 Can you quote this somewhere?
The following quote is used in the chapter discussing Tobias' sexuality and how subtly it is sometimes used: "In the episode, Tobias says, “nice to be back in a queen""
  • 17 OK
  • 18 Where is the ranking explained?
It isn't, I've seen a lot of television FAs use this phrasing for the ranking. I can remove if needed, it's really unnecessary anyway
  • 19 OK assuming that it's talking about the episode in question.
  • 21 OK
  • 22 OK
  • 23 OK
  • 24 OK
  • 27 Can you quote this somewhere?
Sure, I'll paste the parts mentioned in the article: "Arrested Development really is very funny... One weakness in the show is that each character has a showoff story line that splinters the narrative rather than unites it. And sometimes the hyper-arch tone gets a little tiresome."
  • 28 Uppercase R in the source
Done
  • 29 Can you quote this somewhere?
Sure, I'll just paste the review: "Riding high off the critical acclaim and awards won in the first year, the writers were never more confident than right here, beautifully echoing some of the jokes from season one while also setting the stage for what was to come. Lindsay is tempted by an open marriage, Oscar might be Buster’s dad, Gob turns a $100 bill into 100 pennies, and Tobias notoriously “blues�? himself. The whole ensemble delivers in this episode, all of them so clearly committed to pleasing the fans of the show and taking it in a new direction. It’s a near-perfect episode."
  • 30 OK
  • 31 OK
  • 32 OK

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:36, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, @Jo-Jo Eumerus:, I have addressed most of your concerns, except for source 11 and 13, which are both attributed to the book barely available through the Google books preview. I used the Google books preview for when I was writing the section, and it seems they removed even more content since then. If needed, I'm totally fine ordering a copy of the book and physically checking it, it might just take a day or two to arrive Crystal Drawers (talk) 13:31, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Jo-Jo, from the scrappy access I can get cite 11 seems to be supported, although from pages 111-114 rather than 111 alone. I can't get anything on page 200 (cite 13), but you may feel able to AGF. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:46, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Re 13: I guess it's OK, but only because most of the other things are correct too. However re 15 what supports "The episode continues the long running gag of Tobias' sexuality, incorporating it in more subtle ways;"? Re 27 should the hyper-arch thing be mentioned too? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:11, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As said, the quote for 15 is used in a chapter that discusses the subtler uses of this gag. I can change it to “it continues the running gag” or something more general if needed. I feel 27 is alright without the hyper-arch mention, it still gets the same idea across without it Crystal Drawers (talk) 16:35, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also to note is that for 15 I am going off the very short text given in the preview. When I wrote it, more info was given in the preview that mentioned the subtle gag part, but I can’t seem to get access to it now, so I don’t have the exact quote for the subtle incorporating of the gag part. Crystal Drawers (talk) 16:38, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: one of my friends, a fellow Arrested Development fan, owns a copy of the book that has minimal previews on google books, so I am going to borrow it from him and will be able to post the quotes from before to verify the claims. Just wanted to let you know :) Crystal Drawers (talk) 16:24, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Voices of Morebath

[edit]
Nominator(s): Pbritti (talk) 15:39, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In 2001, the Irish Catholic historian Eamon Duffy was at the height of his popularity, still riding high on the success of his seminal work on medieval English ritual, The Stripping of the Altars. A minor character from that book is the main character of this micro-history of the English Reformation, with Duffy using the records from "a somewhat unamiable busybody" to contradict popular narratives of English Christianity. Despite its dryness, the book has had an outsized impact on both later academic works and cultural memory of faith and rebellion. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:39, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
Why is the book cover considered fair use? It is just a crop of Bruegel's Netherlandish Proverbs with white text and simple shapes added. ―Howard • 🌽33 17:15, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Out of an abundance of caution, I figured it should be considered fair use. However, my hardcover copy (which I believe is a first impression) gives full credit to Bruegel for the front cover art on both the copyright page and the inside leaf of the dust cover. Perhaps it is public domain. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:40, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So far, similar book covers uploaded to Commons have not been deleted (I'm not aware of a particular deletion request), such as c:File:The Sickness Unto Death.jpg and c:File:NBV21 book cover.jpg.
If credit is solely given to Bruegel on the copyright page, then I would take that as meaning the publisher doesn't claim copyright for the cover, esp. considering this is the US where the threshold of originality tends to be higher. ―Howard • 🌽33 18:35, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Howardcorn33: I'll throw a version tagged as public domain on the commons. Beyond the standard {{PD-US-expired}}, I'm assuming I should use {{Trademarked}} and {{PD-textlogo}}. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:46, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I find that acceptable. ―Howard • 🌽33 16:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UC

[edit]

I've not read Duffy's work, but I'm interested in his approach -- this one has been on my to-read list for a while.

These two I think are reasonably "big", and make a material difference to whether the article meets the criteria:

  • I would generally encourage the use of page numbers when citing paginated sources, even when those are relatively short. Some of the sources we cite are actually quite long -- note 24, for example, can presumably be pinned down very precisely, but we ask the reader to search through 29 pages in order to find it.
  • I find it a little odd that, for a book with quite a large academic footprint, we don't cite any academic books in response to Morebath. We have a few reviews and small features, many of which come from religious periodicals, but I don't really see any sense of the continuing conversation in works of the same sort of weight.
  • I don't find the "Reception" section very easy to follow. Part of the problem here is that it's organised by reviewer, when the different reviewers all make lots of different points but tend to tread similar ground. I would suggest re-organising by theme, and including choice examples from different reviews to illustrate common threads in the criticism: this would be much more secure under WP:DUEWEIGHT.

These are smaller points which, on their own, are relatively minor:

  • the Protestant Elizabethan Religious Settlement.: is the adjective Protestant quite right here? This is not my field, but as I understand it, Anglicanism was (is?) generally considered, at least from within, a via media between Catholicism and (German) Protestantism -- a lot of the "real" Protestants, like the Puritans, were pushed out by it.
  • Just commenting here. Anglicans, at least the ones I know and from what I read, view themselves as Protestants. Their theology is certainly in line with other Protestant sects (though "Protestant" as a term is... nebulous, to say the least). During the Reformation, Anglicans did see themselves as steering Christendom back towards "true catholicity" by preserving tradition but breaking with the perceived errors of the Church in Rome and there is a lot of theological and ecclesiastical overlap (e.g., Oxford movement didn't come out of thin air), but I would be quite shocked to hear an Anglican describe themselves as non-Protestant. Worth pointing out as well that the Puritans tortured the Quakers (e.g., dismemberment, branding) for not being "real" Protestants as well when they got to the New World. ThaesOfereode (talk) 12:58, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Since the sources on TVOM almost unanimously describe the Elizabethan settlement as establishing a Protestant regime, this is perhaps a question beyond the scope of this article. That said, if you want to learn more, a decent primer on the topic is Haugaard's Elizabeth and the Reformation (CUP, 1968). ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • its coverage of parochial and local matters: why the two adjectives -- what's parochial but not local, or vice-versa?
    I used "parochial" here in the sense of referring to matters pertaining to an ecclesiastical parish, evidently forgetting that many places use "parish" just as often for secular localities. Rewritten. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • It drew critiques for instances where Duffy uses examples from Morebath to engage in broader discussions, with other reviewers noting that Duffy conceded these limitations.: this isn't wonderfully clear. Firstly, I think the word critique (detailed, close analysis at length) may not be the right word: I think you mean criticism (negative commentary). That aside, the second clause doesn't really fit with the first.
    Rewritten. Let's see if that fits well. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • an isolated and impoverished parish (now St George's Church): throughout the article, I think there's some confusion on the distinction between the village, the parish, and the church. A village is a collection of houses and fields, a church is a building, and a parish is an ecclesial administrative division. Hence, the parish cannot now "be" St George's Church, though the latter can be the parish church. However, was it not that at the time?
    Skipping the parenthetical, as the church's article is linked with mention of Binney. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • that served roughly 33 families of 150 people: those are very big families. 150 people in 33 families?
    Haha, fixed. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sir Christopher Trychay was Morebath's vicar for 54 years, a period during which England: this isn't grammatical. If I were you, I would put the dates in the first part: for 54 years between X and Y, a period...
    Re wrote to give us a shorter sentence introducing just Trychay. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would suggest calling him simply Christopher Trychay: I do take the point about "Sir" as a priestly title, but under MOS:HONORIFIC we generally drop these titles anyway, and it'll still be unclear to many readers whether he was (also) a knight. I notice that Binney doesn't get "Father" later on.
    I've deleted it outside of the first mention and quotes. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:42, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think we need to be explicit at some point about what Exeter has to do with Morebath, as otherwise readers will wonder what the village's records were doing in the town when they were bombed.
  • Religion played a significant role in the daily lives of Morebath's residents, though they conformed their practices to the oscillating theologies imposed under the monarchies of Henry VIII, Edward VI, Mary I, and Elizabeth I.: the first half of this is a bit woolly, bluntly, and the second seems to contradict most of the article: we say a moment later that they joined an armeed rebellion against one of those, which doesn't quite fit with "conformed". I would suggest cutting this or rethinking it somehow.
  • Duffy recalled that he had discovered Morebath parish during his 1990s countryside trips out of Cambridge: Morebath is a very long drive from Cambridge -- even today it's about 5 hours. He's clearly not talking about a day trip here, so "out of Cambridge" seems a bit out of place.
    Removed. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:52, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie's seminal 1975 book Montaillou: cut seminal: WP:PUFFERY.
    Done. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:52, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not your fault, but the image of the church has an unfortunate camera artefact creating the illustion of wavy lines on the roof. Perhaps better swapped for this one?
    That's better. I cropped and rotated the image a bit since we're more interested in the church building than any current burials or walkways. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:52, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:49, 20 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ranges need dashes, even in titles: see A Country Merchant, 1495-1520.
    Done.
  • The center of the story, the center of the village: centre in BrE.
    Good catch.
  • Bruegel's painting, alongside colour plates, woodcuts, and illustrated endpapers included in the book were described: the colour plates etc. Also needs a comma after book, and probably to change were to was.
    Did something similar but with dashes.
  • We mention the second impression, and then jump straight ahead to the fourth. What about the third?
    I have looked high and low and found absolutely no mention of the third impression. One presumes that there were no significant differences between the second and third impression.
  • Note 3: Patrick Collinson said that referring to the records used in The Voices of Morebath "would be misleading, if conventional", as Trychay audited and recorded them for not only the wardens but also other elements of the parish. I don't understand what this is saying -- I wonder if something has dropped out (e.g. "referring to the records as XYZ would be misleading"?)
    Yep, that's what happened.
    We now need to lose the italics, to match the formatting used throughout (and in the MoS). UndercoverClassicist T·C 19:37, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • the villagers grazed the parish's sheep alongside their own flocks and partook in raucous events called church ales, replete with homemade beer and visiting minstrels at the parish's church house, to financially support the congregation -- I don't understand the distinction here. Weren't the villagers and the congregation the same people?
    I think this is fixed.
  • witnessed the dissolution of the monasteries replace the parish's proprietor with speculators: I have very little idea what the second half of this means, or what it would have to do with the first.
    Rewritten.
  • Though complying with Edward VI's religious impositions, Trychay is recorded as having hidden expensive vestments that he had recently purchased after 20 years of saving up for them: again, it takes all of my dim memory of primary-school history lessons to piece together how the two halves of this go together -- we shouldn't assume that all readers will have had such a thorough grounding in Edward's religious policy.
    I added a few words that should help carry the reader through the meaning. Unfortunately, few of the sources are written with the average Wikipedia reader in mind, so I'll have to reach into some generalist glossing outside of the sources to say much else.
  • The parish subsidized five of its congregants to join the calamitous Prayer Book Rebellion at Exeter, after which the parish was gutted of its ornamental items: I found this whole paragraph a bit of a strange ride: I'm not sure it really has a central idea. We've stepped from "religion and everyday life couldn't be separated before the Reformation" (fine, but I'm not sure I like the implication that they could be separated during it), to "Trychay basically went along with what his parishoners believed, and so put up no real resistance to the Reformation" (fine in principle, but I'm not sure that's quite what the book is arguing), to "the parish was so resistant to the Reformation that they sent people to die fighting against it". The way we present the third part of that doesn't seem to be compatible with how we've presented the second.
    I've done some splitting/tweaking. There is inherently going to be a tension here, as the parish's involvement in the Prayer Book Rebellion was kind of a out-of-left-field move that many of the sources mention but fair to sufficiently extrapolate on. If that fits a bit better, let me know.
  • We could do with some dates for the accessions of the various monarchs involved here.
    Done.
  • Early modern English can be placed into lang templates: {{Lang|en-emodeng|at their goyng forthe to sent davys down ys camppe}}. This helps screenreaders pronounce it correctly and (I think) has some benefits for the Wiki software. You could consider a footnoted translation, too.
    I'm unsure on the best translation, but I added the language template.
  • While Collinson said Trychay is described as developing into "some kind of Protestant", Collinson said "to call him a Vicar of Bray [a clergyman who changed his beliefs to match official doctrinal changes] would be an insulting caricature: this is not the most felicitous phrasing, with the repetition. However, how can we read Trychay's faith is shown as reflecting the beliefs of his congregation, with Duffy saying "[h]is religion in the end was the religion of Morebath alongside this note -- I actually thought of the Vicar of Bray as I read it! There seems to be a conflict here.
  • defenders of "ancient traditions against the King's bad counsellors, not the king: need to pick a lane on capitalisation here.
  • are presented as likely among those killed in the Battle of Clyst St Mary.: probably is BrE; "likely" here is AmerE.
  • Carlson's review compared it to a previous Hawthornden Prize winner, Graham Greene's novel The Power and the Glory. Holding that "it is hard to think of Voices of Morebath as a masterpiece equal to Greene's novel", Carlson said that both books "give us the life of an all-too-human priest, an insignificant figure in the grand scheme of history but someone nonetheless rather representative of his time: this is a bit of a non sequitur: it's not a million miles from "holding that the book wasn't anything like as good as Greene's, Carlson said that Greene's book and Duffy's were basically as good as each other". Those two ideas need more seperation, I think.
  • the 2002 Samuel Johnson Prize for Non-Fiction, an award for non-fiction works: WP:MTAU and all, but I think most of our readers will have figured that one.
  • It was also shortlisted for the British Academy Book Prize for "accessible scholarly writing within the humanities and social sciences" in that award's second year: MOS:QUOTEPOV would axe the quote marks.
    Done.
  • It was also shortlisted for the British Academy Book Prize ... The judges for the British Academy Book Prize: a touch repetitious.
    Done
  • St George's Church reported that hundreds of people have come to visit after reading about it in Duffy's work: sequence of tenses: had come.
  • the English rural class: not sure even the hardest Marxist could defend the singular here.
    Done. Zinn rolls in his grave.
  • Playwright Alan Bennett listed The Voices of Morebath as a "key work" in 2005: Alan Bennett is certainly a leading light in his field, but this is a bit like citing Eamon Duffy's view of one of his plays -- what's his authority here? Key work for what? If it was a personal inspiration for a particular project, that would be another matter, but I'm not sure "famous person likes book" is necessarily notable in itself.
    I understand that it is certainly not enough to qualify as notable, but a leading British literary figure naming an academic monograph as one of his five "key works" strikes me as weighty enough to warrant mention.
    What exactly does "key work" mean in this context? One of his favourite books? An influential book upon his writing? What he considers to be one of the most important books on the Reformation? UndercoverClassicist T·C 15:51, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • pointing to the book as evidence that Duffy's works as have been focussed on exposing "Puritan propaganda".: something is awry here.
  • secularization: AmerE: secularisation in BrE (unless you're going to use Oxford spelling, and that way madness liez). See also Post-revisionist historians, such as Alec Ryrie, emphasize and, in the notes, popularized. I'd suggest doing a ctrl-f for "ize".
    I tagged this article as Oxford spelling from the outset (that seems to be the average among the sources I used), so I think it's ok to stay.
  • Moreau said that post-revisionists evaluated Dickens's thesis as not promoting a false conception that the religious revolution came "from the bottom": I've read this a couple of times and I'm not sure what it actually means. The multiple negatives don't help.
  • Lutton's argument promoted a theory of diverse pieties during this period: this is a bit academic-ese: there must be a more layman-friendly way to put "a theory of diverse pieties".
  • The Virginia Quarterly Review is put title-first by the template, so alphabetise under Notes.
  • Biblio: places of publication are inconsistent, as is whether to put state abbreviations after US placenames.
    The locations are not included for periodicals, web sources, and journals, but provided for books (as I believe is standard). I believe you're confusing the names of some of reviews (which themselves feature inconsistent abbreviations for Connecticut). ~ Pbritti (talk) 03:27, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Ah yes, you're right on the Connecticut abbreviation. Tucker 2007 has no location; the other two (Duffy 2001 and Moreau 2004) do. I think these are all the books cited -- as above, I'm a bit surprised that we're only citing two books other than the article's subject, and for that matter very few articles that aren't explicitly about the book itself. Is that really a reflection of its impact in printed scholarship? UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:42, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I have gone through quite a bit of searching to wrestle up references to TVOM across other published works. While it's cited plenty, there's rarely engagement with the text at any level worthy of mention here (a surprisingly large number of citations merely use TVOM to reference statements about periodization or well-established facts). I've cited a couple monographs or reviews of other works that directly challenge or evaluate TVOM, but it's not like The Stripping of the Altars in terms of reopening a corner of scholarship. If you're aware of additional works I ought to reference, please let me know and I'll work on them. I've been transient these last two days, but will finish your comments tomorrow UTC. Thanks for your help! Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:14, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @UndercoverClassicist: Your patience has been greatly appreciated–my life has taken a number of left turns over the last week, so this review's goal of improving the article has become something of a brighter spot in the midst of the chaos. I have substantially reorganized the reception section to conform with your suggestion of a thematic organization. You were right: that really does improve the flow of that section. I also removed one of the shorter reviews from that section as likely undue (or, at the minimum, surplus). I have added a couple other works that engage with the impact of the book. Please offer any additional comments you can! ~ Pbritti (talk) 16:51, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think the outstanding queries are the "key work" and the "Vicar of Bray" question -- did you manage to get to those? UndercoverClassicist T·C 08:30, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed the "key work" bit a few days back because I felt you were right that there was little encyclopedic value. The Vicar of Bray thing has me a tad stumped. I agree that there's a conflict, and I think that's why Collinson initially made that point: Trychay, while ultimately compliant, had convictions that he was ultimately forced to surrender under duress. If you recommend an alteration that amplifies or otherwise improves that note, I'll gladly implement it! ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:29, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I think that puts me at a slightly tentative support: I'm happy at the moment to AGF that the book hasn't had much impact on other scholarly works, and can't find any evidence to shake my confidence in that, but then this isn't my field and I wouldn't necessarily expect to be able to turn up that evidence even if it did exist. It look as though the "Vicar of Bray" is going to have to remain unresolved, but I think the way we present it here is consistent with WP:DUEWEIGHT. UndercoverClassicist T·C 12:11, 12 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note

[edit]

This has been open for more than three weeks and doesn't have a single support yet. Unless this changes the next few days, I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. FrB.TG (talk) 21:55, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: Thanks for the note. I'm still awaiting a reply from the only reviewer who has taken the time to comment at length. I don't know how to resolve this. ~ Pbritti (talk) 22:31, 11 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

RoySmith

[edit]

This seems like an interesting topic and at first glance well-written, so I'm surprised it has attracted so little attention from reviewers. Let's see what I can do...

