Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/March 2023

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates‎ | Archived nominations
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 31 March 2023 [1].

David Bentley Hart edit

Nominator(s): Jjhake (talk) 02:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a living American writer, philosopher, religious studies scholar, critic, and Eastern Orthodox theologian born in 1965 noted for his Baroque prose and provocative rhetoric. He has translated the New Testament for Yale University Press and been criticized by other Christian thinkers who consider him heterodox in a variety of ways. Jjhake (talk) 02:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination edit

  • Hi Jjhake, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you. Is the source to text integrity spot check something that someone else will complete automatically, or is it something that another Wikipedia editor needs to complete as they have time and interest? Three other editors provided reviews recently: two peer reviews and one GA review. I could ask some of them if they would be willing to complete a source to text integrity spot check if that would be helpful. Jjhake (talk) 13:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:David_Bentley_Hart_3_Nov_2022_Interview_cropped.png is described as an interview crop - where is it cropped from?
  • File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg: has the permission been verified by VRT? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  1. I recorded this interview with Hart and posted the video content in two places. Most of it is on a video course subscription service where I am the director. A little of it, I posted to my personal YouTube account. Hart shared links to both of these from his Substack newsletter here.
  2. No, I'm not familiar with VRT, should I send them a copy of the email that Hart sent releasing the David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg image into public domain? Jjhake (talk) 11:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: In case helpful here, I've just sent a note to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org that included a full copy of the emails between Hart and myself in which Hart released File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg into the public domain. Jjhake (talk) 13:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Further update regarding Roland image (File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg): Alfred Neumann, a volunteer with with Wikimedia Commons, does not consider my request to David Hart (that he "release this image into the public domain") to be adequate, and I have put David Hart directly in contact with Alfred Neumann in the hopes of getting this verified by VRT. --Jjhake (talk) 17:47, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    David Hart forwarded me Ticket#2023031410014384 that he got in response as he wrote separately to Wikimedia Common about releasing this David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg image file. I'll hope to be able to confirm soon. --Jjhake (talk) 22:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nikkimaria: Thank you the note about the need for VRT verification for File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg. This is now in place. --Jjhake (talk) 12:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SC

Oppose I took a quick spin through (not even an in-depth review), and saw the following problems:

  • "writer, philosopher, religious studies scholar, critic, and Eastern Orthodox theologian": too long and involved
  • "noted for", "known for": these are a jarring way to provide information
  • "Born and raised in Howard County, Maryland": Way too detailed for the lead
  • "a 2nd edition": second, not 2nd
  • The lead overall comes across as a bit hagiographic
  • WP:LQ is something you need to take note of (as well as sorting out the curly quotes that appear frequently)
  • One sentence paragraphs are not good
  • blockquote are for quotes longer than c. 40 words
  • Do we really need to know his wife "owned a soft toy sheep whom she named Beauchamp Cholmondeley Featherstonhaugh." – and if we do, why is this a quote?
  • WP:ELLIPSES is also something you need to take note of
  • some odd capitalisation

I'm going to suggest withdrawing and giving it a good copy edit prior to trying again - SchroCat (talk) 19:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@SchroCat: Extremely helpful feedback. Thank you. This doesn't sound like copy edit work that would require much time. I agree with and could implement the bulk of what you note fairly quickly. This has recently had a GA review and two peer reviews, including by User:Gerda Arendt with some FAC experience. With a little help from these other editors, I think this could be cleaned up shortly. However, I'm new to FAC, and if withdrawing and coming back when cleaned up is best, I'm obviously glad to follow whatever path is prescribed as the best practice. --Jjhake (talk) 20:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
When you say that it won’t take much time, I’ll stress that my comments were from a quick spin, not a full review. Others may differ in their opinion, but this is mine. - SchroCat (talk) 21:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as other's weigh in and as I have the time, I'll start working through the feedback here that seems most straight-forward to me. More of a full review would be a great help as well, of course, regardless of the FAC status. Thank you. Jjhake (talk) 21:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SchroCat: I've made an effort to address the very helpful list of issues from you. Regardless of this FAC process, if you or anyone that you might recommend can give a more complete critique and edit, it would be a great help. Thank you. Jjhake (talk) 11:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I do have a specific question and let me know if this is not the place. Ed Simon writing for the Los Angeles Review of Books in 2022 said that Hart has "thousands of essays, reviews, and papers", and I use this in the lead while only citing further down within the article body. I'd estimate that Hart has well over one thousand essays, reviews, and papers, but "thousands" seems like an exaggeration. What’s the best solution? Cut this specific from the lead? Jjhake (talk) 11:41, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note -- This nom has stalled, with an outstanding suggestion for withdrawal, so I'll be archiving it shortly. I know this went through peer review, so my suggestion moving forward is to consider the FAC mentoring scheme to assist with any future nomination. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:27, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 29 March 2023 [2].