Background
[edit]
  • During this vicariate, England had four monarchs and Morebath transitioned from a conservative Catholic community rebelling against the government-imposed English Reformation into a village conforming to the Protestant Elizabethan Religious Settlement.[2][4][5][6][3] Why does it take five citations to support what appears to be a simple uncontroversial statement? See WP:OVERCITE.
    • Cut down to three. ~ Pbritti
      • In general, I'm a minimalist when it comes to citations. I'm not going to go through every one, but I encourage you to look on your own at them all and see if there are any places you use multiple cites which could reasonably covered with fewer.
        • I went through and removed a couple. As it stands, there are about 80 places where I've placed citations. Of these, 10 have multiple citations, with nine of those having two citations. I think a 1-in-8 presence of multiple citations is reasonable, but let me know if you want me to winnow it down a bit (this may require some slight adjustments to content). ~ Pbritti
  • Henry VIII (reigned to 1547) ... I suggest use of {{reign}} for a more compact presentation.
    • Done. Good call. ~ Pbritti
  • However, the strain of the Edwardian government's religious and financial demands proved the most trying: this seems like an odd construction here. The used of "however" and "most trying" implies a contrast/comparison to some preceding statement which doesn't really fit.
    • Dropped "However,". Reads far more cleanly. ~ Pbritti
  • Devon and Cornwall revolted with the implementation of 1549 Book of Common Prayer for the sake of readers not familiar with England, I'd add some context: "The counties of Devon and Cornwall ...". Also, "revolted against" instead of "revolted with" Or perhaps, "with the implementation of 1549 Book of Common Prayer, the counties of Devon and Cornwall revolted"
    • That's better. Done. ~ Pbritti
  • sponsored five of its men to join the doomed Prayer Book Rebellion at Exeter, again, add some context for unfamiliar readers: "... at the city of Exeter, 20 miles to the south".
    • Went with "nearby city". ~ Pbritti
  • he Accounts of the Wardens of the Parish of Morebath, Devon, 1520–1573 the full text is available at https://archive.org/details/accountswardens00weavgoog. I suggest adding a link (perhaps in an External links section).
    • Did this as a "Further reading" section. Good idea. ~ Pbritti
  • many of its archived records were destroyed in bombing raids on Exeter how did it come that the parish records were moved to Exeter?
    • Oh, I see, you explain in the next sentence. Why not present this in chronological order; first telling about Binney and the rebinding at the Exeter library, then following up with the bombing.
      • Good call. Done. ~ Pbritti

(more later)

Contents
[edit]
  • features 16 pages of front matter and 232 pages of body matter Maybe something a little less WP:PEACOCK than "features" (here and elsewhere)?
    • Done with the exception of the reference to the television appearance, as I believe that is conventional phrasing. ~ Pbritti
  • Duffy intended The Voices of Morebath to serve as a "pendant" for The Stripping of the Altars I'm not familiar with this use of "pendant". I don't see it mentioned in the OED either, so I assume this is a somewhat obscure use and worth an in-line explanation. I had to go back and figure out what The Stripping of the Altars was, so remind the reader, i.e. "his earlier volume ..." or something like that.
    • I added a parenthetical and a gloss. ~ Pbritti
  • The second impression I'm sure "impression" is correct, but "printing" would also be correct and more familiar to most readers.
    • Done. I was under the impression (no pun intended) that these were slightly different things. ~ Pbritti
  • In some places (throughout the article) you say "Morebath parish", in other places "Morebath's parish". Pick one and be consistent.
    • Made the latter the uniform usage. ~ Pbritti
  • In the aftermath, the parish was gutted of its ornamental items I'm not sure what that means. Did they sell the items to raise money for the rebellion, or did Royal authorities come and ransack the place in retribution?
    • I tried making that a bit clearer. ~ Pbritti
  • gladly embraced the duties and income of a second parish what does "second parish" mean?
    • In this context, literally a second parish came under his ministry. I adjusted that sentence to be a tad clearer. ~ Pbritti
Reception
[edit]
  • In his 2002 review for London Review of Books, Collinson contextualized The last we heard about Collinson was several sections back, so reintroduce him.
    • Done. ~ Pbritti
  • Duffy was awarded the Hawthornden Prize ... previous Hawthornden Prize winner, Graham Greene's novel In the first instance, you refer to the author as having won the prize, in the second, the book having won it. Which is correct?
    • The former. Done. ~ Pbritti
      • I'm confused. You still have "Duffy's book was awarded" but "previous Hawthornden Prize winner, Graham Greene", so still one is the book and the other is the author.
        • Whoops, sorry. Fixed for real this time. ~ Pbritti

As a general note, I'm wondering what makes Morebath so special that it got all these books written about it? Was there something about the parish which made it stand out from presumably hundreds (thousands?) of similar parishes? Or is it just that the vicar kept excellent records thus leaving something for future historians to work from?

Yeah that's the thrust of it. I tried pulling quotes that indicate this (eg "keyhole"). Let me know if you believe more has to be done to emphasize that. ~ Pbritti
OK, I see where you talk about this in paragraph 2 of Background, so perhaps that's fine. Let's see what other reviewers think. RoySmith (talk) 23:43, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Legacy
[edit]
  • The French historian Jean-Pierre Moreau assessed both The Stripping of the Altars and The Voices of Morebath as among the revisionist works by English historians of the English Reformation. something's not right with this sentence. I think it's missing a word somewhere, but not sure what.
    • I think I just wrote a clunky sentence. I have rewritten it for clarity. ~ Pbritti

OK, that does it for a first read-through from me. RoySmith (talk) 23:41, 15 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Other stuff
[edit]

Why do you have several references with "[Untitled]" instead of a title?

The JSTOR formatting indicated those titles as untitled works. While I think that book citations aren't really titles for reviews, I've put them in to maintain consistency and prevent any untitled citations. ~ Pbritti
The JSTOR links (and doi) are "nice to have", but the core citation is to the journal title, volume, issue, pages, date, author, and item title, just like you would find it in a traditional dead-tree card catalog, so yeah, that needs to be correct.
To clarify, I'm fairly certain that the dead-tree formatting, at least as indicated when I searched those sources where it was present, was some variation of "[Untitled]" or an auto-populated "Review of XYZ" that didn't correspond with the heading in the original source. I've removed the "[Untitled]" in favor of rendering the citations for the reviewed works that precede the reviews as titles. ~ Pbritti (talk) 00:05, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Many aspects of this are outside my field of expertise (English history, religion, literary review) so I am unable to comment on the comprehensiveness or quality of the research. But it's a good read for a non-expert audience so support based on the quality of the prose. RoySmith (talk) 10:39, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Ippantekina

[edit]

Non-expert review; I'm pretty keen on reading history.

  • I would suggest other words rather than "noted" per MOS:SAID
    • Done.
  • the book was appraised as overly complex for the broad audience it had been written and marketed towards appraised by whom? And maybe shorten it to "... the broad audience that Duffy had intended it for"
    • I have attributed this to reviewers, but this is a summary of reviews that comment on both Duffy and the publisher.
  • Sir Christopher Trychay[note 1] was vicar of Morebath for 54 years, from 1520 to 1574 link vicar here instead
    • Done.
  • I'm unsure how you organised the "Reception" section as it currently reads like a collection of disparate reviews of who said what; I'd suggest a more thematic approach to the section
    • The first paragraph is for commentary on the practical elements of the book (size, price, readability). The second paragraph is positive reviews that contextualize the work with contemporary scholarship. The third paragraph is criticisms based on the limited source material, with the fourth being more positive appraisals of Duffy's treatment of this limitation. The last three paragraphs address the work's place in the field of microhistory.
  • Same concern for the Academic legacy section.
  • Harv errors for the two book sources in "Further reading".
    • I do not see these errors. The books in that section do not utilize the harv template.

Ippantekina (talk) 20:48, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Ippantekina: Thanks for your review! I've worked through what I saw, but I think you may need to assist me in identifying the harv error, as I have tried figuring out what you're referring to but have been unable to locate an issue. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 18:08, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Pbritti: thanks for addressing my comments! I checked again and fixed my common.js and the harv errors are gone :) so no action needed from your side. Support on prose -- overall it was a good read about (to me) a niche topi, great work! If you are keen, I would greatly appreciate any feedback from you for my current FAC, but I understand if it is not of your interest. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 20:20, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I'll swing by that review once I wrap up reviewing responses to my comments on another editor's FAC. Looking forward to comparing Evermore to your other great TS work. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 20:31, 26 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

I am not sure that the sparse use of the book itself is sufficient; on an article about a work I'd expect the work to be cited more frequently. I am also wondering about the logic between which works get a page number and which don't. Selwood 2018 should probably be marked as dead link. Are Guardian editorials reliable sources? Did some sparse spotchecking. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:11, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • Citing the book itself would be WP:PRIMARY and opens the door to WP:UNDUE, which is why I avoided it on my previous FA on a book. Guardian editorials are fine to establish basic facts and indicate societal impact. Journal articles don't typically receive page numbers in citations but rather have page ranges listed in the bibliography. ~ Pbritti (talk) 13:14, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think this argument passes muster under the WIAFA comprehensiveness criteria - the book is the most reliable source for the book's own contents, and while sometimes there is the question of how much WP:WEIGHT to accord to any of its points, when it comes to plot summaries etc. that's not so important. The tendency of secondary sources to omit stuff or get things wrong because they are second-hand matters more in this context. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:40, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    That's not inherently true, especially when the majority of sources utilized here are from peer-reviewed book reviews and reviews from highly reputable sources. Looking at other 2020s FAs on non-fiction works, there are zero primary-source references in The May Pamphlet and four in Why Marx Was Right. There is very little of encyclopedic value that can only be referenced to the book itself; if it's worth having on Wikipedia, it's almost certainly readily available in an RS (especially in such a widely and diversely reviewed work like this). I addressed the issue on Selwood. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    ...Why Marx Was Right has an entire section sourced to the book itself. The synopsis section, which is exactly the type of section where one expects the primary source to be used. Not a counterexample. The May Pamphlet's synopsis section seems to be at times more analysis than synopsis. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:17, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It's a minor thing, but Why Marx Was Right technically breaks WP:PLOTSOURCE, in that it gives a synopsis of a non-fiction book without actually including citations -- in theory, PLOTSOURCE applies only to works of fiction. I have elsewhere raised the prospect of changing it to apply more broadly, and that didn't get much traction: there was at least a strong body of opinion that the current exemption is too broad. However, it would be easy enough to simply add footnotes with the page numbers relevant to the bits we're summarising. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:01, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I can see adding citations to TVOM that correspond with the portions discussed by other sources, but that runs contrary to RoySmith and his OVERCITE guidance and the guidance I received while working on Free and Candid Disquisitions. As such, I'm flatly saying that I will not be adding more PRIMARY citations unless a specific instance where one is needed is presented. ~ Pbritti (talk) 14:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    OK, definitively can't pass this one under "comprehensiveness" then. The rest works. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:53, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @Jo-Jo Eumerus: I think your review would benefit from identifying an instance where the article is not comprehensive in its sourcing. If you believe that it should cite the book itself, it does that three times (without violating WP:PLOTSOURCE). If you believe coverage of the book's contents is incomplete, we should be able to identify how. You should articulate how this is definitively not comprehensive. ~ Pbritti (talk) 05:43, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    It seems like you are using the book itself as a source only in footnote 5. One would expect it to be used a few times in the contents section too - by default, the book is the best source for the book's own contents. Sometimes you can cover everything with secondary sources too but in my experience, people doing that neglect to check whether that's enough and often assume that the secondary sources accurately reflect the primary source when that's not guaranteed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:24, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get the impression that if I had the exact same section sourced exclusively to the book, you would have not raised this concern. However, that runs contradictory to PLOTSOURCE. I have instead sought highly reliable sources that were carefully selected so that the book's contents were well summarized. The book is cited in those notes on the small occasions where secondary sources were insufficient in their coverage of the book's contents and where Duffy's own words were needed to provide greater detail. If you believe some element of the book is not adequately covered by the article, please identify it. Best, ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:19, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"I get the impression that if I had the exact same section sourced exclusively to the book, you would have not raised this concern." That's indeed true, because the problem is exactly that you are using the wrong kind of source for this type of content. Sources aren't always equivalent. It also opens the risk of incompleteness. Did you compare these sources to the book, to verify that they aren't getting anything wrong or omitting anything important? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 13:12, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I did. And it's not true that I used the wrong source. Policy opposes nonfiction books being the primary sources on their own content. There is no equivalent for WP:PLOTSOURCE for nonfiction that suggests that one has to cite the book. You should cite a policy or guideline, as you seem absolutely certain that there's something indicating what the "right kind of source" is here. ~ Pbritti (talk) 15:10, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zhang Jingsheng

[edit]
Nominator(s): Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:34, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Zhang Jingsheng, frequently nicknamed "Dr. Sex", was a controversial writer, philosopher, and yes, sexologist from early 20th century China. A revolutionary in his youth, he studied in France and became obsessed with Rousseau, eugenics, and scientific racism. He caused a massive public scandal with his 1926 book Sex Histories, after which he fell into complete obscurity.

This has been longest and most intricate article yet; I hope you all enjoy reading about the "literary monster" of Republican China. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:34, 15 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • @Nikkimaria: Zhang_Jingsheng,_circa_1906 and Zhang_Jingsheng_with_family_Early_1940s were unpublished and public domain at the time of the URAA date. This seems like it would mean it would be PD in the US as well due to the Bern Convention, but I'm unsure what template this would use.
  • For File:Havelock_Ellis_cph.3b08675.jpg, LOC says it was "created/published" circa 1913, mentions "no copyright renewal" and says no known restrictions on publication. Does this satisfy publication for copyright purposes? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 07:51, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    On Havelock, that tells us LOC considers it out of copyright, but not why, which is what is needed for the current tagging - suggest a tag swap.
    On the others, what is the first known publication? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:21, 16 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Done for Havelock. First known publication appears to be 2019 for the other two (although one appears in Rocha's 2010 doctoral thesis, cited to the Raoping County archives; I assume that doesn't count as publication) Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 01:26, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Hm. In that case the Hirtle chart suggests they wouldn't yet be PD. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:42, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I removed the two and added one that was published in 1930, so covered by PD-China-1996 Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:23, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc

[edit]
General
  • The article uses "organized" and

"program" which are American spellings whereas it uses "dmy" date format is used in the article which ca is uncommon.

Lead
  • “confusion on which books” → should be “confusion about which books”
  • Fixed.-G
  • “spawned from” → “were spawned by”: The idiom is spawned by; from is ungrammatical.
  • Rephrased to avoid the idiom. -G
Early life and education
  • "Zhang was rejected from a government scholarship to study overseas.”

→"Zhang was rejected for a government scholarship to study overseas.”

  • Fixed.-G
  • "At Peking, Zhang was introduced to the theory of social Darwinism, to which he would become a strong proponent."
    • You could use either of the following two versions:

1) "At Peking, Zhang was introduced to the theory of social Darwinism, of which he would become a strong proponent." Or 2)"...and he would become a strong proponent of it. "

  • Fixed.-G
Academic career
  • on recommendation from → on the recommendation of
    • Fixed.-G
  • a number of reforms → several reforms
    • Fixed.-G
  • He was forced to resign from his post after only one year → He was forced to resign after only one year
  • united by a belief that China's weakness to foreign powers had to be overcome → sharing the belief that China's weakness to foreign powers had to be overcome
    • Fixed.-G
  • a number of other faculty → several other faculty members
    • Fixed.-G
Sex Histories
  • You could 'delink Zhou Zuoren since he has been linked in the previous paragraph (the last paragraph of the previous section).
    • Fixed.-G
  • railes against contemporary erotica → rails against contemporary erotica
    • Fixed.-G
  • sexual perversion → sexual perversions
    • No, it works in this context; perversion can be used as an uncountable noun meaning an abnormal view of sexuality in general, rather than one specific view.-G
  • Zang was aware that young people → Zhang was aware that young people
    • Fixed.-G
  • the rest of committee → the rest of the committee
    • Fixed.-G
Shanghai and the Beauty Bookshop
  • Ellis has already been introduced as "British sexologist".
    • Fixed.-G
  • explicitly scenes → explicit scenes
    • Done.-G
  • shitting, to sexual intercourse, and on to thinking and culture → defecation, sexual intercourse, and thinking and culture
    • This is a quote so I can't alter it.-G

A few more thoughts after a further read. MSincccc (talk) 08:59, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Later life and death
  • educational minister → education minister
    • Done.-G
  • co-educational → coeducational
    • Done.-G
    • Standard American English.
  • Link "archivist"?
    • Done.-G
Views and philosophy
  • Do we need the links to "military uniform" and "school uniform"?
    • Military uniform, probably not, but school uniforms are not universal.-G
Utopian society
  • “all couples who wish to have children would need to receive permission” → “all couples who wish to have children would need permission”
    • You could remove unnecessary "to receive".
    • Fixed.-G
  • “All citizens would require to bathe daily” → “All citizens would be required to bathe daily”
    • The correct verb construction.
    • Fixed.-G
  • “which would lay on the site of a demolished Tienanmen Square and Forbidden City” → “which would lie on the site of the demolished Tiananmen Square and Forbidden City”\
    • Fixed.-G
Aesthetic labor
  • for the example of rickshaw-pulling → For example, rickshaw-pulling
    • That wouldn't be quite right either, but I reworded it. -G

MSincccc (talk) 13:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sexology
  • "Havelock Ellis" is linked on four out of five mentions (including the image caption) in the article.
    • removed extraneous quotes.-G
  • writing that his work inspired him to begin his scientific studies of sex → writing that it inspired him to begin scientific studies of sex
    • “His work inspired him” is repetitive.
      • Fixed.-G
  • only loosely incorporating Ellis's → loosely incorporating Ellis's
    • “Only” is redundant here.
Legacy
  • analyzes → analyses
    • Yes. In American English, the plural of “analysis” is analyses. “Analyzes” is the verb form.

MSincccc (talk) 13:28, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TechnoSquirrel69

[edit]

One source review coming up! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 16:45, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Review time! I just have a few things to get us started, and I'll add more after my spot-checks, probably tomorrow.

Prose comments
[edit]
  • Add links for the place names in the infobox.
    • Done.-G
  • Consider piping the links to exclude the word philosophy under the "philosophical work" section of the infobox; it seems redundant.
    • Done.-G
  • Link Sex Histories in the lead.
    • Done.-G

A little more. —TS

  • In places, I feel like the prose is a little choppier than it could be. I feel this mostly in paragraphs with multiple consecutive short sentences that don't flow together; as an example, the "Zhang was rejected for a government scholarship to study overseas. [...] They were both suspended for one year." passage might read better as "Zhang was rejected for a government scholarship to study overseas, and grew increasingly rebellious against the academy [as a result?]. He cut off his queue ([...]) and advocated that other classmates do the same. After staging a protest with a friend against the school's food service – which he claimed penalized slow eaters – the two were suspended for a year." Of course, you'd know best how to apply this without introducing synthesis or other issues, this is just a general point of feedback.
    • I tried to cut down on these a bit throughout the article while fixing stuff.-G
  • destroyed his professional reputation and → destroyed his professional reputation, and (conjunction between two independent clauses)
    • Fixed.-G
  • You seem to be using em dashes in this article, so swap over the spaced en dashes in § College education.
    • Done.-G
  • Qing Dynasty → Qing dynasty (2×)
    • Fixed.-G
  • In § Revolutionary activity and overseas study, "the Republic" is mentioned without being introduced.
    • introduced.-G
  • Should "Diligent Work-Frugal Study Movement" have an en dash instead of a hyphen?
    • No, I think it's a hyphen here, since they connect two related concepts (as in "toll-free number"). -G
  • "who ultimately skipped Beijing" Can we go for something more tonally formal here?
    • Fixed.-G
  • I would not put "big breast renaissance" in Wikipedia's voice in the section header, probably use quotes and capitalize as in the text.
    • Fixed.-G
  • "30 to 40%" needs an alternative per MOS:%.
    • Fixed.-G
  • "made one of the first analyzes of Zhang" Presumably a spell-check software "corrected" this out of context? :P
    • Oops, yes.-G
  • 'new citizen' → "new citizen"
    • Fixed.-G
  • Consider using {{harv}} (or {{harvnb}}) inline to link the sources mentioned in the footnotes.
    • Done.-G
  • mid-to-late 1910s → mid- to late 1910s
    • fixed.-G
  • The androgyny link in § College education goes over the dash.
    • Fixed.-G
  • "Favorable analyzes of his thought" Same as before.
    • Fixed.-G
  • "Rocha noted that it was small enough to read with one hand." I don't think this is important enough to mention, and Rocha puts this information in quotes — not sure what that indicates. The article already established that it's a "pocket book" anyways.
    • Removed the pocket book part to make it more clear.-G
  • "史; shǐ" Put the transliteration in parentheses.
  • "The title Xingshi carried both academic and pornographic subcontext" is a little unclear, I would rephrase closer to the way Rocha puts it. And is subcontext a word? Maybe subtext?
    • Subtext is probably clearer; rephrased. -G
  • "while a republication in mainland China ..." I would split this into its own sentence.
    • Done.-G
Source review
[edit]
  • This paper looks like it could be useful to cite.
    • Ooh, thank you for linking. I'm incorporating this now. -G
      • Incorporated.-G
  • Use |script-title= for Chinese titles, which also suppresses italicization.
    • Didn't know this existed! Done.-G
  • Most of the books have ISBNs and DOIs, but some have other identifiers like OCLC or JSTOR numbers instead — can this be made more consistent?
    • Some (but not all) articles on JSTOR lack DOIs, and for those I have just used the JSTOR numbers (and of course, articles not on JSTOR would not have JSTOR numbers). Likewise, older books lack ISBNs, so I have used OCLCs instead when available. That being said, I could add OCLCs to all of them if that'd be helpful.-G
  • Dikötter 1995 needs an ISBN.
    • Done.-G
  • Geng 2020: add |doi-access=free.
    • Done.-G
  • Similarly, |url-access=subscription in Hee 2013.
    • Done.-G
  • En dash between the years in Jiao 2017, add the DOI.
    • Fixed.-G
  • It seems like Leary and Rocha also published work in academic journals or books, so I'll presume their PhD theses inherit that reliability. Could you say anything about the reliability of Jiao 2017?
    • Nothing beyond any other PhD thesis, other than that it's been reviewed by a reputable institution. My approach has been that PhD theses from otherwise non-notable scholars are usable as long as they don't contradict academically published works. This seems to roughly correspond with the guidance at WP:THESIS.-G
  • Leary 1993 goes (presumably) before 1994.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Does Lei 2015 have a DOI?
    • Not that I can tell.-G
  • Rocha 2015: "Chinese Sexologies" → 'Chinese Sexologies', across → Across.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Rocha 2019: Move the comma outside the quotes (MOS:LQ, and it's in the original), en dash between the years.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Does Zhang 2011 have a DOI?
    • Not that I can find.-G
  • Use |editor= instead of |author= for Chen 2021 in § Further reading. Since I don't have access to (or know anything about) this book, could you briefly explain why it's not cited in the article?
    • It's just the most thorough collection of Zhang's published works, but it doesn't seem to have much in the way of original commentary from Chen, so no use here. -G

Citation numbers from this revision. —TS

  • Spot-checks done for citations 5a, 5b, 8b, 17a, 17b, 58, 85, 91b, 92a, and 92b without issues. Some concerns are below.
  • I'm seeing a lot of full paragraphs with citations bunched up at the end, which doesn't seem ideal from the perspective of text–source integrity. For example, citation 17c verifies some of the information in the preceding three sentences, but not the names of the publications mentioned. Could you put the citations as close to the text they verify as possible?
    • Tried to break these up.-G
  • Citation 8a fails verification entirely, although 8b is fine.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Citation 36: Peng says "rumor has it", so I wouldn't use phrasing as confident as "Peng (2002) states that".
    • Rephrased.-G
  • Citation 47a doesn't verify much of the paragraph before it, and mentions that raids occurred in school dorms rather than bookstores.
  • Citation 65: It doesn't look like anything on page 77 is relevant, only 78. "feuded with Zhang" Use something more neutral here; there's no evidence of a major feud in the source.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Citation 85 checks out, but there is a disagreement between it and Rocha 2019, p. 7 — the first and second fluids are swapped, and he claims one kind comes from the labia, not the vaginal walls. I would assume there are other sources that cover this aspect of Zhang's theories that should be checked for a consensus, or at least mentioned in that footnote.
    • Chiang agrees with Rocha's ordering, added that.-G
  • Citation 91a's pages seem off. Jiao mentions the "Big Breast Renaissance" on page 83. The other source for this statement, by the way, translates this as "To Restore Big Breasts"; is there a reason one was picked over the other?
    Jiao 2017, p. 85, also translates this as "Big Breast Restoration". —TS
    • I mostly just chose it because it had the best ring to it out of the given translations, and they all seemed to check out.
  • Citation 110 has only 24 non-bibliography pages in my copy, but you've cited pp. 42–44. Was this for a different source?
    • Supposed to be Rocha 2015, my bad.-G
  • Citation 110a does not state that Romantic Generation was "one of the first".
    • Was missing another cite - fixed.-G
  • Some of the sources are offline or not in English, so I haven't checked any of those.
  • The reference list strikes me as a little light on Chinese sources — are there any appropriate scholarly sources from China, contemporaneous or contemporary? Do the English-language sources cite any Chinese works themselves?
    • All the main English sources are themselves mainly dependent on Chinese sources, both primary and secondary. Several Chinese sources I couldn't use for whatever reason; this is a good example; it cites many of the same sources (including English-language sources) that others do, but mostly retreads ground already covered by the very thorough Rocha 2010. Thus it is discounted by WP:NONENG. (fwiw, Yang 2025 is a Chinese journal article that was translated and republished in a journal dedicated to that.)
  • Consider linking to Google Books on Dikötter 1995.
    • Done.-G
  • Leary 1993 needs its page range fixed.
    • Done.-G
  • Rocha 2015 is missing the editor and chapter page range.
  • |doi-access=free for Rocha 2019. Could you take your own look through the references and see if similar access-related changes are needed on any others, please?
    • Done.-G
  • En dash on Zhang 2011.
    • Done.-G

Another round of spot-checks since the first one turned up a lot of fixes needed. Going off the same revision, which is still current. —TS

  • These citations were verified: 31a, 31b, 86a*, 86b, 97, 98*, and 99*. Those with asterisks need text–source integrity fixes as above, but this definitely isn't a comprehensive list.
  • Citation 30 is okay, expand the page range to 48 to verify the prevalence of sexual discourse in the 1920s.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Citation 93 does not verify "an anti-breast binding movement emerged across the political spectrum". (That hyphen should be an en dash, by the way!)
    • I think I misplaced a Zhang cite but I softened this anyhow.-G
  • Citation 94 is fine, but why is Hu Shih's speech relevant here? The source is using his statements to contrast with Zhang's, so I don't think they can be grouped together like this.
    • That's fair. I thought it was important to show that he wasn't the only guy advocating this, but I think it's a bit extraneous. -G
  • Hsu 2018 is missing the chapter page range. Please do a run through the references list again and include any information missing in the citations.
    • Fixed, went through them.-G

Final round of spot-checks from Rocha 2010 and Leary 1994 — thank you for helping me access them for this review. Citation numbers from this revision. —TS

  • Spot-checked without issues: 13, 38, 41, 51a, 51d, 54, 108b, and 111.
  • Citation 40 checks out, but pages 123 and 124 don't appear to verify anything. One more concern in the prose comments.
  • Citation 51b doesn't mention "Professor Bullshit", maybe move the ref to the middle of the sentence? Also, drop the "notably" (MOS:OP-ED).
  • I wouldn't say 51c verifies "Academic opinion turned sharply against Zhang"; it seems to focus more on the book reception by the public and the authorities.
  • Citation 108a needs to be moved a few sentences backward.
  • Citation 113a fails verification.
  • Citation 113b mostly checks out, though the article has the quote as "three big literary monsters" instead of "three great literary monsters" as in the source — why? The page range is also wider than it needs to be.
Discussion
[edit]

Please let me know if you have any questions. Also, I have an open FAC in need of prose reviews, if you're interested! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:22, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

UC

[edit]
  • The infobox lists his birthplace as Darongpu, Fubin, Raoping County, Guangdong, Qing China. That's a lot of commas and not particularly readable, and many readers will struggle to parse what the ascending sequence means. I would suggest cutting it down: either "Daronpu, [Qing] China", or conceivably "Daronpu (near Guangdong), Qing China".
  • Fixed.-G
  • Zhang was ridiculed by much of the Chinese media and academia for the book, often referred to by the mocking nickname Dr. Sex: the book was called "Dr. Sex"?
  • Fixed.-G
  • sex education texts: MOS:HYPHEN would like one here, as it's a compound modifier.
  • Fixed.-G
  • Collections of his writing began to be published during the 1980s, but likely due to obscenity laws, a full republication: this isn't quite grammatical: we really need a comma after but, since likely due to obscenity laws is parenthetical, but that makes the sentence very choppy. How about Collections of his writing began to be published during the 1980s, but full republication of Sex Histories was not made until 2005, likely due to obscenity laws.?
  • Fixed, good idea.-G
  • In 1888, Zhang Jiangliu (张江流) was born the third child of a well-to-do merchant family in Darongpu Village, Fubin Town, in Raoping County, a rural county in eastern Guangzhou.: might just be my idiolect, but I'm not sure you can really use "the third child" adverbially like that. Suggest Zhang Jiangliu (张江流) was born in 1888 in Darongpu Village, Fubin Town, in Raoping County, a rural county in eastern Guangzhou. He was the third child of a well-to-do merchant family.
  • Fixed.-G
  • Is the term "Overseas Chinese" anachronistic for 1888?
  • I've seen it in quite a few sources; see for instance the book Schooling Diaspora: Women, Education, and the Overseas Chinese in British Malaya and Singapore, 1850s-1960s or the article Overseas Chinese Nationalism in Singapore and Malaya 1877–1912. -G
  • As I understand it, it's not usual to invert Chinese names in bibliographies: so Zhang Peizhong should be listed as such, using the |author= parameter, rather than as "Zhang, Peizhong".
  • Fixed.-G
  • As Whampoa required the study of a foreign language, Zhang was randomly assigned French.: need to rework the as here: he was not randomly assigned French (rather than German) because the academy required him to study a language. Easy enough to cut as and join with a (semi)colon.
  • Fixed.-G

More to follow. UndercoverClassicist T·C 11:04, 21 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UndercoverClassicist: Are you still interested in going over the prose? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:05, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, let's give the body a proper look:

  • Chief among the journal's ideological inspirations was Jean-Jacques Rousseau,: you may wish to introduce Rousseau briefly, particularly if it was a particular one of his ideas that especially inspired Wang -- after all, Rousseau is not generally considered either a revolutionary or an anti-statist.
    • Added context.-G
  • Zhang's father took a concubine when he was young, causing great division and strife in his family: I'd appreciate some context here: was that normal? Legal?
  • seeking to continue his academic study: I think we'd normally say studies unless we meant a particular study (ie, a specific investigation/experiment/project).
    • Fixed.-G
  • This was only allowed by his father after he was forced to accept an arranged marriage with an illiterate fifteen-year-old girl named Xu Chunjiang: awkward passive voice here, and also seems to suggest that his father was forced to marry this girl.
    • Rephrased.-G
  • Resentful, he later wrote that it was a major contributor: I would rephrase: "Resentful" is a bit poetic but also a bit unclear (at the time or when he wrote?), and the specific antecedent of "it" isn't clear (the marriage? Being forced to marry? Xu?)
    • Rephrased.-G
  • he later wrote that it was a major contributor to his support of freedom of marriage and sex education, and ran away from his family six months later: the timing isn't very clear here.
    • Rephrased.-G
  • a Beijing French normal school: do we mean a teacher-training college? I would say that if so, per MOS:NOFORCELINK.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Hu Shih's memoirs: who? I think we need some context here, since we're talking about a set of memoirs, so it could be practically anyone.
    • Context added.-G
  • alongside anthropological commentary advocating for the "ideal proportions" among Germanic women: I'm not sure quite what this means -- encouraging Germanic women to diet/exercise until they had the "ideal proportions"? Claiming that Germanic women naturally did have the "ideal proportions"?
    • Rephrased.-G
  • the Tianjin-Beijing cell: endash, if this means "Tianjin and Beijing".
    • Fixed.-G
  • He recalled in his memoirs that none of the figures involved in peace negotiations "understood what kind of creature republicanism was",: MOS:SAID: this is a matter of opinion, so we can't use "recalled" like it's a neutral fact.
  • the incipient Republican government but what kind of creature republicanism was: caps?
    • Fixed.-G
  • He recalled in his memoirs that none of the figures involved in peace negotiations "understood what kind of creature republicanism was", blaming this for Yuan Shikai's ensuing dictatorship and the Republic's fall into warlordism.: we jump forward in time here only to jump straight back: is there a way to arrange this chronologically -- perhaps putting this retrospective at the point where the dictatorship actually happened?
    • It's very awkward to go chronological here, since the time where this change happened was when he was overseas, and he's connecting it to the conference in 1912. I rephrased it to try to make it easier to understand the chronology, however.-G
  • He was awarded a Diplôme d'études: what's that?
    • It doesn't seem to have a super firm definition cross-historically so I just.-G
  • the outbreak of World War I and the threat posed by the Imperial German Army to Paris: "Imperial German Army" seems an odd thing to spell out and link here: just "German Army"? But this is really personal taste.
    • Fair point, rephrased.-G
  • Zhang received his doctorate in April 1919; alongside biologist Tan Xihong [zh], he was one of two out of the twenty-five members of his cohort to receive a doctoral degree in his overseas study: were these the two? Could be more neatly phrased if so.
    • Rephrased.-G
  • Sino–French Education Association: this one doesn't want an endash, as Sino- is a prefix (like "Franco-Prussian War", but "a French–Italian collaboration").
    • Done.-G
  • Diligent Work-Frugal Study Movement: this one does want an endash.
    • Done.-G

More to follow. UndercoverClassicist T·C 09:54, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Let's do a bit more:

  • He met with Guangdong warlord Chen Jiongming: the idea of warlords might need some introduction at some point.
  • He was forced to resign after only one year: editorialising: after a year much better.
    • Fixed.-G
  • fled Guangdong to avoid political persecution by Chen: this isn't totally clear: was he being persecuted, or did he fear that he might be? Why would he have been persecuted? Simply because Chen didn't like his views on birth control?
    • Clarified a bit more, seems like he just personally feared political persecution but no such persecution happened.-G
  • China's weakness to foreign powers: not sure this is quite grammatical: you can be vulnerable to something or weak versus/vis-a-vis/by comparison to it.
    • Fixed.-G
  • May Fourth movement publications: we capitalised the Movement a minute ago.
    • Fixed.-G
  • a tumultuous and uncertain marriage: what's an uncertain marriage?
    • Removed since it basically just redundant.-G
  • A Beautiful Philosophy on Life (美的人生觀; Měi de rénshēngguān): for the newspaper titles, you gave the pinyin in main text then the English in the brackets. I think this is a better way to do it, unless the titles are widely known in English by their pinyin pronunciations.
    • Fixed.-G
  • unite into a front, overthrow the government and people that have no feelings: I think we need to stick an [and] where we currently have the comma.
    • Done.-G
  • attacks of his intellectuals opponents: something's awry here.
    • Fixed.-G
  • They appealed to ... He also espoused: not sure about the shift in pronoun here.
    • Fixed.-G
  • food to crime to personal hygiene: I think it's usual to swap the second to for an and.
    • Done.-G
  • Western sexology had only recently introduced to China, with the first sexological works—mainly translated from Japanese—appearing during the first decade of the 1900s: at the risk of stating the obvious, Japan isn't in the west.
    • Yeah, 'modern' is better than 'western' here - fixed.-G
  • The announcement received a significant amount of public attention: as Tim would say: "significant, eh? What did it signify?". "Large"?
    • Fixed.-G
  • Zhang's second wife, Chu Songxue: any idea when they married, or who she was? This is her first introduction, I think.
  • when compared to other academic sexological works used in legal and medical contexts: are we saying that Sex Histories was academic and used in legal or medical contexts?
    • Ah nah, fixed.-G

More to follow. UndercoverClassicist T·C 06:29, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • The title Xingshi holds both academic and pornographic subtext, as the character 史; shǐ, was used to describe both kinds of publication: lots of formatting nitpicks here. I don't think Xingshi is in the proper transliteration template, which causes issues for screen readers (and, I'm told, the Wiki software). the character 史; shǐ, was used doesn't seem standard to me: shouldn't we follow MOS:GLOSS here? This will almost certainly require removing the comma after shǐ as well. I think we could do with translating Xingshi specifically, too.
    • Hmmmm...Fixed, i think.-G
  • Can you comment on Rocha 2010 from the point of view of WP:THESIS?
    • Later English sources often refer to it as the primary English language documentation on Zhang and cite it heavily. Reliance on it also minimizes the reliance on Chinese language sources, fitting guidance on preferring English sourcing when available -G
  • annotations over the reader-submitted case studies: is over the right word? You normally have annotations of a text, I think.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Among his focuses in the book is the absorption of sexual fluids between partners during sex for their health benefits.: a bit unclear, I think. I dimly remember this being a Taoist idea -- is there anything to include about the background to it here?
    • Added a brief mention, and elaborated later on.-G
  • A 1936 estimate put the total circulation in Shanghai alone at around 50,000 copies, including pirated editions: suggest rephrasing pirated: I'm not totally sure what this means in the context of a book ("unlicensed editions"?)
  • The book had an exceptionally high circulation in comparison to most May Fourth Movement texts: we've previously said that Zhang himself was part of the movement, but I don't think we've linked this text to it. Lenin's thoughts on gardening wouldn't automatically be considered a Communist book.
    • Fair; rephrased to "texts by May Fourth Movement intellectuals"-G
  • Guangzhou Minguo ribao [zh] (廣州民國日報; 'Guangzhou Republic Daily'): italicise title, but see my comments above: it would probably be best to lead with the English title unless the Chinese one is widely known.
    • Fixed, but I think the pinyin is more helpful as Chinese periodicals typically do not have consistent English translations in sources, while the pinyin is unambiguous for identification (the exception ofc is journals that had official English titles) -G
  • had been sold in Guangzhou, noting its popularity among adolescent girls; it described the rampant popularity of the volume as an "epidemic",: This reads oddly: suggest a full stop after Guangzhou.
    • Done.-G
  • One retrospective account by academic Shen Yingming noted that the book's popularity among college students was boosted by institutions attempting to ban it.: how come we cite Rocha for this, rather than Shen?
  • However, numerous sequels, pirated editions, and parodies of Sexual Histories were produced by authors seeking to profit off of its success and notoriety.: see my comment about pirated above: it sounds like two of these things have authors and one doesn't.
    • Fixed.-G
  • These often including literary sexual tropes and explicit erotica.: something's wrong here.
    • Fixed.-G
  • The Sexual Histories, Part II available on the market now: italicise the title.
    • Fixed.-G
  • so that buyers will not be defrauded of the truth...: I wouldn't usually end a quotation with an ellipsis (just a full stop), but if you must, MOS:... wants an nbsp before it.
    • Fixed.-G
  • Several regional and local governments, including Shanghai and Guangzhou: those of, surely?
    • Fixed.-G
  • including "Dr. Sex" (性博士; Xìng bóshì) and "Professor Bullshit (胡說博士; Húshuō bóshì): I'm assuming that bóshì is the "honorific" here: it's the same in both titles, so we should translate it consistently.
    • Done.-G
  • with scholars dismissing his theories as either nonsensical or pornographic: suggest cutting either: surely they could have been both?
  • Fellow eugenicist Pan Guangdan rebuked Zhang's concept of a "third kind of water".: you can rebuke a person, but I'm not sure you can rebuke (="tell off") a concept.