Code of Hammurabi edit

Nominator(s): Emqu (talk) 21:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is for the Code of Hammurabi, which is an iconic text of the ancient Near East and the longest legal text of the period. I rewrote the page two years ago and it remains essentially unchanged. I put it through FAC back then but the process became rather bogged down in personal-preference style edits. I'd love to see it through and I look forward to hearing your views. Emqu (talk) 21:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination edit

  • Hi Emqu, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as you have not yet had a nomination promoted at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check and a review for close paraphrasing to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I found and removed some original research in the "reception outside Assyriology" section. The entire article should be checked for similar issues. (t · c) buidhe 22:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder from Airship edit

  • Hi Emqu, I'll start the review properly this weekend, but I just wanted to comment on the lead's first two paragraphs. At the moment, they're slightly messy, as they seem to lose focus a lot and the second one is rather short (note that WP:LEAD recommends no more than four well-composed paragraphs, emphasis mine).
  • I would combine the two, saying something like: "The Code of Hammurabi is a Babylonian legal text composed c. 1755–1750 BC. Written in the Old Babylonian dialect of Akkadian, purportedly by Hammurabi, sixth king of the First Dynasty of Babylon, it is the longest, best-organised, and best-preserved legal text from the ancient Near East. The text itself was copied and studied by Mesopotamian scribes for over a millennium. The primary copy of the text is inscribed on a basalt stele 2.25 m (7 ft 4+1⁄2 in) tall, which was rediscovered in 1901 at the site of Susa in present-day Iran, where it had been taken as plunder six hundred years after its creation; it now resides in the Louvre Museum." What do you think? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Buidhe
  • The first paragraph of "Mosaic, Graeco-Roman, and modern" is arranged in a confusing way. If there is a consensus as you state in the last part of the paragraph, put that first, then mention any minority views specifically attributed to their holders, not something vague like "some" or "others".
  • There are some issues with editorializing. For example, "even Van De Mieroop acknowledges"—it does not seem verifiable that his position is particularly divergent as the text suggests. There are MOS:WTW issues throughout.
  • Also, I would suggest reducing the number of quotations and mentions of different scholars to aid readability.
  • I have some skepticism about how sources are used and found some failed verification issues, which I flagged in the article. For example, a broad generalization about "all insurance" needs a more recent and stronger source than a book published in 1915. You need a different source than Wolfram von Soden to assert that Wolfram von Soden "proved" anything. Etc. I am finding these issues throughout the article so I am leaning oppose. (t · c) buidhe 23:03, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • File:P1050763_Louvre_code_Hammurabi_face_rwk.JPG needs a tag for the original work. Ditto File:F0182_Louvre_Code_Hammourabi_Bas-relief_Sb8_rwk.jpg, File:Mosaic_of_Justinianus_I_-_Basilica_San_Vitale_(Ravenna).jpg
  • File:Tranchée_de_Jacques_de_Morgan_sur_l'acropole_de_Susa_en_Iran_(Musée_du_Louvre,_Arch_AO_2267).jpg: when and where was this first published?
  • File:Enki(Ea).jpg is tagged as lacking author info and needs a US tag
  • File:Napoleon_Bonaparte.jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:13, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Gog the Mild edit

Recusing.

Apologies, but this seems far from FAC-ready, so I am opposing and suggesting withdrawal for further work. The points above seem on the money to me. A partial review (not by me) has led to a number of tags being added, which I agree with. As just one example of the many issues which need addressing, cite 181 bundles eight works, none with page numbers[!], to cover two sentences, with no indication as to which cover the first sentence, which the second and which, if any, both. This is a great start but needs input from an editor or editors who understands the requirements of FAC. @FAC coordinators: Gog the Mild (talk) 12:22, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose. Sorry, but there too many issues in terms of sourcing and referencing to pass muster here. - SchroCat (talk) 22:36, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 22 March 2023 [3].