Spookyaki

[edit]

Hi! I'll go ahead and do a prose review. Recommendations in purple, more urgent corrections in red. Lead

• After he was expelled from Whampoa, he met with the group and entered the Imperial University of Peking.—Not entirely clear what "met with" means here in the lead. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm a bit unsure how to phrase this unambiguously. -G
• He became an enthusiastic advocate of European ideas of social Darwinism, scientific racism, and eugenics... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• He was ridiculed by much of the Chinese media and academia for the book and was often referred to by the mocking nickname Dr. Sex (性博士; Xìng Bóshì) in the tabloid press. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Early life and education

• I'm actually not sure how the link hierarchy works in this case, but Fubin Township [zh] does have a page on the Chinese Wiki that you could maybe do an interlanguage link to. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Whampoa required the study of a foreign language, and Zhang was randomly assigned French. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• He became a supporter of the Tongmenghui revolutionary organization through its Min Bao (民報) newspaper, which took a socialist, anti-statist position, inspired by a variety of European philosophers. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

College education

• He cut off his queue (a hairstyle mandated by the Qing government) and advocated that other classmates to do the same. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Incensed by the school's food service, which he claimed penalized slower eaters, he staged a protest with a friend. They were both suspended for one year. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang returned in 1910, instead seeking to continue his studies. This was only allowed by his father after he was forced to accept an arranged marriage with an illiterate fifteen-year-old girl named Xu Chunjiang. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think 'instead' is good here because it makes it clear he didn't follow Hu's advice to join the New Army.-
• Fair enough! Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Zhang deeply resented this marriage, and later wrote that it was a major contributor to his support of freedom of marriage and sex education. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• He ran away from his family six months after his marriage and began studying at the French Catholic Aurora University in Shanghai... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• At Peking, Zhang was introduced to the theory of social Darwinism, which he became a strong proponent of. or per MSincccc's suggestion. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Revolutionary activity and overseas study

• Maybe include a brief clause explaining who Zaifeng is? Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done.-G
• The following year, Sun Yat-sen appointed him to serve under Wang as an official in the North–South Conference... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...a peace conference in Shanghai with the leading general Yuan Shikai.—Leading general of what? Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Clarified.-G
• Zhang received his doctorate in 1919; alongside biologist Tan Xihong. Out of the twenty-five members of his cohort, he was one of only two to receive a doctoral degree in his overseas study.—MOS:EDITORIAL Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang chaired a Chinese students group... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Academic career

• ...overhaul of teachers...—How does one overhaul teachers? Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rephrased.-G
• He met with Guangdong warlord Chen Jiongming to advocate for the regional introduction of birth control, which was rejected. Zhang claimed that Chen called him "mentally deranged" when he made the proposal. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• At Peking, Zhang was strongly influenced by the political and social philosophies of the May Fourth Movement... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• In addition to his classes on European philosophy and aesthetics... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Soon after, he attempted to organize a visit from Albert Einstein... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

First books

• ...Zhang responds to the academic debate over the value of science and intellectual westernization to China. Some Chinese intellectuals viewed the devastating effects of World War I as evidence of the moral bankruptcy of European civilization caused by a preoccupation with rationality and science as opposed to spiritual matters. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• In his book, Zhang advocates for a form of westernization which combines rationalism with the reorganization of society around aesthetic principles. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...expanding on his vision for a "New China" and "New People" in a society oriented around beauty. The book included a call for "sentimental people from everywhere" to "unite into a front, overthrow the government and people that have no feelings". Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...and frequent attacks of his intellectuals opponents. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• His aesthetic works were well-received by contemporary academics. The writer Zhou Zuoren praised Zhang's boldness in advocating for beauty in opposition to traditional Confucian society. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Sex Histories

• ...attracted the attention of social academics at Peking...—The city or the university? Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang recommended that the Survey Society collect information on sexuality and sexual customs, but this was vetoed by the rest of committee, who felt that these topics were too controversial to study. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang resolved to continue studying sexuality without the society's sponsorship.—Or something like this. Sentence is a bit hard to read. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...calling for readers to submit detailed accounts of their sex lives. Prompts included with the advertisement asked readers to recount a variety of experiences, such as their earliest exposure to sexuality, their methods of masturbation, their preferred sexual positions, whether they had had homosexual experiences, and whether they had engaged in bestiality. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• He chose seven of these to feature in his book, of which the identities of two respondents are known: Zhang's second wife, Chu Songxue, and novelist Jin Mancheng. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• It was a portable pocket book about a hundred pages in length. Rocha noted that it was small enough to read with one hand. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• In the work, Zhang railes against contemporary erotica, writing that it spreads misconceptions and superstition about sex. He claims that sexual perversions, pornography, and prostitution are the result of the silencing and repression of sexuality; he advocates for a sexual revolution towards openness and "healthy sex", seeing this as an unavoidable prerequisite for the moral and political advancement of the Chinese nation towards equal footing with the western world. Zhang states that sexual openness, especially through the sharing and documentation of sexual experiences, is required to achieve this cultural change.—Use of literary present should be consistent throughout the article. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Reception and notoriety

• The book had a relatively limited initial print run of around only 1,000 copies...—MOS:EDITORIAL Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...including pirated editions. The book had an exceptionally high circulation in comparison to most May Fourth Movement texts... Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...noting its particular popularity among adolescent girls. It described the rampant popularity of the volume as an "epidemic"...—MOS:EDITORIAL Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Academic opinion turned sharply against Zhang, with scholars dismissing his theories as either nonsensical or pornographic. Hu Shih, his former colleague, was among those who denounced him.—MOS:EDITORIAL Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Despite the backlash, some academics supported the book. Novelist Lin Yutang wrote that it was instrumental in changing the "physical and mental outlook of Chinese girls". Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Conditions for professors at Peking University had worsened by late 1926. The chaotic political climate, characterized by violent events such as the March 18 Massacre, had made Beijing dangerous to academics. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang wrote that he never returned to the university after taking a sabbatical, moving to the emerging cultural capital, Shanghai. Spookyaki (talk) 02:27, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Shanghai and the Beauty Bookshop

• Likely to avoid legal liability, Zhang was not officially the owner of the bookstore. The largest shareholder and general manager was a man named Xie Yunru... Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang's bookshop produced book series. Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...the most profitable book genre for the major publishers of the period. Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

New Culture

• He attempted to expand the society into branches outside Shanghai, boosting the visibility of his bookstore... Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• The paper ran intermittently for six issues before folding partway through 1927. Two years later, the Beauty Bookshop itself went out of business. Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• According to Zhang, the police attempted to negotiate with him to remove the nude paintings and pay them a significant bribe. He claimed that when he refused... Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Unsustainable business practices likely played a major role in the shop's decline—Guessing no, but do we know what these were? Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gave context; at least one of them is named.-G

Later life and death

• After the closure of the Beauty Bookshop, Zhang continued his work on translating Rousseau, and earned an income delivering lectures. Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• He was arrested while visiting Hangzhou in 1929 for "corrupting and poisoning the youth". He claimed that his arrest was ordered by Jiang Menglin... Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• He also became interested in the work of Sigmund Freud. He was the first to translate Freud's Interpretation of Dreams into Chinese... Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang published two of his own books during this period: Great and Sinister Art and Introduction to the Romantics. Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...and returned to work as a teacher, while secretly conducting philosophy research. Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• On 18 June 1970, he suffered a brain hemorrhage and died in forced confinement in Raoping. Spookyaki (talk) 15:30, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Utopian society

• Runner-ups in this contest would receive elite roles such as concubine and minister. Constituting a new elite alongside the kings and queens, they would be encouraged to form families with one another and serve as role models for the nation. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• This new religion would idolize the lives of past heroic ancestors through a continuously updated collection of poems, which would serve as the sole religious text and a core component of education. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Aesthetic labor

• Zhang advocates transforming work into play. To this end, he proposes that state-sponsored vocational schools should be established for all fields of work... Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...he argues that incorporating aesthetic and scientific elements into these trades would be beneficial. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang embraces the sexual division of labor in his political philosophy. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Meanwhile, he believed women (being more emotionally inclined in his view) are best suited for artistic and service work, as well as homemaking and international diplomacy.—NPOV Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• In his model of ideal, pleasurable sex, women would absorb semen from men... Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Unlike many other sexologists in his time, he did not particularly explore sexual perversion or psychosexual disorder... Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

Legacy

• ...seeking to publicize his work.—Or a different, more precise word. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• During the early 1980s, the village of Raoping also made efforts to publicize his work and rehabilitate his image. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• They claimed he was the first person from Chaozhou to receive a doctorate, although this claim is uncertain.—Original wording initially makes it seem like they awarded him a posthumous graduate or something. Also, why is it uncertain? Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...legitimizing Zhang's work. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Zhang characterized himself as a misunderstood intellectual who fell victim to the sexually conservative backlash against his work. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• ...comparing him to a contemporary American sexologist, Alfred Kinsey. He bemoaned that "while Kinsey is still pursuing his great work, our Zhang Jingsheng is keeping silent and lying low." Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G
• Western scholarly assessments of him have also varied. the Dutch historian Frank Dikötter is largely dismissive of Zhang's role in the history of sexuality in modern China, sarcastically calling him a "sex revolutionary", while the translator Howard Seymour Levy... Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.-G

@Generalissima: Looks like a well-written, thorough and thoroughly-researched article. Great job! Feel free to ping me when you're finished addressing these comments. Spookyaki (talk) 17:28, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Spookyaki: Thank you very much for a very thorough review! I think I got to everything. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 19:06, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yup! Looks good to me. With that, I support on prose. Spookyaki (talk) 19:15, 22 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Evermore

[edit]
Nominator(s): Ippantekina (talk) 21:56, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about an album by Taylor Swift, best listened to during dark, chilly winter days. Or if it is not winter where you are at, close your eyes and feel the songs while imagining yourself wandering in a winter forest. For me this stands among her top 2 most accomplished albums. I believe this article satisfies FA criteria, and I'm open to any and all comments regarding its candidature. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 21:56, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

[edit]
  • Would it be beneficial to add to the lead that Folklore was also surprise-released? It could help to draw stronger parallels between Folklore and Evermore as "sister records", but I could also see this making the prose repetitive. It was just a thought I had while reading this part of the lead, so I thought that it was worthy sharing. On a somewhat similar note, surprise-released should be linked on the first mention in the article to be consistent with the link in the lead.
  • For the part on the "No Body, No Crime" and "Coney Island" radio releases, shouldn't "respectively" be added to the end?
  • For the images of Aaron Dessner, Matt Berninger, Justin Vernon, Marjorie Finlay, and Paul McCartney, it may be helpful to add the year in which these photos were taken to provide a more complete context for readers. For instance, it could be beneficial for readers to know if these photos of Desnner, Berninger, and Vernon were taken around the time of these collaborations of if they were taken years earlier or after.
  • I am uncertain about how numbers are represented in the following sentence: On Evermore, Dessner produced 14 out of the 15 tracks on the standard edition and 2 bonus tracks, and Antonoff co-produced 1. On one hand, I see why you kept them all consistently in numerals, but on the other hand, it does look a bit odd to see 2 and 1 represented in this way.
  • I have a comment about this sentence: They recorded the album in secrecy, using passwords, data encryption, and specific communications when sharing mixes of the tracks. When I first read this sentence, I was uncertain about its value, as I would imagine that most albums are recorded "in secrecy" to try and avoid leaks and the like. I looked at the article, which clarifies this further by saying this type of recording process was done given the huge international interest in Swift. I would clarify this in the prose to give a better indication of why this occurred and why it is notable enough to mention, as it was unclear to me.
  • Just out of curiosity, do we know where Bryce's studio is in France? I was just curious as a more specific location was given for Long Pong Studios for instance.
  • I do not think that Big Red Machine links to the right article. I think that the link should be to the Big Red Machine (band) article.
  • What is a rubber-bridge guitar? Is there a way to link that? Maybe it is because I have never played a guitar before, but I have never heard of this.
  • It may be helpful to link to the sampling (music) article on the first instance that "samples" is mentioned in the article. I could see readers either being unfamiliar with that type of music jargon and wanting to learn more about it.
  • There is an error message for Citation 243 (https://www.audiogest.pt/uploads/files/file). When I try to open it, I get an error screen.

Wonderful work with the article! I hope that these comments are helpful so far. I have read up to the "Composition" section, and I will continue once everything has been addressed. Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 14:00, 19 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Aoba47:, I have addressed all of your comments except where I responded above. Looking forward to the rest of your review :) Ippantekina (talk) 21:33, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would be mindful of citation overkill. There is a part in the "Music and production" subsection that uses five citations. I would avoid that by doing something like citation bundling. There is an instance of four citations in the "Critical reception" section. I think that anything over three gets into citation overkill territory, which should be avoided.
  • Steven Hyden may be a well-known music critic in his own, but the publication in which he published his article should be attributed in the prose to provide the entire context for readers.
  • I have a question about this part, straightforward "indie", while that of Folklore is "indie"–styled pop music. Could you just use indie without the quotation marks? These are pretty generic statements, so the quotation marks do not really add much in my opinion.
  • For this sentence, Bryce added orchestration to nearly every song., I think that it would be more beneficial to say how many songs he contributed to for this, as I would imagine that this number would be known.
  • I would more clearly attribute the quotes in the following sentence as coming from Swift: Whereas Folklore deals with "conflict resolution" and reconciliations, Evermore explores "endings of all sorts, sizes and shapes" and the painful aftermath. It may seem obvious based on context, but I would just avoid using quotations like this without explicit attribution in the prose when possible. On an unrelated note, this sentence and the next one both use "explores" so one should be revised to avoid repetition.
  • I wonder if Christmas party dinner could incorporate a link to the Christmas dinner article?
  • It is unclear who is saying the following quote, "feeling unmoored". I would more clearly attribute it in the prose. I have the same comment for this quote, "trying to love someone who is ambivalent", later in the article.
  • I would not consider Maria Juko to be an "English-language scholar", which I read more as a scholar of the English language and more involved in something in linguistics. When I look her up online, she seems more like an English literature scholar to me.
  • This part, a revenge plotted by a friend of Este, needs further clarification, as it has not been established who "Este" is. Is this referencing Este Haim? If so, this needs to be clarified. It is just confusing to have a name thrown out without any context for it.
  • It may be helpful to link banjo and mandolin, which are a bit more of niche instruments compared to something like the flute or string instruments in general, which are both linked in the article.
  • The phrase "longing memories" just sounds off to me. Is this memories of her longing for grandmother? Are the memories longing in tone? I just think that a different word choice would be better here.
  • Do we have any further information on which records were sampled for Finlay's vocals other than some "old records"? Even just knowing when these records were released would be helpful.
  • I think that it would be worthwhile to point out that Folklore also had its title and track listing in all lowercase, just to clarify that this was not something unique down for Evermore.
  • If vinyl LPs is linked, then I would do the same for CD and cassette for consistency.
  • I was confused by this sentence, Reception of the production and sounds was not as uniformly positive., as I thought that this was setting up a paragraph that would include more mixed or even negative reviews, but this paragraph has all positive reviews. The topic sentence seemingly does not support what is in the actual paragraph.
  • Do we know what song Swift is performing in File:Taylor Swift Eras Tour - Arlington, TX - Evermore (Willow) (cropped).jpg. Based on the title, I am guessing that it is "Willow", but it would be nice to add to the caption if this is known.
  • Could you clarify this part for me, defying external expectations on her to create upbeat music? I am curious to know what is meant by "external expectations" Maybe, it is because the only Christina Perri song that I know is a ballad ("A Thousand Years"), so I was a bit surprised that there was expectations for her to release upbeat music. The reference is to a podcast interview, and I would include a timestamp in the reference to when this part is being discussed. It would make this easier for readers to look into.
  • This is more of an observation, but I cannot help but roll my eyes that Evermore is included on a list of "underrated" albums. That is just beyond silly in my opinion.
  • This is not required for a FAC, but I think that it would be helpful to alphabetize the categories, just so that it would be easier to readers to navigate.

This should be everything from me. I hope that this review helps. I come to this article mostly as an outsider, as the only song that I have heard from this album was "No Body, No Crime", so hopefully that perspective is helpful. Once everything has been addressed, I will be more than happy to support based on the prose. Hopefully, more people contribute to this FAC. Aoba47 (talk) 00:13, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Aoba47: for the review! I have addressed everything except where I responded above. Tbh I think "No Body, No Crime" is among the skips of this album, buuuuuuuut you might have a different opinion after listening to the whole record (pro tip: listen to this album when it gets chilly outside). Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 19:21, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I am glad that I could help. Apologies for the length of my review. The article was in excellent shape already. I very much enjoyed reading through it, so thank you for your patience.
I really should listen to the album, as I love a lot of the influences (like Rebecca and The Great Gatsby). I love an album that has a vibe. It just makes it a full experience, which is always nice in my opinion. It is cool when songs hit differently for people. I really enjoy "No Body, No Crime", but I would be curious to see if that changes when I listen to everything as a whole.
My rambling aside, I support this article for promotion as a whole. I always appreciate the work that you put into your articles. If possible, I would greatly appreciate any feedback for my current FAC, but I completely understand if you do not have the time and/or interest. I hope that you have a wonderful rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 20:08, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

HF

[edit]

I will review this soon. Have never listened to this album. Hog Farm Talk 01:23, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • "and Antonoff co-produced one" - is it worth noting who Antonoff co-produced with? Or in this context, does co-produced simply indicate that Antonoff was a second producer on the album, not that Antonoff shared production duties with somebody else on that song?
  • " as described by Swift, inspired by Daphne du Maurier's 1939 novel Rebecca" - From what I can tell, that novel was published in 1938
  • "evealed that Swift had shared with him the planned release Evermore on December 18 to respect McCartney's planned December 11 release of his album McCartney III. Upon learning this, McCartney decided to release his album on December 18 instead, " - this doesn't seem to match with what the source states? It mentions planned releases on the 10th not the 11th and unless I'm really mis-reading it, there was release date changing from Swift?
  • I re-read the source and it seems the interviewed (McCartney) made a mistake. Billboard writes, For bookkeeping purposes, Swift dropped Evermore on Friday (Dec. 11) and McCartney III is due out this Friday (Dec. 18). Ippantekina (talk) 19:00, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

"No Body, No Crime" must have made basically no impact on country airplay; I have no memory of having heard that before. Hog Farm Talk 02:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm: That song barely cracked the top 50 of the Country Airplay chart so it makes sense you haven't heard it before. I've addressed your comments, except one where I responded to above. Thanks for taking time reviewing this article, Ippantekina (talk) 19:00, 29 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Leaning support from a nonexpert perspective; I don't feel that I have much to add with this review. Hog Farm Talk 02:25, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Hog Farm, I appreciate your time reviewing the article :) Ippantekina (talk) 08:44, 9 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

750h

[edit]

Leaving a placeholder here. 750h+ 09:45, 16 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+: hey, any update atm? :) Ippantekina (talk) 21:53, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
sorry, i'll start reviewing today. 750h+ 10:27, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
lead
  • "Evermore was supported by three singles that were each released to a different radio format in the US—"Willow" was released to contemporary hit radio and peaked atop the US Billboard Hot 100 chart; "No Body, No Crime" and "Coney Island" were released to country and alternative radio. ==> "Evermore was supported by three singles, each released to a different radio format in the US. "Willow" was released to contemporary hit radio and peaked atop the US Billboard Hot 100 chart, while "No Body, No Crime" and "Coney Island" were released to country and alternative radio." (I don't mind how this is rewritten the sentence is just a bit long)
  • "No Body, No Crime" and "Coney Island" were released to country and alternative radio maybe add "respectively" at the end
background
  • Taylor Swift wrote and produced her eighth studio album maybe add "American singer" before "Taylor Swift" just for a bit of description
  • Justin Vernon of the indie folk band Bon Iver and Joe Alwyn (credited under the pseudonym William Bowery) ==> "Justin Vernon of the indie folk band Bon Iver, and Joe Alwyn (credited under the pseudonym William Bowery)"
writing and recording
  • the National's lead singer Matt Berninger duetted with Swift while ==> "the National's lead singer, Matt Berninger, duetted with Swift while"
composition
  • that maintains consistent throughout ==> "that maintains consistency throughout"
  • shifting scenes of nature including seascapes ==> "shifting scenes of nature, including seascapes"
  • such as the poets Robert Frost ("'Tis the Damn Season") and Emily Dickinson ("Ivy") and the writer F. Scott Fitzgerald ("Happiness").[38] ==> "such as the poets Robert Frost ("'Tis the Damn Season") and Emily Dickinson ("Ivy"), and the writer F. Scott Fitzgerald ("Happiness").[38]"
release and promotion
commercial performance
  • Republic Records reported that Evermore was Swift's eighth album to sell over a million copies first week worldwide. are we sure about this? Isn't TLOAS her eighth album to sell 1M+ first-week? If Republic Records reports it then that's fine, but wouldn't it be better to include the actual figure?
OH. I don't know how I missed that. 750h+ 13:19, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
critical reception
impact and commentary
  • In the views of Vulture's Justin Curto ==> "In the view of Vulture's Justin Curto"
  • strategies in the 2020s decade "decade" is redundant
  • several critics however alleged her ==> "several critics, however, alleged her"

@Ippantekina: that's all I got! thanks for the article! 750h+ 11:13, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+: thanks for the review! I believe I have addressed all of your comments :) Ippantekina (talk) 09:43, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Happy to support! Great work! 750h+ 13:20, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Igordebraga

[edit]
Support Another great work from that very dedicated bunch that makes up WP:TAYLOR. igordebraga ≠ 00:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

[edit]

Discussion has stalled on this for weeks; unless there's more significant discussion and support, this is liable to be archived in the next few days. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 19:49, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review

[edit]

File:Willow by Taylor Swift.mp3 and File:Ivy - Taylor Swift (song sample).ogg might run into a WP:NFCC#8 problem - the guideline/policy requires "significant" enhancement of our understanding of the article topic, which might not be the case here. Is File:Rebecca-FE.jpg PD also under US copyright law? Some images lack ALT text. Their sectioning is good. Source wise, what makes https://tomhull.com/ocston/blog/archives/2911-Music-Week.html a reliable source? How is AllAccess maintained? Robert Christgau is apparently noteworthy enough that reliability questions are probably moot. What's Plötutíðindi? Didn't do much spotchecking. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:20, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: thanks for the review. Tom Hull (critic) is an established music critic so his blog is as reliable as Christgau's. Plötutíðindi is where Iceland's record chart Félag hljómplötuframleiðenda publishes the chart. Re. the audio files, my take is that for an article about an audiovisual format like this, prose alone cannot convey the audio experience of the tracks incl. instrument textures, vocals, and rhythms (which are extensively discussed in prose), and here in lies the "significant" enhancement of the reader's understanding of what they are reading about. And I see that the 2 audio files are the only ones without ALTs, do they require ALTs too? Ippantekina (talk) 11:45, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant that this article is about an album, not the songs, so a sample of the song doesn't necessarily significantly enhance our understanding of the page topic. I think so, yes (audio files warranting ALTs) but I think one image or the other also lacked it when I checked. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:07, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe the samples I selected for this article are representative of the album's overall sound and feel (the folk compositions and the "wintery" vibes as discussed by critics). And per {{Listen}} alt is only needed when the file has both audio and video... otherwise I don't think alt for audio-only files makes sense for visually impaired readers. I added alt text for the remaining photo (Marjorie Finlay's portrait). Ippantekina (talk) 14:53, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
OK on the ALT thing. On the NFCC thing, I think you need to expand the rationales to note that the samples are representative of the album as a whole and not just the individual song (if that's what they do) Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:13, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pbritti

[edit]

I offered to do a review here a bit ago and I should have a couple hours over the next few days where I can offer sporadic comments. My first read through was very positive. I am certain that the article satisfies the requirements of thorough encyclopedic coverage. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:43, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • In the theme park section, "and demanded 'statutory damages of $2 million per counterfeit mark per type of goods or services sold'". That's a bit of a mouthful and (as best I can tell) a quote from Taylor's legal team. I barely comprehend what it means, and that's after rereading the article and the cited sources a couple times. I know paraphrasing legalese is no fun, but an attempt may be worthwhile in this case.
  • Sodomsky, Mylrae, Pareles, and a few others are cited at least five times. It would require a bit of time (and I could assist), but it may be worth breaking them out into their own section like you have the books.

Central Africa Regiment

[edit]
Nominator(s): simongraham (talk) 22:17, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the regiment raised in what is Malawi while it was still the British Central Africa Protectorate. It was important not only in the development of the military of that country but, through serving in many campaigns in other parts of Africa, including the Somaliland campaign against Muḥammad ibn 'Abdallāh Hassan and the War of the Golden Stool against the Ashante, earned a reputation rare amongst colonial troops for their skills and professionalism. Amongst their troops were the first Malawian soldiers to be awarded medals by the British Empire and the first Malawians to visit Great Britain. The literature includes first-hand accounts from those that served as well as secondary sources. I feel it is important to raise the profile of African history and show the part that African and Indian service personnel paid as active agents in the destiny of Africa during the turn of the 20th century. This is my first FA nomination so any help to bring it up to standard is appreciated. simongraham (talk) 22:17, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, welcome to FAC! I'll start off with an image review.

UC

[edit]

Welcome to FAC -- a couple of quick ones for now, trying to pick up the pedantic MoS points:

  • The Second Battalion Central African Rifles after returning from the War of the Golden Stool: this looks odd to me as British military style. British style guides generally prefer the ordinal and no the, with a comma optional but more likely in historical as opposed to journalistic writing -- 2nd Battalion, Central African Rifles. Alternatively, you could do The second battalion of the Central African Rifles or similar.
  • five companies: A and B: as it would be "A Company" (not "Company A") in British parlance, it's usual to restate the word: so five companies: A Company and B Company...". However, this isn't a strict rule.
    • Fixed.
  • In any case, forming the First and Second Battalions of the new regiment etc should have no capital letters.
    • Removed.
  • Per MOS:QUOTE, we use " rather than ' in most contexts.
    • Done.
  • We need an endash (–), not a hyphen, in Martini–Enfield.
    • Fixed.
  • Each of the enlisted soldiers was issued with two uniforms: enlisted soldiers (as opposed to officers) is American English: in British English, "enlisted" means "conscripted". The British equivalent is other ranks.
    • Changed.
  • I think we should rephrase it was still acceptable to beat African troops to avoid saying that beating people is, well, acceptable as long as they're African.
    • Rephrased.
  • In the bibliography, titles should be consistently formatted, at least for a given type of source. It looks as though we're mostly going for title case, but this isn't consistent. Make sure to check MOS:DASH too.
    • I was following the sources themselves, but have adjusted them for consistency.
  • There are two sources listed in the bibliography but not used: you can use a script to check for these automatically.
    • Sources now used.

UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:35, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@UndercoverClassicist: Thank you for your welcome and review. Those are very helpful and useful suggestions. Please tell me if there is anything else that you see. simongraham (talk) 13:49, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@UndercoverClassicist: Please do add a support to this nomination if you feel able to. simongraham (talk) 07:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not ready to do that yet: I've given it a quick read through and there are still a couple of typos, style errors and other fairly small things that would keep me from a support under criterion 1a. I can't promise that I'll have time to come back and pick them all out in the immediate future, but I would think a good proofread would spot most. UndercoverClassicist T·C 07:46, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@UndercoverClassicist: That is reasonable. I have done another proof read and picked off what I can find. simongraham (talk) 10:36, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi UC, just checking in to see if you have any further thoughts. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Honestly, I don't think the article is ready to be promoted in its current state. A couple of bits that jumped out on a re-read -- though I wouldn't want this to be taken as a straighforward "this is what I need to Support":
    • We don't really introduce the local peoples of Malawi, so we get the Tonga converts to Christianity coming out of nowhere: it's not clear who the Tonga people are or how they fit into the bigger picture (are they the entire local population? A specific minority group?)
      • Like many other countries, Malawi has a heterogenous population with many people groups, one of which is the Tonga. At the time that the article is written, however, Malawi did not exist. I believe that an exposition on the Tonga and other people groups mentioned in the article and their relationship with Malawi would be WP:OOS.
    • Publication titles like The London Gazette need to be italicised, even in footnotes. I spotted a couple of other minor typos and errors on re-read.
      • Italicised. Please do either make the amendments you feel need to be made as per WP:OWN.
    • By 1895, all fighting had been subdued by the British troops: not quite NPOV phrasing: if it was a rebellion against British authority, there wouldn't have been any fighting were it not for the British troops!
      • The sources do not position it as a rebellion but rather a series of skirmishes. Replaced the sentence with a referenced one that gives detail.
    • The soldiers were led by a command staff of four officers, six company officers, a quartermaster: company officers are still officers, so we need some other distinction (If I had to guess, I'd assume we're dealing with a battalion commander/adjutant/?executive officer/?staff officer of some kind assigned to what we'd now call RHQ, versus various officers ranked Major or junior in positions within each company).
      • Clarified. The four officers make up the command staff.
    • We have a few uninflated currency amounts, which will be difficult for modern readers to accurately size up.
    • Two-word ranks like "Lieutenant Colonel" get two capital letters when used in front of someone's name: "Second Lieutenant John Smith", not "Second lieutenant Smith".
      • Amended. The capitalisation follows the wikipedia articles.
    • There are still a couple of military terms not fully explained ("section", for instance). I found this bit a little confusing: Initially, each company was commanded by a British officer and had a Sikh colour sergeant, with three to four Sikhs taking the roles of section leaders and drill sergeants.. We later have the regiment decided that it would no longer be necessary to have a Sikh leading a section, which implies that all sections were led by Sikhs, but a company usually has three platoons with three sections each, so nine. British units also don't generally have "drill sergeants" outside training establishments, but they do have platoon sergeants, who aren't mentioned here. I appreciate things may have been different 100 years ago or so, but would want to be very sure that we've got it right here. From doing a bit of research here, it seems that it was indeed different and we need to be careful: I'm struggling to find definitive sources, but it sounds like the usual rundown was platoons as ad-hoc units, about four to a company, with two sections per platoon. We don't need to go into the weeds but we do need to make sure that modern readers aren't imagining a 2020s "section" of eight soldiers including two NCOs.
      • The source does not list a platoon sergeant and too much speculation on the structure of the regiment beyond the sources would be WP:OR.
    • The soldiers of Central Africa Regiment were known for their elegance: this is sourced to a primary source which doesn't actually support it. The quote preserved in the Gazette is I may perhaps be allowed to say that as far as my opinion goes, the half battalion of the Central Africa Regiment, recently serving in the Gambia, is by far the smartest and most soldier-like body of men I have seen on the West Coast of Africa.. That's quite different from what we've cut it to: The soldiers of Central Africa Regiment [NB typo here] ... were called "the smartest and most soldier-like body of men" by the Governor of the Gambia,
      • Context added.
    "Were known for their elegance" is still uncited, and isn't really something we can support with just a primary source in any case. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:27, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed. simongraham (talk) 05:48, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    UndercoverClassicist T·C 15:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @UndercoverClassicist: Thank you for looking over this again. Please see my responses above. simongraham (talk) 04:46, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    And thank you for your edits and replies. I disagree that fleshing out the technicalities is out of scope: the FA criteria require compliance with the MoS, which includes a requirement to explain technical or specialist terms as far as possible: it's not explictly in the criteria, but the requirement that its prose is engaging and of a professional standard (FACR 1a) is generally taken as including being comprehensible to a suitably broad audience: indeed, the same criterion at the lower level of GA is the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience;. Similarly, clarifying what is meant by e.g. a section in the British Army of the 1890s isn't OR, as long as we're doing that from reliable sources: it's just a necessary part of making that term comprehensible and making sure we haven't made an error in using it. We don't need a full excursus on the ethnography of central Africa or the organisation of a British regiment, but we do need enough to put what we write into context and help an uninitiated reader understand it. UndercoverClassicist T·C 10:27, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    @UndercoverClassicist: I appreciate your time on this. I have edited that section of the article so the hopefully it is clearer and added wikilinks to the relevant articles. simongraham (talk) 05:48, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Adding wikilinks is a good start, but they don't replace an in-text explanation: readers generally shouldn't have to follow them to understand the article (MOS:NOFORCELINK). UndercoverClassicist T·C 07:28, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review from Noleander