The 30th edit

Nominator(s): ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 04:54, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

We're dealing with an article about a Billie Eilish song; after months away from FAC, I am back. This song is quite a personal one to Eilish, as it deals with the teeny details of a friend's car accident -- this caused a traffic that Eilish found herself stuck in, twisting the knife further -- and her reactions as the events unfolded. Ready for any and all comments. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 04:54, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: should be merged into Guitar Songs along with the only other song on that EP, "TV".—indopug (talk) 08:11, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Indopug, respectfully, I greatly disagree with this assessment; I invite you to take a good, hard look at WP:NSONG and to continue this discussion in Talk:Guitar Songs because this is way outside the purview of a FAC. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 11:33, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
From NSONGS, "If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created" — skimming the titles of the references used here, all the coverage of "The 30th" seems to be alongside "TV", in the context of Guitar Songs.
Also the three articles are pretty short at ~1500 words each, and many of these words are repetitions of each other. You can easily combine all that info into one comprehensive EP article, which will still probably be only ~3000 words long at most—still very short.—indopug (talk) 15:42, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Indopug, that is why I invited you to a discussion in the Guitar songs talk page, because I dissect precisely everything you mentioned right here. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?" 02:33, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @FAC coordinators: after being successfully convinced to make the merge in the talk pages, I would like to nominate the EP for FAC instead of this song. Will moving this page be more optimal, or should this be procedurally closed and a new nom started? ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 "Will you call me?"
    📝 "Will you hang me out to dry?"     11:26, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Hi YP, we should treat this as a withdrawal and archive it, which I'll do shortly. Generally we require a two-week hiatus between noms following an archive but given the circumstances I'm happy to waive that if you want to nominate the EP article. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:41, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 21 March 2023 [4].

1986 Tour de France edit

Nominator(s): Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the 1986 edition of the Tour de France, the most prestigious cycling race in the world. It featured a fierce battle between teammates Bernard Hinault and Greg LeMond, who would become the first American winner of the race. After my nomination of 1998 Tour de France failed to pick up any responses, I am hoping for more engagement here. Zwerg Nase (talk) 11:57, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural note -- although the nominator had another FAC archived just now, it had no comments so the coords are waiving the usual two-week break between such noms... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:23, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ian Rose: Thank you! Zwerg Nase (talk) 16:29, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments edit

  • "Greg LeMond of La Vie Claire won the race" - maybe "Greg LeMond of the La Vie Claire team won the race" so it doesn't read like La Vie Claire is the town he comes from?
  • "It was the first ever victory for a rider outside of Europe." - eh? He won in Europe. Or do you mean "It was the first ever victory for a rider born outside of Europe."....?
  • "Several attacks during the race" - they attacked each other?
  • "Stage 12 saw Hinault attack with Pedro Delgado" - more attacking? Really not sure what this means
  • "Hinault [...] was caught and dropped" - what was he dropped off? There's some really confusing wording being used here
  • "One of cycling's Grand Tours, the Tour consisted of 23 stages, beginning with a prologue in Boulogne-Billancourt and concluded on the Champs-Élysées in Paris" => "One of cycling's Grand Tours, the Tour consisted of 23 stages, beginning with a prologue in Boulogne-Billancourt and concluding on the Champs-Élysées in Paris"
  • That's what I got on the lead. Back for more later! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 17:09, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More comments edit

  • "In the Spring" - MOS:SEASONS recommends not using seasons
  • "having Hinault, who he expected to take an early lead" => "having Hinault, whom he expected to take an early lead"
  • "The race route for the 1986 edition of the Tour de France was unveiled on 8 October 1985 by both Jacques Goddet and Félix Lévitan." - add a few words to explain who these guys are/were
  • Prologue seems to be linked in an image caption but not in the prose
  • "which he reached in time but the yellow jersey was lost" - first mention of the jersey, could do with a link and a brief explanation of what it is
  • "from his teammate Marie, who he now led by six seconds" => "from his teammate Marie, whom he now led by six seconds"
  • "Mathieu Hermans, (Seat–Orbea) and" - comma's in the wrong place
  • "Pedro Delgado (pictured in 2016) won stage 12, but later dropped out after his mother passed away." => "Pedro Delgado (pictured in 2016) won stage 12, but later dropped out after his mother died."
  • "Sensing that the French public, clearly favouring Hinault, made LeMond nervous, the former led all the way up the climb" - this doesn't make sense grammatically. I think what you mean is "Sensing that the French public clearly favoured Hinault made LeMond nervous; the former led all the way up the climb"
  • Think that's all I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:42, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note edit