[edit]
  • Welcome to FAC!
  • Source Njoloma, James; Stuart-Mogg, David T. (1998).... does not have any citation referring to it. If it is a source that readers may benefit from, and you want to keep it in the article, consider moving it to a (new) "Further Reading" section.
    • Good spot. Fixed.
  • Source year differs: 1900 vs 1901: Correspondence 1901, p. 15. vs Correspondence relating to the Ashanti War, 1900.
    • It was published in 1901 but covers 1900.
  • p vs pp typo: The London Gazette 1901, p. 5975, 5976.
    • Fixed.
  • Author wikilinks: Although not required for FA, curious readers will be pleased to see wikilinks for source authors. Many authors don't have WP articles, but Willoughby Verner does, so consider adding |author-link=Willoughby Verner and also for other authors, if available.
    • Added.
  • For books that have no URL, consider using the Google Books URL (if available) even if the full book text is not freely displayed. For example: Boeder, Robert B. (1981). Alfred Sharpe of Nyassaland: Builder of Empire. Blantyre: Society of Malaŵi. that book is in Google books at https://www.google.com/books/edition/Alfred_Sharpe_of_Nyasaland_Builder_of_Em/Mt9BAAAAYAAJ And tho the full text is not there, Google _does_ provide a Search function. Internet Archive, which the article is already using for several books, is superior to Google Books for source URLs, but if IA is not available, Google Books is a fallback.
    • Added.
  • Add URL for Internet Archive link: Campbell, Guy (1986). The Charging Buffalo: A History of the Kenya Regiment. London: Secker & Warburg. ... this book is online in IA at https://archive.org/details/chargingbuffaloh0000camp
    • Added.
  • Publisher hard to read: : East Africa Command in collaboration with the Ministry of Information, East Africa can you add some wiki links to make that easier to parse, e.g. to East Africa Command or Ministry of Information, East Africa, etc.
    • Wikilink added.
  • There are five citations to The Times e.g. "Naval & Military Intelligence". The Times. No. 36186. 15 August 1899. p. 10. Are any of those viewable online? They must be long out of copyright, is there a free archive somewhere? If so, consider adding a URL link.
    • There is an archive for The Times available through Newspapers.com[26] and Gale[27] that are accessible through the Wikipedia library, but they need a wikipedia login.
  • Optional style suggestion: The Citation list is clean, but has five lengthy cites for The Times. Consider moving those down into the Bibliography/Sources section, and use harvnb/sfn ... to get a super clean look. There are several ways to use snf/harvnb with anonymous sources: see Template:Sfn#No_author_name_in_citation_template, Template:SfnRef#Usage, etc. Not required for FA, just tossing it out there.
    • Added.
  • Consider adding URL for book: the source Policing and decolonisation: Politics, Nationalism and the Police, 1917—65. Manchester: is online in Google Books with both Preview and Search (but not full text) at https://www.google.com/books/edition/Policing_and_decolonisation/3jYyEAAAQBAJ
    • Added.
  • Consider adding wikilinks to Society of Malawi, Historical and Scientific for sources that name that publisher. Curious readers can go to that article, which may lead to other useful resources. Simply change journal=The Society of Malawi Journal to journal=[[The Society of Malawi Journal]]
    • Added.
  • Overall, the sources are high-quality and solid. They all appear to meet the requirements of WP:V and WP:RS. I don't see any sources that are low-quality, suspicious, or marginal.
  • Spot checks: in progress (heads-up: I'll need you to email me some pages from some of these. I'll give you a list soon):
    1. 11 - Boeder 1981, p. 71. Later in the year, a force of two European officers, ten Sikhs and seventy troops was deployed against Kazembe. Equipped with a Maxim gun and a 7-pound mountain gun, the force destroyed the stockade and, again, negotiated favourable terms with the chief. - Need copy of portion of the page
    2. 18 - Marjomaa 2003, p. 423. Nearly 30 of the contingent died from the cold alone - Verified.
      • It is on page 423 of the copy of the journal available at jstor, accessible with a wikipedia account.[30]
    3. 20 - Verner 1906, p. 59. On 1 August, Colonel Willoughby Verner led a detachment of the First Battalion in what was termed the Anglo-Portuguese Nquamba and Mataka Expedition. - Verified.
    4. 27 - Correspondence 1901, p. 15. The force, including 70 Sikh and 200 African troops sailed, via Cape Town on 11 July, to West Africa - Verified.
      • It is page 45 in the copy on Archive.[31]
    5. 31 - Hall 1939, pp. 328, 332. From that the British force, including the Second Battalion, marched to Esumeja, to defeat the Asante army commanded by Queen Ashantuah, but the leaders fled or surrendered as they advanced - Verified.
    6. 33 - Armitage & Montanaro 1901, p. 178. Together, these forces undertook forays into nearby towns and villages, including the religious centre of Ejisu, that routed the remaining Asante fighters. - Partially verified Source spells it "Ojesu" ... is that the same as Ejisu?
      • Yes, it was the central base for the Asante queen.[32]
    7. 41 - The London Gazette 1901, p. 5974. On 2 January 1901, the force arrived and were accommodated at Bathhurst, present-day Banjul, on 10 January. - Verified.
    8. 46 - Moyse-Bartlett 1956, p. 125. Local recruitment took place by ulendo, place-to-place visits targeting a specific area and people, that encouraged a particular ethnic group to form homogenous military units - Need copy of portion of the page
      • It is on page 125 of volume 1 on Google books.[33]
        • I tried that link, but the preview feature did not include that page. Noleander (talk) 13:39, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
          • I do not have a copy of the original book and, when I received copies of the two volumes, I noted that this particular statement is not backed up by the text. I have therefore removed it. I have also adjusted and expanded all the references to Moyse-Bartlett to the two volumes available on Google books. Please tell me if you would like to see any of the pages referenced. simongraham (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    9. 55 - Baker 2001, p. 80. By 1902 this had reversed and the guns were proving more accurate, the use of the Martini–Enfield deemed, in the words of Captain Gough, an "unqualified success" - Not entirely verified: the article says "reversed and the guns were proving more accurate," but the source says that the guns were always (potentially) accurate, but the soldiers were not accustomed to using it (firing it? assessing accuracy on the firing range?) The guns did not become more accurate, the soldiers became better trained/accustomed to them, correct?
      • That is a nice spot. Amended.
    10. 57 - Verner 1906, p. 51. The policy was to rarely move officers so they understood the local conditions well and invested in their quarters to make them as comfortable as they could. - Verified.
  • @Simongraham: - I'm doing some spot checks (above). Can you email me (thru Wikipedia) the four pages identified above as Need copy of page? Or, if those pages are available online, give me a URL link? Thanks.
  • ... in progress [waiting for copies of pages] ... Noleander (talk) 17:55, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Noleander: Thank you for your welcome and your thorough review. These were very helpful comments. I have added URLs where the sources are online but am aware that they may not be the editions that are used to research the article, as I use a library to access physical books, journals and newspapers rather than solely relying on online sources, so there may be minor differences. The Society of Malawi Journal is, however, available on jstor[34] so hopefully you will be able to access that online through the wikipedia library. Please do take a look and tell me if there are hard-copies that are still needed. simongraham (talk) 04:12, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      The new URLs for the "need copy of page" items do not show me the page text ("no preview available"). So, for the four "Need copy of page" above, I'll need a photo of the pages. (Or, a URL if you can a site online where the page is visible to the public without an account).
Sorry for making you do that work, but the FA review guidelines specify that the first FA nomination submitted by an editor has to be scrutinized heavily. Subsequent FA nominations you make will not have to undergo this much scrutiny. When I first obtain sources for my FA articles that are difficult to access, I make photos or screen-grabs of the key pages and save them. Even tho I have eight FAs, I still do that, in case the material is ever challenged. Every nominator has to be able to provide the text of every single source. Noleander (talk) 14:01, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Noleander: Thank you for your understanding. Responses above. Please be aware that your request may be difficult in some jurisdictions as scanning and emailing copyright material may not legal. I also feel it would be to wikipedia's detriment if its Featured Articles could only be edited by editors that use sources that are available digitally. I am aware that not every editor has access to high-quality library resources but I find offline resources can be of great benefit to an article. simongraham (talk) 20:49, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
For a source review, all that is required is the snippet that directly verifies the material in question -- this is rarely more than a page, and usually about a sentence or two. Sending such a small quantity to an individual person for non-commercial academic purposes is considered fair use (or equivalent) in almost all of the world. There's no need for it to be available digitally -- it's perfectly fine to photograph or transcribe a print source. It might be worth noting that the standards at WP:DYK recently changed so that good faith can no longer be assumed for sourcing -- if the reviewer cannot access a source, the nominator has to provide the relevant chunk or the nomination cannot pass. UndercoverClassicist T·C 22:20, 25 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham - Thanks for providing links to the remaining four spot checks. I was able to verify two of the four. The other two were Google Books, but the preview feature did not include the desired pages. The FA source review procedure suggests that random citations be selected from the article, which is how the above spot checks were selected. It would not be random if the spot checks were limited to those sources that are available online. If you're not comfortable with emailing a fragment of a page, we can leave this source review in its current state (I would mark it "inconclusive" or "incomplete"). Also, you could post a note on the FA Talk page ... the FA coordinators patrol that page, and they would respond with advice regarding the not-online sources. Noleander (talk) 13:53, 27 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Noleander: Thank you for your patience. I am now in a jurisdiction that I can access the relevant books and scan pages so have made adjustments accordingly. Please see above. simongraham (talk) 10:56, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham - Thanks for providing additional information on the final two spot checks. I verified one, and for the other: the source did not support the article, and you updated the article accordingly.
The article has 62 citations, and 10 of those were spot-checked. Of the 10 spot checks, 20% resulted in changes to the article. Extrapolating, that suggests that there may be about ten more changes if one were to scrutinize the remaining 52 citations. It may be prudent for you to double-check the remaining 52 citations ... what are your thoughts on that? Noleander (talk) 15:00, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I only have experience of assessing potential Featured Articles rather than as the assessed but often find that changes are made to the article in the process so I am not surprised that changes were requested. If you feel it would be boost your confidence to spot check other citations, I am open to that. simongraham (talk) 21:47, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Simongraham Yes, I suggest that you perform checks on all the remaining 52 citations. There are a few benefits:
  • Since this is your first FA nomination, it is important to establish strict compliance with the WP:Verifiability policy. Subsequent nominations will relax the depth of the source review spot checks, but it is important to go the extra mile in the first nomination.
  • Double-checking all the citations is a good habit to get into for your future articles. I'm positive that double-checking all the cites on this article will prove very useful and informative.
  • For example: I recently nominated the James Cook article for my ninth FA. The final step, prior to nomination, was to go through all 384 citations and read the source (sometimes for the third time) and ensure it supported the associated text. Took me about twelve hours. But I did it because in a prior FA nomination a reviewer found a couple of cites that did not support the article, and I was mortified. Not only were the cites inaccurate, but I had wasted the reviewer's time.
  • I cannot speak for other reviewers, but other potential reviewers may look more favorably at jumping in to review this aritcle if they know that all the cites have been fully validated. Ditto for the closing FA coordinator.
Noleander (talk) 17:38, 1 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Validating all 99 references:
  • 1: Marjomaa 2003, p. 415. Confirmed 1875.
  • 2a: Lewis 2002, p. 72. Confirmed 1888 formation under African Lakes Company to fight Mlozi and 1891 formation under Johnston.
  • 2b: Lewis 2002, p. 72. Confirmed 1898 prefix 'British' removed.
  • 2c: Lewis 2002, p. 72. Confirmed date and name.
  • 3a: Baker 2001, p. 69. Confirmed 1893 expedition against Liwonde.
  • 3b: Baker 2001, p. 69. Confirmed company names and home deployments.
  • 3c: Baker 2001, p. 69. Confirmed size of contingents, termed Ayao (Yao), Atonga (Tonga) and Achewa (Chewa). Confirmed Tonga enlisted for a year in local service only.
  • 3d: Baker 2001, p. 69. Confirmed quote.
  • 3e: Baker 2001, p. 69. Confirmed company names and constituents.
  • 4a: Stacke 1941, p. 550. Confirmed number and constituents.
  • 4b: Stacke 1941, p. 550. Confirmed 1897, number and constituents
  • 4c: Stacke 1941, p. 550. Confirmed name and date.
  • 5: Marjomaa 2003, p. 416. Confirmed "more or less subdued" in 1895.
  • 6a: Marjomaa 2003, p. 419. Confirmed Tonga Christian converts.
  • 6b: Marjomaa 2003, p. 419. Confirmed three of six would be Tonga.
  • 6c: Marjomaa 2003, p. 419. Confirmed three year service.
  • 7: Boeder 1981, p. 61. Confirmed Sharpe's concern with German incursions.
  • 8: McKracken 2017, p. 167. Confirmed purpose.
  • 9: Njoloma 1998, p. 21. Confirmed purpose "to promote, serve and defend British political and economic interests".
  • 10: Boeder 1981, p. 69. Confirmed quote. He compared the soldiers favourably to Gurkhas.
  • 11a: Boeder 1981, p. 70. Confirmed attack by Mpezeni and Mombera.
  • 11b: Boeder 1981, p. 70. Confirmed battle with Ngoni.
  • 11c: Boeder 1981, p. 70. Confirmed agreement, payment and Bemba interest.
  • 12: Boeder 1981, p. 71. Spot check verified.
  • 13a: Baker 2001, p. 70. Confirmed movements.
  • 13b: Baker 2001, p. 70. Confirmed G and H formation and constituency.
  • 14a: Baker 2001, p. 72. Confirmed Fort Lister and recruitment from "unoccupied Portuguese territory"
  • 14b: Baker 2001, p. 72. Surmise from Sikh contingent at Zomba.
  • 14c: Baker 2001, p. 72. Confirmed policy of not moving officers.
  • 15a: Baker 2001, p. 79. Confirmed 1899 formation and purpose.
  • 15b: Baker 2001, p. 79. Confirmed challenges with smokeless powder.
  • 16a: Boeder 1981, p. 72. Confirmed name change.
  • 16b: Boeder 1981, p. 72. Confirmed attacks from Mauritians and illnesses of "pneumonia and bronchitis" from the cold.
  • 16c: Boeder 1981, p. 72. Confirmed quote.
  • 16d: Boeder 1981, p. 72. Confirmed date.
  • 16e: Boeder 1981, p. 72. Confirmed date and ship. Also mentions that they took forty tons of rice and one ton of salt as rations.
  • 17a: Campbell 1986, p. 8. Confirmed name.
  • 17b: Campbell 1986, p. 8. Confirmed first recruits were Sikhs recruited through the India office.
  • 17c: Campbell 1986, p. 8. Confirmed name and date.
  • 18a: Marjomaa 2003, p. 422. Confirmed service and date.
  • 18b: Marjomaa 2003, p. 422. Confirmed original term and 1898 change to include service "outside protectorate borders".
  • 18c: Marjomaa 2003, p. 422. Confirmed conditions and marriage situation.
  • 19a: Marjomaa 2003, p. 423. Confirmed number and constituents.
  • 19b: Marjomaa 2003, p. 423. Spot check verified.
  • 19c: Marjomaa 2003, p. 423. Confirmed Second Battalion.
  • 19d: Marjomaa 2003, p. 423. Confirmed First and Second.
  • 19e: Marjomaa 2003, p. 423. Confirmed names.
  • 20a: Naval & Military Intelligence 1899, p. 10. Confirmed date and naming.
  • 20b: Naval & Military Intelligence 1899, p. 10. Confirmed date and naming.
  • 21: Verner 1906, p. 59. Spot checked.
  • 22: Baker 2001, p. 78. Confirmed size of force and burning of "Nquamba's town".
  • 23: Beachy 1990, p. 38. Surmised form the text that the British "continued to look upon his his activities with much tolerance" until his speech was "increasingly tinged with anti-Britishness".
  • 24: Beachy 1990, p. 40. Confirmed quote.
  • 25a: Stacke 1941, p. 551. Confirmed 1899 Mauritius.
  • 25b: Stacke 1941, p. 551. Confirmed number and constituency.
  • 25c: Stacke 1941, p. 551. Confirmed "remaining half" departed to Gambia.
  • 26a: The 2nd Battalion Central Africa Regiment 1900, p. 4. Confirmed activity.
  • 26b: The 2nd Battalion Central Africa Regiment 1900, p. 4. Confirmed date and location.
  • 26c: The 2nd Battalion Central Africa Regiment 1900, p. 4. Confirmed dates and action.
  • 27: Moyse-Bartlett & 2012 Volume 1, p. 32. Spot check verified.
  • 28: Page 2011, p. 3. Confirmed deployment, numbers and constituents.
  • 29: Hall 1939, p. 141. Confirmed deployment.
  • 30: Correspondence 1901, p. 45. Confirmed date of departure from Cape Town.
  • 31: The Infantry of East Africa Command 1944, p. 6. Spot check verified.
  • 32: Armitage & Montanaro 1901, p. 164. Confirmed involvement. p. 165. Confirmed date and use of guns.
  • 33: Armitage & Montanaro 1901, pp. 168, 169. Spot check verified.
  • 34: Hall 1939, p. 328. Confirmed regiment was part of contingent p. 332. Confirmed victory.
  • 35: Armitage & Montanaro 1901, p. 173. Confirmed date.
  • 36: Armitage & Montanaro 1901, p. 178. Confirmed location as "Ojesu, the famous fetish town of the Ashantis".
  • 37: Hill 2006, p. 44. Confirmed A Company first to reach Kumasi and battle of Obasa.
  • 38: Beachy 1990, p. 41. Confirmed order not to cross border and consequential action.
  • 39: Beachy 1990, p. 47. Confirmed "except for the Yao of the Central African Rifles".
  • 40: Beachy 1990, p. 48. Confirmed British victory.
  • 41: Beachy 1990, p. 42. Spot check verified.
  • 42a: The London Gazette 1901, p. 5973. Confirmed Sitwell and Silva and incident.
  • 42b: The London Gazette 1901, p. 5973. Confirmed quote.
  • 43: The London Gazette 1901, p. 5974. Confirmed date and place.
  • 44: The London Gazette 1901, pp. 5975, 5976. Confirmed timeline.
  • 45: Moyse-Bartlett & 2012 Volume 1, p. 46. Confirmed action.
  • 46: The London Gazette 1901, p. 5977. Confirmed departed 30 March.
  • 47a: Boeder 1981, p. 73. Confirmed constituency.
  • 47b: Boeder 1981, p. 73. Confirmed visit to England.
  • 48: Page 2011, p. 4. Confirmed presentation of medals by King Edward at Marlborough House and inspection.
  • 49: Marjomaa 2003, p. 418. Confirmed lesson gained from British experience in India.
  • 50: Marjomaa 2003, p. 420. Confirmed collapse of Yao chiefdoms.
  • 51a: Marjomaa 2003, p. 421. Confirmed nationality of officers and NCOs.
  • 51b: Marjomaa 2003, p. 421. Confirmed corporal punishment and beating.
  • 52: Baker 2001, p. 76. Confirmed circumstance and direction of change in standing order.
  • 53: Verner 1906, pp. 56–57. Confirmed that troops overtook the raiding party, killed "several" and captured materiel.
  • 54: The British Central Africa Protectorate 1899, p. 13. Confirmed attitude of chiefs and that they encouraged of their sons to join the regiment.
  • 55: Moyse-Bartlett & 2012 Volume 2, p. 689. Confirmed details of uniform,
  • 56: Baker 2001, p. 75. Spot check verified.
  • 57: Verner 1906, p. 47. Spot check verified.
  • 58: Baker 2001, p. 80. Confirmed quote.
  • 59: Armitage & Montanaro 1901, p. 177. Confirmed use of bayonets.
  • 60: Verner 1906, p. 51. Confirmed policy that gave the officers "a personal interest in the improvement of their station and surroundings".
  • 61: The Native African Regiments 1900, p. 11. Confirmed quote.
  • 62: Njoloma 1998, p. 19. Confirmed name and date.
@Noleander: Thank you for your patience. This took a bit longer than I hoped, especially I discovered new material that could be included in the article, but I have now verified every citation. It was a useful exercise as I noted a few that needed updating and dealt with them. simongraham (talk) 09:51, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for doing an excellent job on the sourcing, it is much appreciated! Source review is PASSED. Noleander (talk) 14:52, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hawkeye7

[edit]

This article is outside my area of expertise. I had to look up where Malawi was. Anyway, it looks great to me. A fine piece of work. Some comments:

  • Link Fez (hat), Commander-in-Chief of the Forces
    • Added.
  • "They met Edward VII, who presented them with medals for their service in combat." Any idea what medals?
    • Yes. Added.
  • "for much of the early period of interaction between the people in the area and the European visitors was peaceful." Something wrong here.
    • Amended.
  • "of the slaver Mlozi bin Kazbadema that operated from Karonga' that -> who
    • Amended.
  • "the African force was deployed against the Liwonde" Who were they?
    • It is a place.
  • "The British had gained much experience with the use of non-British troops across the empire by the foundation of the Central Africa Regiment, particularly in the conquest of India and the foundation of the British Raj." Suggest "by the time of the foundation of the Central Africa Regiment"
    • Amended.
  • "The Tonga had a larger level of education" This is unclear. Do you mean a higher level, or more widespread education?
    • Both. They had greater access to missionary schools and so had more people educated and to a higher level.
  • " the soldiers mounted bayonets to their rifles" -> "fixed bayonets to their rifles"
    • Fixed.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:53, 26 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Hawkeye7: Thank you for this excellent review and your very positive comments. I have made the changes you suggested. simongraham (talk) 08:05, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No worries. Moved to support. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:57, 27 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Noleander

[edit]
  • Reviewing prose and MOS:
  • Overall: Style looks good; consistent with WP:MOS
  • ISBNs: ideally, they would have a more uniform look: either all with or all without hyphens, 978-0-43608-290-0 vs 9780947792435.
    • Fixed.
  • Section title: "Genealogy" is that a military term? I'm not a military history expert, so it looks odd to me, but perhaps it is normal.
    • There does not seem to be a convention. Changed to "Summary of name changes" as I feel this is clearer.
  • There are a few sources with anonymous authors, including:
    • Correspondence relating to the Ashanti War, 1900. London: HMSO. 1901. OCLC 940444714.
    • "The 2nd Battalion Central Africa Regiment". The Times. No. 36276. 18 October 1900. p. 4.
    • The Infantry of East Africa Command 1890–1944. Nairobi: East Africa Command in collaboration with the Ministry of Information, East Africa. 1944. OCLC 44942953.
Personally, I like seeing such anonymous listed as a separate group, separate from the sources that have authors. Not a requirement for FA, just a suggestion.
  • An interesting suggestion. I am following the convention in other military FAs, like HMS Vanguard, where they are included in the alphabetic list by their title.
  • It raised a semi-official ... can "semi official" be defined in this context? Is there a WP Link available? such as paramilitary?
    • Unfortunately the sources do not go into much detail. Removed to avoid the ambiguity.
  • Wording better? The only local troops that served any more than ceremonial duties were a ... sounds odd to my ears. Consider The only local troops that served in a capacity other than merely ceremonial were a ... or something like that.
    • Reworded.
  • Significance? By 1895, all fighting had been subdued by the British troops. However, most of the African troops that served in the British force were from Mozambique and Zanzibar. The only local troops ... Not clear what the word "however" is trying to tell the reader ... were more local troops expected to be participating? Why was that expected? Why did they not participate? etc.
    • Reworded.
  • Is it possible to name a year when its successor finally disappeared? In 1902, the regiment was merged with the East Africa Rifles and Uganda Rifles to form the King's African Rifles. The two battalions of the Central Africa Regiment became the 1st and 2nd Battalion. ... I looked at that linked article, and it looks like the history after that is rather complex, so maybe it is not possible to have an termination date? Groups merged & renamed over and over again.
    • I think that seems reasonable. It was more of a merger than a succession. The current Malawi Army ha some claim to be the ultimate successor to the Regiment so there is an argument that its legacy is an army that exists today.
  • Photo alignment: the pic at top of Description section might look nicer if it were moved down a tiny bit to be at top of "Local recruitment" section .. that way the top of the pic and top of the "Local recruitment" body text align vertically.
    • Moved.
  • Cite for pic caption: Optional, but if you can provide a cite for the caption "Sikh members of the regiment in 1898" ... that would benefit readers that see the pic, and read the caption, and want to learn more about those Sikhs. Even if it is described in the body text, why make readers hunt in the body text? Not required for FA.
    • Added a wiki link so that readers can explore more about Sikhism if that wish to.
@Noleander: Thank you for this review. I think your ideas are excellent and improve the article. I have also taken the opportunity to reword the second Background paragraph in light of your comments. Please tell me if there is anything else. simongraham (talk) 21:05, 28 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Second pass
  • Link: ... increasingly saw the Mullah of Somaliland, .. "Mullah" should have a wikilink, if this is the 1st occurance.
    • Added link
  • Suggest a map be included like this one, identifying locations of all significant places mentioned in the article:
    • Added map.
  • Terminology? .... was added to the regiment to serve overseas and formed to serve overseas and ...n given its first overseas assignment.... To my ears, "overseas" means abroad, on another continent. If the intention was limited to islands in the Indian Ocean, maybe "offshore" is more accurate? Not a big deal; I suppose if the source(s) use the word "overseas" then so be it.
    • It is the terminology in the sources. "Overseas" seems to be used for any service that took place outside the country itself, presumably because transport was by sea. I have reworded some instances.

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]

I'll review this, but it might take me a day or two to go through it. A couple of initial notes for tonight:

  • "and, in 1899, the Central Africa Regiment. The Central Africa Regiment was led by ...": suggest "It was led by ..."
  • "Half of the battalion was deployed, alongside a contingent of the First Battalion, to the Gold Coast to participate in the War of the Golden Stool against the Asante Empire, and the other half suppressing an uprising in the Gambia Colony and Protectorate": the two halves of the sentence need to match in tense; currently we have "deployed" and "suppressing". Perhaps "were sent to suppress"?