This has been open for more than three weeks and has yet to pick up a 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) 13:12, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that this has timed out. The usual two-week hiatus will apply. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • Don't use fixed px size
  • File:Route_of_the_1986_Tour_de_France.png would benefit from a legend. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:20, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 17 March 2023 [5].

Basiliscus (Caesar) edit

Nominator(s): Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:53, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Basiliscus, possibly the most confusing Byzantine character of mine to date: not only does he share a name with one of the most important other characters of the time, his great-uncle Emperor Basiliscus, but he also might be the same person as the dead son of Emperor Zeno, whom his great-uncle usurped. Probably not though. Probably. After Emperor Basiliscus quickly and effectively alienated every ally he had, and a few that he didn't, his nephew Armatus, the father of our Basiliscus, conspired to restore Zeno to the throne. In exchange for this, our young Basiliscus was made caesar and heir, and renamed Leo, before Zeno decided not to let Armatus, who had already betrayed two emperors, one of them himself, stick around. Basiliscus was placed in the monastery as a result of his familial relationship with Zeno's wife, Ariadne, where he seems to have lived his life out in peace. His existence as a former caesar, bearing the same name as the dead son of Zeno, confused the populace of Constantinople suitably that they seem to have invented a narrative that they were one and the same, by means of a vast conspiracy. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 00:53, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • The article's only current image is tagged as having disputed factual accuracy and lacking sources
    Of course... I've replaced the image with a sourced one. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there nothing that could illustrate the subject? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:43, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    @Nikkimaria: Not that I could find; it seems coins of him are very rare; I've not even been able to find pictures of them in numismatic books, much less images with acceptable copyright status. Do you think I should add a coin of someone related to the narrative, like Zeno? Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 03:22, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    You could, but I don't think that's necessary. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:58, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps a map of the empire at the time? Eg this one could be cropped down. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • Withdrawn as requested. Given the minimal commentary so far the usual two-week hiatus is waived.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 16 March 2023 [6].

Leonard W. Murray edit

Nominator(s): Friendofleonard (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a significant Canadian military figure, Rear-Admiral Leonard W. Murray, Commander-in-Chief of the Northwest Atlantic, architect of the Battle of the Atlantic, and the only Canadian to have commanded a Theatre of War in WW1 or WW2. It is proposed for featuring on the anniversary of the Battle of the Atlantic on 8 May 2023. Friendofleonard (talk) 19:30, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination edit