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:30, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Thank you. I look forward to your thoughts. simongraham (talk) 07:29, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Continuing:

  • "The British Central African Rifles was founded in 1896 with an initial strength of 738 African and 175 Sikh troops." No Europeans? The officers were African or Sikh?
    • Added the officers.
  • "The force grew quickly to five companies:" but the article then lists six companies.
    • Amended,
  • "The deployment was a failure due to a lack of warm clothing being issued and abuse from the local population. Nearly 30 of the contingent died." The reference to warm clothing is surprising; Mauritius has a tropical climate and it rarely gets below around 16C or around 60F. Googling for weather data it appears Mauritius is typically warmer than Malawi; Malawi certainly has colder minimum temperatures. What exactly does the source say? Were the deaths from the clothing problem or were the soldiers killed by Mauritians?
    • The source says, "The Mauritians deeply resented Africans garrisoning their island, demonstrated against them when they landed, and at every opportunity thereafter. To make matters worse it was mid-winter when the 1,000 man strong battalion arrived. Heavy clothing had not been issued so pneumonia and bronchitis swept through the soldiers and the three hundred wives and children who accompanied them."
  • "The climate in Somaliland proved beneficial to the troops, and they quickly recovered and trained": this makes it sounds as if they were all laid low by the cold, and none of them were well enough to train. As above this seems unlikely.
    • The source says, "The fine climate of that part of Somaliland, nearly 100 miles from the sea, where the regiment was sent, soon had an excellent effect on the men, and afforded an excellent opportunity for the full completion of their musketry and military training."
  • "... with arms for the Dervishes. 60 soldiers of B Company surprised and captured ...": per MOS:NUMNOTES, avoid starting a sentence with a number in figures -- rephrase or use "Sixty".
    • Rephrased.
  • "On 19 June, a contingent of four officers ... departed from Zomba. On 30 June, the soldiers ... departed aboard the transport Victorian." The parallel structure is a bit clumsy. Do we know where the Victorian sailed from? Can we rephrase, perhaps like this: "On 19 June, a contingent of four officers, 73 Sikh troops and 276 African soldiers of the First Battalion, along with a medical officer, hospital and machine gun detachment, departed from Zomba, embarking on the transport Victorian on 30 June with 750 carriers"?
    • Amended.
  • "The four companies, each containing about 120 soldier": I can't make the arithmetic work here. We've mentioned 73 + 276 = 349 soldiers from the First Battalion, and then 70 + 200 = 270 from the Second. In total that's 619 soldiers, not counting officers. If those are the four companies that's 155 soldiers in each company.
    • The figure is for the soldiers only, so the African troops. Removed as it caused confusion.
  • "A Company of the battalion": I assume this refers to A Company, not just generically to "a company". If so, I'd suggest "The battalion's A Company ..." to avoid the ambiguity.
    • Amended.
  • "In December 1900, the deployment of the Second Battalion in British Somaliland had mainly ceased": I don't think we can use past perfect tense like that with "In" a date. I think "By December 1900" would make more sense, assuming that's the intended meaning.
    • Amended.
  • "This campaign was unique as it was the only time that": "unique" is redundant with "the only time"; I'd make this "This campaign was the only time that".
    • Amended.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:16, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: Thank you for your rigour in this review and the edits that you have made to the article. I feel that they have definitely improved it. I have made the amendments listed and provided content from the sources. Please tell me if there is anything else. simongraham (talk) 17:19, 27 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi Mike, 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) 19:34, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Hi Gog, sorry about the delays in my reviewing recently. The fixes all look good. The only remaining issue I have is the effect of the weather in Mauritius. Currently the article says "The deployment was a failure due to a lack of warm clothing being issued and abuse from the local population. Nearly 30 of the contingent died." Given the supporting quotes (above), and the fact that this is surprising because Mauritius is tropical, I think we need to be more definite -- I would mention pneumonia and bronchitis, and if the source says so then give that as the cause of the deaths. The source says "winter", but although I think that's technically true, I would instead suggest saying it was the coldest part of the year. As it happens I'm having minor surgery tomorrow morning and may not be able to edit for a couple of days, so if Simongraham addresses this point you can consider this a support without waiting for my response. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:10, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      @Gog the Mild, Mike Christie: I have edited the section. Please tell me if there is anything else. simongraham (talk) 04:46, 1 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment

[edit]

Mongush Buyan-Badyrgy

[edit]
Nominator(s): BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In what was possibly the most difficult article I've ever written, I present to you Mongush Buyan-Badyrgy. I've always been fascinated by obscure countries and locations, but even I had never heard of the Tuvan People's Republic until this year! Buyan-Badyrgy is one of the most important figures in the history of the Tuvan people. Adopted as an infant by the noyon (chieftain), who traded cattle to his family in exchange for him(!), he ascended to the noyon position himself at around age 16 after his adoptive father's death.

Despite his youth, Buyan-Badyrgy was a "natural diplomat" and an important figure as the question of Tuva's future was debated. A letter he sent to Russian Emperor Nicholas II resulted in the Tuva region becoming a Russian protectorate. A few years later, in 1918, a decision was made that Tuvans would be allowed to have their own state. He chaired the All-Tuvan Constituent Khural in 1921 which resulted in the establishment of the Tannu Tuva People's Republic, a nation that received partial recognition during its existence.

Buyan-Badyrgy chaired the new General Central Council, thus becoming head of state and government. From 1921 to 1927, he served many roles, including as Minister of Foreign Affairs, General Secretary of the ruling Tuvan People's Revolutionary Party, prime minister (as Chairman of the Council of Ministers), and head of investigation. However, Soviet Russia still maintained significant influence over the new country. Attempts to convert Tuva to a Buddhist theocracy by Buyan-Badyrgy and others proved increasingly irritating to Soviet leadership, and in 1929, they helped launch a coup. Buyan-Badyrgy was removed from office, imprisoned and then executed without trial, aged 39 at his death. Tuva was later annexed into the Soviet Union. Following the Soviet Union's fall, he has become a revered figure in the region, with several monuments made of him and the second-highest Tuvan honor being named the "Order of Buyan-Badyrgy". I thank AirshipJungleman29, who reviewed it for GA and encouraged me to take this to FA. BeanieFan11 (talk) 01:50, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Buyan-Badyrgy.jpg: source link is dead, needs an author death date and a US tag
    • As mentioned, the source link is dead and there doesn't appear to be any archived versions of it. Some Russian websites use the picture, e.g. this, as well as the "Personality in history" source in the article, but I don't see either of them list an author or the date of the picture, ugh. BeanieFan11 (talk) 02:07, 20 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Буян-Бадыргы_и_русский_чиновник.jpg: when and where was this first published and what is the author's date of death?
    • Appears to have been taken by K. D. Mintslova (К.Д. Минцловой), but I'm not sure of the author's death or when it was first published, although this story briefly describes it: And here we see what the founder of Belotsarsk, the head of the Russian population in Tuva, Vladimir Gabaev, looked like. The photo is quite well-known. However, it was not reliably known that it was V. Gabaev in the photo, so in various publications this photo is called "Buyan-Badyrgy and a Russian official."

Airship

[edit]

Marking my spot. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:07, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Still here, just investigating sourcing to see if there was anything utilisable that was missed. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:26, 18 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I support this article's promotion to FA status. I've had a look at the sourcing available to me with relation to my work on Mongolia, and found no omissions on the article subject worthy of note. Maybe a sentence or two of context could be added here and there, but that's no big deal. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:32, 21 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Graham Beards

[edit]

This is a well prepared article and I am close to supporting. I have a few comments:

  • Does the Tuvan People's Republic have freedom of Panorama? I am thinking about the photograph of the statue.
  • There are lots of "with...being" expressions that, in my view spoil the prose.
    • with several monuments being built of him and the...
      • Split into two sentences: Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Buyan-Badyrgy has become a revered figure among Tuvans. Several monuments have been built of him and the second-highest honor of the Republic of Tuva is named after him.
    • with the overall head of the territory being the amban-noyon
      • Changed to your below suggestion.
    • with him being an "unconditional supporter of an independent and self-sufficient Tuva."
      • How about At the congress, Buyan-Badyrgy "showed himself to be a cautious, attentive, moderately democratic politician," according to Khovalyg, being an "unconditional supporter of an independent and self-sufficient Tuva" – does that work?
    • with it being divided into six kozhuuns.
      • Changed to This meeting created new subdivisions for the state, which was divided into six kozhuuns.
    • with the kozhuun conflict being resolved and Tannu Tuva remaining independent;
      • Changed to your suggestion below.
    • with the TPRP being the only party and the Tuvan section of the Communist International.
      • Changed to your suggestion below.
    • with the first recipient being Kenin-Lopsan.
      • Changed to your suggestion below.
  • In the third one, "with him being" is grammatically wrong, it should be "his being". Same goes for the fourth, "it being" which should be "its being". The others are mainly, not entirely, stylistic. How about something like:
    • and several monuments have been built to commemorate him and the second-highest honor of the Republic of Tuva is named after him
    • and the overall head of the territory was the amban-noyon
    • with the kozhuun conflicts' being resolved" (possessive before a gerund)
    • with the TPRP's being (possessive before a gerund)
    • and the first recipient was

Maybe more to come. Graham Beards (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A few more:

  • There's a lot of "howevers" and I think many of them are redundant.
  • Here "located" is redundant. " located in Barun-Khemchik kozhuun (administrative division), a region of Tuva." Just "in" is enough.
    • Done.
  • Instead of "Khaidyp had no children himself" how about "Khaidyp had no children of his own"?
    • Done.
  • Instead of "However, with the new Chinese government hoping to reintegrate Tuva and Mongolia as part of its territory, the majority of Tuvan leaders" I suggest, "As the new chinese government hoped to reintegrate Tuva and Mongolia as part of its territory, most of Tuvan leaders..."
    • Done.
  • Is the Further Reading item of value? It's an odd mixture of a wikilink and an incomplete citation.
    • I could remove it if you like. It's a two-volume book written by Mongush Kenin-Lopsan on Buyan-Badyrgy's life; I couldn't locate any copies of it myself which is why I wasn't able to use it in the article.
I would delete it. Graham Beards (talk) 10:57, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted. BeanieFan11 (talk) 15:39, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please be mindful of WP:NONENGPLAG when using non-English sources. For example, citation 5 has "Сын арата вырос в царских условиях", which translates from Russian as "The son of Arat grew up in royal conditions" and in the article we have "He grew up in royal conditions". This is a little too close. My O-level Russian is not up to the standard needed to check all the citations, but Google can be useful here.

Maybe more to come. Graham Beards (talk) 10:58, 24 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  • This, "After Tannu Tuva was established as an independent state, the government was formed, called the General Central Council, which featured one representative from each kozhuun. Buyan-Badyrgy, at the advice of I. G. Safyanov, was appointed the chairman of the council" is sourced from "На нем был образован Всеобщий центральный совет (Правительство), состоящий из представителей кожуунов (по одному от каждого кожууна). По совету И. Сафьянова, председателем пра­вительства был назначен М. Буян-Бадыргы", which translates to " It formed the General Central Council (Government), consisting of representatives of the kozhuuns (one from each kozhuun). On the advice of I. Safyanov, M. Buyan-Badyrgy was appointed chairman of the government." This (again) raises the issue of WP:NONENGPLAG in that it is too close to the source. Are there any others? Graham Beards (talk) 10:08, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Changed to After Tannu Tuva was established as an independent state, the government, known as the General Central Council, was created; it included one representative for each kozhuun. Buyan-Badyrgy was named chairman of the council on the suggestion of I. G. Safyanov. Is that better? BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:20, 2 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The author of this source "Alekseevich, Molchanov Leonid (2012)" is wrong; it is Л.А. Молчанов (L.A. Molchanov)
  • Looking deeper into this source I see this paragraph:
In the new protectorate, seven kozhuuns were formed, each to be led by ukherids, with the amban-noyon the overall head; there was also a Commissar, "effectively a Russian representative, an official of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, who was in charge of the placement of Russian settlers."[19]

Is sourced to this: 

В административном отношении край делился на 7 хошунов (административные и  податные единицы) во главе с ухэридами (огурдами). Общее управление
формально находилось вруках амдын-нойона, фактически - российского  представителя, чиновника Переселенческого управления МВД , который ведал устройством русских переселенцев (к 1917 г. – 12 тыс. человек).

Which translates to: 

Administratively, the region was divided into 7 khoshuns (administrative and tax units) headed by ukherids (ogurds). General management was formally in the hands of the amdyn-noyon, who was in fact the Russian representative, an official of the Resettlement Department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs, who was in charge of the placement of Russian settlers (by 1917 - 12 thousand people).

I can't see the direct quotation. And the amban-noyon and the Russian representative appear to be the same person. Graham Beards (talk) 15:02, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

    • The issues are: An author of a source is given as "Alekseevich, Molchanov Leonid (2012)", when it should be "Molchanov, Leonid Alekseevich" and the source is named throughout as "Alekseevich" which is a patronymic. The same goes for "Andreevna, Oidupaa Alena" which should be "Oidupaa, Alena Andreevna", Another problem, as I have said above, is explained in WP:NONENGPLAG in that the text of some of the article is too close to a direct translation of the source. And there is an issue with WP:VERIFY, which I have also pointed out. An example of this was a direct quotation - inside quotation marks - that has now been removed. [38].Graham Beards (talk) 07:28, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • With regard to the Andreevna p. 47 citation#13 (which should be Oidupaa), I cannot find the source for "In his first years as a noyon, Buyan-Badyrgy followed after his adoptive father's policy and tried to maintain friendly relations with China." Or the source for "The day of exposing lies will certainly come ... And there will be time to glorify my righteousness." Graham Beards (talk) 16:24, 31 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer. I'm particularly interested in the sources of the following quotations, in part to see if the quotation marks are in fact needed. It would be easier if you could just add the source text here below each one.

  • "sharp mind, great sense of self-worth, excellent manners and a tendency to [make] reasonable compromises."[2][8][9]
    • He was adopted by noyon Khaidyp (Buurul Noyan) of the Khemchik Daa khoshun. Since childhood, Buyan-Badyrga was distinguished by his sharp mind, great sense of self-worth, excellent manners and a tendency to reasonable compromises.
  • "noble character, deep knowledge, and [his] ability to govern," with his title Uger-Daa meaning "Promoter of Holiness".[11]
    • His compatriots respected Khaydyp as “Uger-Daa” (“Propagator of Holiness”). European travelers who met him praised his noble character, deep knowledge, and ability to govern. Other places have translated this as "Promoter of Holiness".
  • "a natural diplomat who was intelligent, self-confident, flexible, and able to make concessions."[11]
    • Although young, Buyan-Badyrgy, a natural diplomat who knew his worth, was flexible, and was able to make concessions in various ways, found a common language not only with the Tuvans, but also with the Mongols and Russians.
  • "showed himself to be a cautious, attentive, moderately democratic politician," according to Khovalyg, being an "unconditional supporter of an independent and self-sufficient Tuva."
    • The Congress adopted the Constitution of the Tuvan People's Republic, consisting of 22 articles. At the Congress, Buyan-Badyrgy showed himself to be a cautious, attentive, moderately democratic politician, an unconditional supporter of an independent and self-sufficient Tuva.
  • Buyan-Badyrgy "considered it necessary to maintain a certain continuity with previous customs and laws."[26]
    • At the same time, he considered it necessary to maintain a certain continuity with previous customs and laws.
  • At this point, Buyan-Badyrgy was described by researcher V. A. Dubrovsky as being at "the pinnacle of his political career," with Dubrovsky noting that "due to his natural talent and education, intelligence and foresight ... He enjoyed well-deserved authority among the Tuvans, Russians and Mongols."[33]
    • V. A. Dubrovsky notes that "the former gun-noyon Mongush Bu-yan-Badyrgy, due to his natural talent and education, intelligence and foresight, reached the pinnacle of his political career. He enjoyed well-deserved authority among the Tuvans, Russians and Mongols"
  • According to Khovalyg, he was known among contemporaries as a "skillful and purposeful defender of the interests of his people," and was considered a skilled diplomat.[32]
    • Buyan-Badyrgy visited Kyzyl on visits; he constantly lived with his family near the Upper Chadan Temple, on the right bank of the river of the same name. In the eyes of his contemporaries, he was noted for his education and intelligence: he was fluent in Mongolian and Russian, and knew Sanskrit. As a diplomat, he showed himself to be a skillful and purposeful defender of the interests of his people.
  • "Comrade Buyan-Badyrgy, working in the leadership of the [TPRP] party, has done and is doing much for the further development of the party. It should be especially noted that a connection with the Communist International has been created, the party has become a member of the Peasant International. Whose merit is all this? All this is the merit of only Comrade Buyan-Badyrgy."[2]
    • The 5th Congress of the TPRP, held on October 8-13, 1926, elected M. Sodnam as General Secretary. In his speech, S.A. Natsov said: "Comrade Buyan-Badyrgy, working in the leadership of the Arat party, has done and is doing much for the further development of the party. It should be especially noted that a connection with the Communist International has been created, the party has become a member of the Peasant International. Whose merit is all this? All this is the merit of only Comrade Buyan-Badyrgy. On behalf of the Third Communist International, I propose that Comrade Buyan-Badyrgy be elected General Secretary of the new Central Committee of the party."
  • "former princes, high-ranking officials, lamas and wealthy Tuvans,"
    • It is not for nothing that the years 1927-1928 are considered to be turning points, marking the beginning of the second period of development of the Tuvan People's Republic, when active changes in the political course, the struggle between the so-called "right" and "left" began. In this case, the "right" were considered to be former princes, high-ranking officials, lamas and wealthy Tuvans. Buyan-Badyrgy, as the most active representative of the old bureaucratic aristocracy, aroused the greatest hostility from the "left", who were striving for undivided power. With the support of the Comintern, since 1928 the "left" increasingly actively pursued a line of cleansing the People's Revolutionary Party of "alien elements", "expressing dissatisfaction with the attitude of the seconded Soviet workers to the former officials, in particular to Buyan-Badyrgy".
  • "The day of exposing lies will certainly come ... And there will be time to glorify my righteousness."[13][37]
    • The day when lies are exposed will certainly come; The revelation of bloody secrets will surely come; They will return my good name and honor to me; And there will be time to praise my righteousness.
  • "true democrat [and] a defender of the interests of the people."[11][41]
    • Researchers of the last decade, M. B. Kenin-Lopsan, V. A. Dubrovsky, S. Ch. Sat, G. A. Ondar, S. V. Saaya and others, on the contrary, see only virtues in Buyan-Badyrgy: a true democrat, a defender of the interests of the people

The FAC coordinators will expect to see a source review so this will preempt some questions. Graham Beards (talk) 10:09, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Sorry to have been tiresome. Please check the citations have a consistent format. Graham Beards (talk) 18:14, 3 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Crisco 1492

[edit]
  • he led in negotiations with surrounding countries regarding various issues and helped Tuva receive official recognition from the Soviet Union and Mongolia. - Is "in" correct here?
    • Cut "in".
  • several leading Tuvans ... several others - A bit of repetition here. Is it worth nixing the mention of the other arrests in the lead?
    • Cut the "several others".
  • providing him with a good education - Do the sources provide any more information as to this education?
    • I provided what was available in the subsequent sentences: Buyan-Badyrgy's adoptive father invited many of the top experts in various languages to teach him and had him study numerous fields including history, astrology, medicine, mathematics, psychology and philosophy. He was taught the Tibetan and Mongolian languages starting at age five and had "mastered" them from a young age; he also became a fluent speaker of Sanskrit, Russian and Chinese, in addition to his native Tuvan language.
      • Ah, so home schooling with private tutors. Makes sense, but keep in mind that your readers wouldn't necessarily know the education context in this region in the early 20th century. "A good education" is ambiguous enough that they could assume formal schooling (which would have been true in much of Europe, North America, and some parts of Asia at this time... the noble-born Indonesians were sending their children to Dutch-run schools before 1911). — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Who was the amban-noyon when Buyan-Badyrgy ascended to noyon?
    • Source doesn't say (Thus, he became the ruler of Daa khoshun and the second person after the ambyn-noyon - the ruler of all Tuva.), though it does mention by 1912 it was Kombu-Dorzhu. I do see that Tannu Uriankhai lists him (under the name Oyun Ölzey-Ochur oglu Kombu-Dorzhu) as serving from 1899 to 1911, though I don't see a source for it... Thoughts?
      • Here's a source mentioning Kombu-Dorzhu's tenure, which would verify him being the amban-noyon at the time. Should I add it in?
  • Annexed to or annexed by?
    • Wouldn't those mean the same thing, or no? The suggestion of the leaders was to have it become part of Mongolian territory. Would that be "annexed to" or "by"?
  • he also requested the preservation of the Tuvan titles, ranks and positions, that the Russians would not interfere with the Buddhist religion and the exemption of the Tuvan people from serving in the military - Given how many commas are here, it might be worth having an Oxford comma after "religion" or even using a semicolon to separate the three items.
    • Added comma after "religion".
  • I'm seeing quite a few sentences that are overly preponderous, with multiple clauses and subclauses; see, for example, "This allowed China and Mongolia to take more control over the region; however, by 1921, the Soviets had defeated Alexander Kolchak, leader of the opposing White movement in the Civil War, and drove out the Chinese and Mongolians in the region, taking control." and "It featured one representative from each kozhuun, and Buyan-Badyrgy, at the advice of I. G. Safyanov, was appointed the chairman of the council.". I'd recommend simplifying a bit. Those are just two examples... there are quite a few more.
    • I split up the mentioned two examples (e.g. This allowed China and Mongolia to take more control over the region. By 1921, the Soviets had defeated Alexander Kolchak, leader of the opposing White movement in the Civil War, and took control of the region by driving out the Chinese and Mongolians.) – could you point out some others you'd like changed?
      • I'll give one more, "In his last poem, published at the end of his life, he wrote of the "sadness of my name", realizing his impending execution, but noted that "The day of exposing lies will certainly come ... And there will be time to glorify my righteousness," but try re-reading with this comment in mind. Generally having multiple subordinate clauses in a sentence does not help readability.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:16, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
        • Changed that one to He wrote of the "sadness of my name" in his last poem, realizing his impending execution, but noted that "The day of exposing lies will certainly come ... And there will be time to glorify my righteousness." BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:59, 30 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • daughter of an acquaintance, whom he called Dembikei - Was Dembikei the daughter or the acquaintance?
  • Not a prose comment, but your references are sometimes out of order; for example, one set reads [29][2][11][31] — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:53, 29 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Do you think there's anything I can do to earn your support @Crisco 1492:? BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support - Glad to see coverage in this area. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:54, 17 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]

Reading through; will add comments as I go.

  • The date of birth predates 1918 so is presumably Old Style -- if you can confirm that it would be good to add a footnote, and give the new style equivalent.
    • According to the source, it is April 25, 1892 according to the Gregorian calendar. That would be New Style, right? Should any notes be added?
      I think it might be worth adding a footnote saying something like "This date is given in the modern Gregorian calendar, although at the time Russia was still using Julian calendar dates", with relevant links. It should be easy to find a reliable source for the date Russia changed to new style dates. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:26, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Added that in. BeanieFan11 (talk) 18:33, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Could we get an inset in the map showing Tuva highlit in Asia? This is not a well-known area of the world.
    Because neither of those are SA or more restrictive, as long as they're attributed properly the licensing could be anything free. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:00, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He was born to a large but poor Arat family, the son of Mongush Nomchug, a herdsman": suggest "His father was Mongush Nomchug, a poor Arat herdsman with a large family".
    • Done.
  • "In one, it is stated ... Another held that ..." No reason to change tense here; the legends still exist so I'd make this "holds that ...", or "According to another, ..."
    • Done.
  • "Khaidyp showed great concern in the upbringing of Buyan-Badyrgy, providing him with a good education.". I can't read the source; can you confirm that the source supports the first and second half of this independently? The second half is clearly supported, as I can tell from the rest of the paragraph, but I suspect the first half of being just an editorial comment.
    • It seems I based this off of What is surprising is that Daa noyon personally took up the upbringing and education of the boy. – should I change it to just that he provided him with a good education?
      I would suggest cutting the first half, yes. For the second half, the source quote you give here doesn't support "good" but it's clear from the rest of the paragraph that it was a good education -- so long as some of that material is also on p. 52 of the source that's fine. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:26, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Cut the first part, will address your other concerns tomorrow. BeanieFan11 (talk) 03:08, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'Buyan-Badyrgy was distinguished by his intelligence as he grew up and was noted for having a "sharp mind...'. Again I wonder if we need both halves here -- does "distinguished by his intelligence" tell us anything that "noted for having a sharp mind" does not?
    • Cut the quote.
  • 'Buyan-Badyrgy's adoptive father was praised for "noble character, deep knowledge, and [his] ability to govern," ': praised by whom? Contemporaries, his subjects, the Russian governors who dealt with him?
    • According to the source, it was Аны менен жолуккан европалык саякатчылар анын ак сөөк мүнөзүнө, терең билимине, башкаруу жөндөмүнө тен беришкен. / European travelers who met him praised his noble character, deep knowledge, and ability to govern. – so I clarified.
      I wish we knew what Tchoroev's source is for this. It sounds like WP:PEACOCK phrasing and I distrust it, though it does appear Tchoroev is a reliable source. Without details I don't think there's much encyclopedic value to the statement. See also my comment at the end of this review about pinging Tchoroev. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:31, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suggest giving the date of the Russo-Japanese war inline.
    • Added date.
  • Suggest cutting ", where he was believed to be poisoned": the next few sentences tell the tale, and there's no need to look ahead and hence tell the reader twice.
    • Cut.
  • There are a lot of quotes. I started counting and gave up at around thirty; I would guess there are forty. (I searched for the double-quote character in the browser to highlight them all.). A couple are quite long, and perhaps should be blockquotes if you're going to keep them, but do we really need so many? (And you already have a couple of substantial blockquotes.) I know it's tempting to use the source's language, and of course one doesn't have to worry about close paraphrasing with quotes, but I have a hard time believing we couldn't move most of this material into summarizing language. For comparison, I took a look at Gerald Durrell, which has around thirty quotes and one blockquote at three times the length of this article.
    • I cut a few of them. How many do you think should be removed?
  • "According to Salimaa Khovalyg in the Bulletin of Eurasia, memoirs from ...": why name the source (and even the journal) inline here? Is there some doubt about the reliability of this information?
    • I don't doubt that the source is accurate. I cut the journal mention, but I usually think it makes sense to mention the author when including decent-sized quotes from them.
  • Similarly 'Despite his young age, Buyan-Badyrgy was described by historian Tyntchtykbek Tchoroev as "a natural diplomat who was intelligent, self-confident, flexible, and able to make concessions."': what's your criterion for naming the source inline? If it's just that you want to attribute quotes inline I think that's another reason for eliminating most of the quotes. And this is more a matter of style, but I think it's more common to use the present tense to talk about historians' opinions: "Buyan-Badyrgy is described as".

I'm going to stop there for now -- particularly if you decide to eliminate a lot of the quotes the text could change quite a bit so let's resolve that before I finish the review. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:48, 24 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

More comments:

  • Re the number of quotes, I don't think I can give you an exact number -- it's more that there are some cases where they seem justified (usually opinions expressed by contemporaries or historians) and cases where I think it would be best to use our own wording. For example, Tchoroev calls him "a natural diplomat ..."; this seems fine as a quote, since it's one historian's opinion. On the other hand, in that same paragraph we have 'In his first years as a noyon, Buyan-Badyrgy followed his adoptive father's policy and tried to maintain friendly relations with China. His policy was described as "generally anti-Russian and pro-Chinese"'. I don't see any value in this as a quote, and would suggest rephrasing it, perhaps like this: "In his first years as a noyon, Buyan-Badyrgy followed his adoptive father's policy of maintaining friendly relations with China rather than Russia", or perhaps combine it with the next sentence: "In his first years as a noyon, Buyan-Badyrgy followed his adoptive father's policy of maintaining friendly relations with China and opposing Russia: he attempted to stop trade with Russa, and created an army ..." Another example quote that I think should be rephrased in the same paragraph is "did not supply the population with the necessary consumer goods" -- this is not an opinion, and there's no reason we can't rephrase it. I looked through the remaining quotes in the article; many are opinions and I can see why you wouldn't want to rephrase them, but here are a few more I think are not needed:
      • Changed the China/Russia part to your suggestion and rephrased necessary consumer goods to contrasting them with the Chinese who they said left the Tuvans in poverty by not providing sufficient goods.
    • "exchanging"
      • Changed to trading.
    • "the pinnacle of his political career"
      • Changed to Buyan-Badyrgy was described by researcher V. A. Dubrovsky as being at peak of his career.
    • "alien elements"
    • "dissatisfaction with the attitude"
      • Changed to showed discontentment towards the views of figures such as Kuular and Buyan-Badyrgy..
    • "provoked by representatives of the former nobility and Buddhist clergy with the aim of discrediting the new government"
      Looks like you missed this one? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:30, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      Changed to believed to have been started by former Tuvan elites in an alleged attempt to challenge the new government – hope that works. BeanieFan11 (talk) 23:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • "considered it necessary to maintain a certain continuity with previous customs and laws"
      • Changed to Buyan-Badyrgy advocated for the constitution to be similar to prior Tuvan customs and laws – hope that works.
  • "Buyan-Badyrgy had initially defended China up through the end of 1911. However, he significantly changed his views after ...:" I don't think we need "significantly", and I think we could improve the flow by combining these: "Buyan-Badyrgy had initially defended China up through the end of 1911, but he changed his views after ..."
    • Done.
  • "The amban-noyon was overall head of the protectorate": suggest giving his name again, as it hasn't been mentioned for several paragraphs.
    • Done.
  • "neither Mongolia nor China renounced previous claims to the region, leading to them still having influence". Just because they had claims doesn't mean they automatically had influence. I don't know what the source says, but should this be rephrased to say something like "... claims to the region, and both continued to [or "attempted to"?] influence Tuvan politics"?
    • Changed to "both continued to influence Tuvan politics", which seems to reflect the source: Thus, [the region] remained within their sphere of influence.
  • "Following the February Revolution, the new Provisional Government": to avoid forcing readers to follow the links, I think it would be good to mention Russia here -- either "... the February Revolution in Russia ..." or "... the new Russian Provisional Government ..." would do it.
    • Changed to "February Revolution in Russia".
  • "This decision was met with resistance among the protectorate's elites, who invited Mongolian and Chinese troops and diplomats into the region and began deepening political and economic ties with the two countries. The entrance of Chinese and Mongolian troops in the region sparked the potential for a violent confrontation between the two countries' forces and local Red Army troops, however the Provisional Siberian Government in Omsk managed to avoid any confrontation by negotiating the exit of the two countries' forces shortly after." Reversing the order of clauses in the first sentence would permit a simplification: "This decision was met with resistance among the protectorate's elites, who began deepening political and economic ties with Mongolia and Chinea, and invited troops and diplomats from the two countries into the region. The arrival of these troops risked sparking a violent confrontation between the two countries' forces and local Red Army troops, but the Provisional Siberian Government in Omsk soon negotiated the exit of the two countries' forces, and there were no incidents." Assuming there were indeed no incidents?
    • Changed to your suggestion. It seems accurate to say there were no incidents; the source says the Provisional Siberian Government managed to resolve the situation peacefully ... The Chinese and Mongols left.
  • "Later, anti-Soviet efforts in the region proved a convincing success": a bit vague -- efforts by Tuvans? The Tuvan elites? Mongolian and/or Chinese diplomats?
    • Seems to be from the Chinese, per the source: representatives of Chinese trading firms continually penetrated the region and conducted Russophobic propaganda among the Uryankha..., so I clarified Later, anti-Soviet efforts in the region by the Chinese...
  • "the local Soviet government collapsed in July 1918, to be replaced by the Provisional Siberian Government": what does "the local Soviet government" refer to? The only previous government mentioned is the Russian Provisional Government, which presumably would not be described as local.
  • "conducting extensive meetings with the provisional government about the future of the region": you don't give a date for these meetings so it's not clear if this refers to the Russian Provisional Government or the Provisional Siberian Government (Omsk) or both.
    • Looking at the source, it says After the victory of the Red Army in the civil war and the establishment of Soviet power in Siberia, it was Buyan-Badyrgy, as a person with great authority among the population, who conducted lengthy negotiations on the future status of the Uryankhai region with the Siberian Revolutionary Committee. Looking at our article for the Siberian Revolutionary Committee, it seems that was established in 1919, whereas the provisional government events seem to be 1918. I'm wondering if I should move the negotiation part to the next paragraph, but I'm not sure where I'd put it. Thoughts?
      How about putting a note in to explain the problem with the attribution to the SRC that the source gives? When a reliable source says something that appears to be contradictory I think it's often better to let the reader see the contradiction so they can make their own judgement. But is it definite that the source is relating events in 1918, not 1919? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:30, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
      @Mike Christie: I'm not sure if there's necessarily a contradiction, though something should probably be done. There's two main sources I use in that part of the article: Molchanov, who discusses the 1918 events, provisional governments, etc., with a focus on the protectorate rather than Buyan-Badyrgy; and then there's Moskalenko discussing Buyan-Badyrgy. Moskalenko says that Buyan-Badyrgy conducted negotiations with the Siberian Revolutionary Committee (which, based on our Wikipedia article, would've had to have occurred in 1919 – they seem to have been some sort of provisional government as well? Molchanov doesn't appear to talk about the SRC though.), whereas Molchanov doesn't talk about the Buyan-Badyrgy negotiation aspect. For the now, I've changed it to conducting extensive meetings with the Russians about the future of the region. BeanieFan11 (talk) 00:02, 31 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although many Tuvan political and spiritual elite": either make it "elites" or we need "of the" after "many".
    • Done.
  • "advocating for an independent Tuva and the right to sovereignty for the people": what's the difference between these two things?
    • Cut "right to sovereignty".
  • "Tuva.Asia described this as ...": suggest giving the date of this comment -- as it stands a reader might think this was a contemporary opinion.
    • Done.
  • "and was in attendance for a meeting of the TPRP's Central Committee": why do we care that he attended a meeting? Is it to indicate that he was a member of the Central Committee? If so I think we should just say that.
    • Changed to say he was a member of the committee.
  • I'm not sure any change is needed, given that presumably you're using the name the source gives, but FYI per our article the capital was named Hem-Beldir or Kyzyl Hoto during many of the events in the article, rather than just Kyzyl. Do you think these names should be introduced?
    • I'm leaning towards just keeping it as Kyzyl, since I don't see it referred to as "Hem-Beldyr" Or "Kyzyl Hoto" in my sources.
  • "This later led to the establishment of friendly relations with the Soviet Union in 1925": I think you could cut "later" since you give the date.
    • Done.
  • Do we know why he resigned as General Secretary in 1926?
    • No, the source just says In 1926, Buyan-Badyrgy, at his personal request, was relieved of his post as General Secretary.
  • What was the Small Khural?
    • Khural means parliament, I think, so I added parliament in parenthesis.
  • Is Kenin-Lopsan's book fiction, or a historical biography? I ask because it's not cited in the article.
    • I'm not entirely certain – some translations have it as a "biography of Buyan-Badyrgy" and other translations have called it a "historical novel". In any case I wasn't able to find any copies of it, which is why I was unable to cite it.

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:10, 24 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Conditional support. There are a couple of unstruck points left I've replied to above, but as I may be unable to edit for a two or three days I'm going to go ahead and support and will trust you to address those. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:30, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

I kinda think this topic might profit from a specialist reviewer. I can't help but notice "On 22 March, at age 39, he was executed by firing squad without trial or investigation" - to my understanding, the Stalinist preference was to put a show trial or a sham trial and a sham investigation and this claim is sourced to a non-historian source, which makes me wonder if it's wrong on the details. Speaking of, what makes Tuva.Asia a reliable source? I figure that Azzatyk, Russian Centre of Vexillology and Heraldry and Tuva Online might need a similar explanation. Of the bibliography, GScholar'ing leaves only Oidupaa, Alena Andreevna as a source with questions, but I must caution that I can't read either Russian nor Tuvan. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:09, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jo-Jo, I have checked some of the Russian sources. You might find the second part of my review useful in this regard. Best Graham Beards (talk) 09:19, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Azzatyk is written by prominent historian Tyntchtykbek Tchoroev, Tuva Online seems to be one of the only news agencies covering Tuva; Tuva.Asia appears to be similar and seems to have good reporters/authors such as the historian M. S. Baiyr-ool [ru] who wrote one of the Buyan-Badyrgy articles. The Russian Centre seems to be a long-standing research association which is commonly cited on the Russian Wikipedia. It doesn't look like anything controversial is cited to it here. BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:00, 17 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Seems OK, but I kinda think that it might be best to not use news agency sources for historical things (such as the question of whether Mongush received a sham trial or no trial at all); they are typically very fallible for such questions. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:41, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Looking back at my notes, the 2022 journal article stated Without trial or investigation, without evidence, the "leftists" began to deal with their political opponents. In relation to Mongush Buyan-Badyrgy, their illegal actions were motivated by the desire to remove the authoritative leader of Tuva from the political scene forever. Based on the 2007 journal, it doesn't really seem like there was investigation or trial: The Politburo of the Central Committee of the TPRP met on March 22, 1932. Shagdyrzhap, Toka and 15 other people were present at the meeting ... [which] discussed "counterrevolutionary bandit-robbery activities" ... It was decided "to approve the draft resolution of the internal political security, which proposes sentencing them to death under Article 41 of the Criminal Code". Thoughts? BeanieFan11 (talk) 16:41, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I might be reading too much into the tone of the first quoted block, which comes off like a rant (the scare quotes in particular) rather than like a source discussing factual events. The second sounds like it could support something like "effectively sentenced to death by the Politburo" but that might sound too much like proper legal procedure? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:45, 28 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Even if it may sound somewhat biased there, I'd still think it's reliable as published in an academic journal, and there doesn't seem to be anything contradicting the no trial claim. I'm inclined to leave it as it is. Thoughts? BeanieFan11 (talk) 20:16, 30 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well, per your request below, the Russian text at Tuva Asia is pretty straightforward about this:
  • "В марте 1930 г. Ак-Монгуш Буян-Бадыргы был арестован и посажен в тюрьму в Кызыле, чтобы он не стал знаменем борьбы против новой власти." In March 1930 Ak-Mongush Buan-Badyrgy was arrested and imprisoned in Kyzyl so he could not lead resistance to the new government.
  • "22 марта 1932 г. его расстреляли без суда и следствия." On March 22, 1932, he was shot without trial or investigation.
Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 9 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: BeanieFan11 (talk) 17:47, 12 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I have been poking around for other sources and came across this page, by someone called MS Bayyr-ool. I haven't verified that it's a reliable source, but it might be. The author gives citations inline, though I can't tell what he's referring too -- e.g. "(History of Tuva, 2007, Vol. 2: 127)" and "(TsADPOO TsGA RT F.1, op. 1, d. 157, l. 57)" -- and there is also a list of sources at the end, none of which I see used in this article. Bayyr-ool is writing about three different people so not all of these may be relevant, of course. Can you take a look at these and see if they have anything worth including? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:10, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I was recently pinged on checking the Russian sources. What needs to be looked at? Both citations in footnote 2 check out, so far. Daniel Case (talk) 21:27, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jo-Jo Eumerus, see Daniel's offer and comments immediately above. Daniel, thanks very much, I appreciate this. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:40, 6 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I dunno, need second opinions on that "no trial" source. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:32, 7 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The one being discussed above? What footnote would that be? Daniel Case (talk) 23:33, 8 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates&oldid=1321763305"