  • Hi Friendofleonard, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you Gog the Mild. As you can see the article is very substantially referenced, and has benefited from the detailed (and much appreciated) review by Hawkeye, who recommended additional sources be identified for several statements. I think that the tagging follows the text-source integrity guidelines - but that would of course be good to check. Some of the references are to documents in National or Navy archives and not to other published work - but I do not think they are "original research" in that they simply provide evidence for statements (like the dates when medals were awarded) or quotes. I obtained peer review by three Canadian naval historians, and I have done a lot of work tidying up the article (SchroCat, Hawkeye) for format, links, bibliography etc. The only thing left to do is to review the copyright links recommended by Nikkimaria. I will let you know when that has been done. Friendofleonard (talk) 15:13, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    All of the recommended edits have been completed, copyrights checked, and the page has been added to the FA queue for recommended publication on 8 May. Please let me know if there is anything missing or out of place. Friendofleonard (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Passing comment. I’ve closed the PR properly and made the correction on the article talk page too. My oppose comment last time stated the lead was too short. It still is. It doesn’t summarise the article, which it should. I don’t fully grasp all the differences between British and Canadian English, but I would have thought one served on a ship, not in one. - SchroCat (talk) 20:17, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the suggestion regarding the intro section, and for properly removing the PR. On the "in" vs "on", I did initially put "on" but a Canadian naval historian suggested that I change them all to "in" which is what they say in the navy - apparently. Friendofleonard (talk) 04:59, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you want to see a good and complete lead, have a look at William D. Leahy, another article at FAC on a naval officer. It gives the reader a potted summary of the whole article, not just one aspect and is one you should look at before expanding Murray's lead. - SchroCat (talk) 20:45, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks SchroCat. It was useful to look at Leahy and the lead has now been further built up. I must admit I thought the lead was supposed to be more of a two-sentence header than a full summary. Friendofleonard (talk) 14:19, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Don't use fixed px size
  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Murry,_Admiral_L.W..jpg needs a US tag and a publication date. Ditto File:Midshipmen-royal-naval-college-halifax.jpg
  • File:HMS_Iron_Duke_(1912).jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published?
  • File:Commodore_Leonard_Murray_c_1942.jpg: who is believed to be the copyright holder? Ditto File:Murray_and_Muselier_c_1942.jpg, File:Murray_Building_S-15_CFB_Halifax.jpg
  • File:Photo_of_the_Admiral_Murray_memorial_in_Nova_Scotia.jpg: what's the copyright status of the plaque?
  • File:Order_of_the_Bath_UK_ribbon.svg is too simple to warrant copyright protection. Ditto File:Order_of_the_British_Empire_(Military)_Ribbon.png, File:Ribbon_-_1914_Star.png, File:Ribbon_-_British_War_Medal.png, File:Ribbon_-_War_Medal.png, File:Canadian_Volunteer_Service_Medal_BAR_2.svg, File:UK_King_George_VI_Coronation_Medal_ribbon.svg, File:UK_King_George_V_Silver_Jubilee_Medal_ribbon.svg, File:Legion_Honneur_Commandeur_ribbon.svg
  • File:Croix_de_guerre_1939-1945_with_palm_France_-_ribbon_bar.svg: what's the copyright status of the original work? Ditto File:Haakon_VIIs_frihetskors_stripe.svg. Nikkimaria (talk) 18:56, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for all the review suggestions. I will get onto it over the weekend. I might come back to you for some advice although I will try to figure it out for myself. One of the complications is that many of the historical photos were in my family's possession and then handed over by my family to the Canadian government, which "owns" them now. Their original authors are not known (and the historical pix are over 70 years old). As for the medals, these were added by a different editor and I know nothing at all about their origins. But I will see what I can do for sure. Friendofleonard (talk) 04:05, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed pix sizes removed, alt text added, and all the copyrights have been reviewed and cleaned up. Except the medals. All the medal images are from existing wikicommons records that I do not manage. Thanks Nikkimaria Friendofleonard (talk) 12:55, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If the images are to be used in this article, they do need to be tagged correctly, even if you weren't the original uploader.
A bunch of the other images are still missing publication dates. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Hawkeye7 edit

Lead

  • "playing a key role in negotiations with the USA" See MOS:NOTUSA
  • Lead is too short. Suggest adding:
    His graduation from the RNC, RNSC and IDC
  • Something about his interwar service
    The Saint Pierre and Miquelon and the Halifax incidents

- All done, although the St Pierre and Miquelon incident is not really a central part of the career, it is more of a human interest anecdote Friendofleonard (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Early years to the end of World War I

- done

  • Consider making the quote a regular quotation. ie without quotation marks or the final attribution.

- I think I prefer to leave it as a quote to match the style of 3 or 4 other quotes in the text, not all of which are quotes by Murray himself. Willing to reconsider if this is not good practice Friendofleonard (talk) 14:51, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Immediately after graduating in January 1913,[4] Murray first served as a Midshipman in the Royal Navy vessel HMS Berwick" Delete "first" as a tautology; decapitalise "midshipman"; link "Royal Navy"; comma after "Berwick"

- done

  • Can we say what type of ships these were?

- added, and added also to all the other ships in the artricle. Willing to revert if this over-encumbers the text

  • "the newly elected Government of Sir Robert Borden" This is unclear; wasn't he elected in 1911? Was he knighted at the time referred to? He wasn't knighted until June 1914. (Aside: I never knew Canadian PMs were knighted.)

- done

  • Suggest splitting paragraph at "On 14 August 1914". Consider creating a World War I section.

- done - good idea thanks

  • "Midshipman Murray" Just "Murray"

- done

  • "HMCS Niobe" Only link and add the "HMCS" on first appearance.

- done (if I understand correctly, only linking on first appearance and elsewhere just appearing as the ship name in italics without HMCS or link)

  • " Acting Sub-Lieutenant" De-capitalise but link "acting sub-lieutenant"

- done

  • "Lieutenant" Same.

- done

  • "as Lieutenant" Wasn't he already?

- fixed - he was actually promoted in Jan 1917, earlier he was a full sub-lieutenant

  • Suggest splitting the paragraph at "After HMCS Niobe"

- done

  • "set up troop convoys across the Atlantic to outwit German U-boats." I don't think that is how the convoy system worked. Rewrite this.

- indeed, rephrased

  • Link "Scuttling of the German fleet at Scapa Flow"

- done

  • Rear admiral or rear-admiral?

- changed to Rear Admiral when it is a person's title (caps) and rear admiral when the generic position is described

Between the wars

  • Again, for each ship, state what time of ship it was

- done

  • Link "Captain", "Master of the Fleet"

- done

  • Split paragraph at "Thus it was that,"

-done

-done

  • " In January 1925, Murray was promoted to lieutenant-commander ... In 1927, Murray returned to the UK" Avoid starting consecutive sentences with the same words. Suggest "He returned to the UK in 1927"

-done

-done

  • " In August 1938, in the middle of a final year at the Imperial Defence College," Wait, you haven't said he entered the IDC. You could say more about this. There were two representatives from Canada each year.

- edited - it seems that this was a one-year course since we he was aboard Iron Duke until Jan 1938

  • " as a Captain" lowercase. Sigh.

-done, sorry

World War II and the Battle of the Atlantic

  • "1939-42" -> "1939-1942" "1942–45" -> "1942–1945" (MOS:RANGES)
  • How large was the RCN in 1939?

- info added

  • Unlink "Royal Navy"

- done

  • "strategy that was eventually so successful" Footnote required here

- added

- done

  • " Joint Chiefs of Staff meetings" What Joint Chiefs of Staff are we talking about here?

- good catch: clarified it was a meeting of the two chiefs of staff

  • Split the paragraph after "until the spring of 1944"

- done

  • Link "Canadian High Commissioner to the United Kingdom"

- done

  • State who Lester B. Pearson was

- done

  • Lowercase "Commodore"

- done

  • "to serve convoy duty" -> "to serve on convoy duty"

- done

- done

  • "planning of an Atlantic strategy" Footnote required

- added

  • " American Admiral Arthur L. Bristol" "Rear Admiral"

- done

  • "in order to retain seniority in relation to Admiral Bristol" This does not make sense. How does promoting him to the same rank "retain seniority"? (Also delete "Admiral")

- clarified

  • "the Free French Admiral Muselier" -> "Free French Vice Admiral Émile Muselier"

- done

- done

  • "pushing the Vichy government into an openly pro-German stance." Reference required for this paragraph!

- reference added

  • Muselier's claim to have nothing to do with it is extraordinary (ie utterly unbelievable) and will require a better source

- another good catch. The text was ambiguous and now clarified. Muselier always admitted he did it, what he said was that Murray had nothing to do with it

- removed

  • Move the Atlantic Convoy image to the right to avoid sandwiching

- done

  • Murray was made Commander-in-Chief Canadian Northwest Atlantic." You need to repeat the claim in the Lead that he was "the only Canadian to command an Allied theatre of operations during World War II". With a reference.

- bith added

  • Link " First Sea Lord"

- done

  • "167 merchant ships (1,500,000 long tons (1,500,000 t))." I don't think this is correct. I think this was Deadweight tonnage

- reference to tonnage not verified and removed

  • "VE Day and early retirement" Suggest indenting to place under the Second World War section

- done

  • "Naval Board of Inquiry under Admiral Brodeur" "Rear-Admiral Victor Brodeur"
  • Consider adding his CBE citation

- Considered, but I think it is a bit long and would not really fit here in the text (since it was awarded much earlier in his career). Also, if I add one then why not all?

Later years

  • "to care for his ailing wife, who died in 1962" Did they have any children?

- added references to his two sons - who were both Royal Navy officers

  • His Croix de guerre (France) is in the infobox but not the article. Sources required for some of his other decorations. But note that this medal bar is the only source for some of the decorations. I would remove the medal bar, which adds nothing, leaving only the table.

- I have cleaned up all the medal citations and award dates (where known) based on his service records. I prefer to keep the medal arrangement as it matches the uniform in the War Museum, which is kind of cool I think Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:45, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Hawkeye, I will get onto it early this coming week. Friendofleonard (talk) 22:37, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

Notes

  • fn 21, 30, 31, 53, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 63 Publisher?
  • fn 22, 50, 59, 66, 67, 68 Source?
  • fn 27 Page number?
  • fn 30, 38, 60 Access date?
  • fn 32. Should be "pp. 9-10"
  • fn 48. Remove the book details - they are down below. But we do need the page number.
  • fn 64, 65 Move this into the text.

References

  • Barnett, Correlli, "The Partnership Between Canada and Britain in Winning the Battle of the Atlantic". Add URL to the article (https://scholars.wlu.ca/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1365&context=cmh). Link Correlli Barnett. Add pages (pp. 5-18) Put article name in quotes and Italicize the journal name instead.
  • Fry, Major D.G., MURRAY, The Sentinel, Volume 8, Issue 4, April 1972. Not used in the article - remove
  • German, Tony, The sea is at our gates: The History of the Canadian Navy Title case.
  • Glover, William, "Royal Colonial or Royal Canadian Navy?" Chapter name in quotes.
  • Lund is not used. Remove or move to a "Further reading" section.
  • Milner. Chapter name in quotes. Use title case.
  • Sarty is not used. Remove or move to a "Further reading" section.

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:07, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All done. Many many thanks for your diligent review - I have learned a lot about the coding and hope that everything is now super sharp Friendofleonard (talk) 13:58, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Harrias edit

Too many immediate issues for me on this one.

  • Lots of WP:OVERLINKing.
  • Some weird phrasing, such as "in armoured cruiser HMS Essex."
  • Quite a lot of seemingly unsourced content, as no inline citations provided.
  • I find the quality of the prose to be below that required for Featured status.
  • The citations are poorly formatted, often omitting multiple pieces of information.

Should sweeping improvements be made, I'd be happy to come back for a more detailed review, but in the current state I simply think this article isn't ready for the FA process. Harrias (he/him) • talk 19:01, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Harrias for these comments. Some of the elements you have signaled were added as a result of recommendations from other reviewers, especially the addition of links to naval ranks and the inclusion (and linking) of ship types – like the “armoured cruiser HMS Essex.” This might be what has increased the sense of overlinking. Regarding inline citations, there are about 80, but more can certainly be added. However I would want to avoid looking as if there are too many inline citations (as well as too much overlinking). Could you help me understand what is the desired density of inline citations, and also give examples of poor formatting (missing information)? And finally, regarding the quality of the prose, I would definitely appreciate your concrete advice on this. Revisions have been made as a result of detailed review by Hawkeye, and I do not know if you were looking at the latest version of the article or at an archived version that was frozen for the FA review process. I have been over the article so many times now that I think a strong external editor might be the best way forward. Thanks again Harrias, and I look forward to your further advice on these elements. Friendofleonard (talk) 12:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose from Ian edit

Recusing coord duties to review, I must also regretfully oppose, at this stage primarily on prose, tone, and referencing. It looks to me that too much emphasis has been placed on getting this to TFA by a certain date and this has resulted in the article being under-prepared for FAC. I realise this was put up for PR and got no comments but then actively seeking comment from around the traps, or taking to MilHist A-Class Review, would've been better than coming straight to FAC. I started copyediting the lead but stopped as I think it needs a better going-over. Some specifics:

  • From there, he was reassigned to command positions on Canada's east coast, initially in command of the Newfoundland Escort Force, then Commanding Officer Atlantic Coast. -- "reassigned" suggests failure in the previous position but I doubt this is meant; "command positions" tends to obviate the need for "command of" and "Commanding Officer".
  • Following the Atlantic Convoy Conference of March 1943, Murray was appointed Commander-in-Chief, Canadian Northwest Atlantic, and successfully led Canadian, British, American and other Allied naval and air forces to victory in the Battle of the Atlantic. -- "successfully" is redundant if the efforts resulted in victory.
  • Three or four block quotes from the subject seems like overkill and over-reverence. I certainly don't think we need an entire section devoted to a quote.
  • One of these block quotes is introduced with the statement his continuing interest in the offensive merit of convoys over patrols is evident: -- this looks like essay language, inappropriate for an encyclopedia.
  • Several paragraphs don't end in citations, and that needs to be rectified.
  • We shouldn't have a citation on a header as we do with Awards and decorations -- it looks like the source is cited in the section anyway.
  • This is not an actionable objection because AFAIK there's no rule against it in WP but the medal bars and ribbons in the Awards and decorations really do seem more appropriate for a children's book than an encyclopedia. Obviously the above-and-beyond-the-call-of-duty awards are important but they appear in the infobox and are mentioned (or should be) in the main body. The service or campaign medals are not required as they are given for being in a certain place at a certain time and that service should be covered in the main body as well. In any case we don't need the images -- if people want to see those they can follow the links to the medal articles.
  • Lastly, and this is an actionable objection if the awards table stays because of incorrect/misleading terminology, everything from 1914-15 Star to Canadian Volunteer Service Medal inclusive is not a decoration but a campaign or service medal. Similarly, the two King George medals are commemoration medals, not decorations.

I'm going to pause for breath there. I emphasise that the above comments are not exhaustive but based on a fairly quick walk-through. I think it would be best to withdraw this and go back to PR or even better seek a FAC mentor as a first-time nominator. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Rose I agree that it is more important to get the article right than to get it quick, so let us set aside the target date for publication (there is always 8 May 2024) and focus on the best process from here on. For peer review, although there were not a lot of peer review comments through wikipedia, I was able to secure offline reviews by three eminent Canadian naval historians, including one of Murray's biographers and the current official naval historian, and they have confirmed the accuracy of the content. So from here it is, as you suggest, about presentation, tone, style etc. I would be very happy to be coached by a FAC mentor - and as this is a military topic, I would be grateful if you could suggest how I might connect with a mentor who specialises in this domain. I would also be happy to put this up for MilHist A-Class Review. The other items you have signaled in your comments can be dealt with quite easily I feel, like the citations, the overuse of blockquotes, and the medals - but not the prose and tone. I would appreciate your advice on the best way forward (especially obtaining a mentor and WilHist review). Many thanks. Friendofleonard (talk) 12:44, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Friendofleonard: - per Ian Rose and Harrias's comments above, I'm going to go ahead and close this. WP:MILHIST/ACR is a good place to get pre-FAC attention for MILHIST articles, although it can be a bit slow at times. If you decide to put it up for ACR, I can try to take a look at this article, although it'll probably be about a week or so because I'm going to be offline this weekend and busy at the beginning of next week. Hog Farm Talk 16:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 16 March 2023 [7].

Crash Bandicoot (video game) edit

Nominator(s): Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a 1996 video game that kicked off an ongoing franchise and put its developer Naughty Dog on the map. The page had previously gone through a peer review and FA nomination a little over a year ago, but didn't make the cut due to a lack of input. I frankly blame my own poor timing for that on account of the nomination being made just before the holiday season, which would naturally have diverted everyone's attention. Now, having waited for a more opportune time of year, here's hoping for better luck this go-round. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 00:37, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination edit

  • Hi Cat's Tuxedo, and welcome back to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:32, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by ProtoDrake edit

I've checked over the image licensing, and everything seems to be in order. I am a little sceptical about using a video for gameplay given some recent discussions in the VG WikiProject space on the subject, so that might come up and you might need to find a screenshot. Nevertheless, I think this is a nominal Pass. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:45, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@ProtoDrake: Thanks. Whatever the outcome of that discussion may be (if there is one), I got a backup image on hand just in case. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 04:27, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Coordinator comment - I'm sorry, but at about three weeks in without any general supports, this candidacy will have to be closed if there isn't a significant movement towards a consensus to promote over the next few days. Hog Farm Talk 02:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie edit

I hate to see an article archived for lack of comments, particularly twice in a row, so I took a look. I think there's some imprecision in the language. Just from the lead:

  • "The game's premise chronicles the creation of the titular Crash": the game chronicles Crash's creation; the game's premise is the creation of Crash. And I don't think you need 'titular'; it's not wrong but it's a bit ungainly and it's not like the reader can't figure out the connection.
  • "Uplift" is a science fiction jargon word; I'm familiar with it but for the non-sf-aficionado we need plainer language. in the lead at least.
  • "The story follows Crash as he aims to prevent Cortex's plans for world domination": one doesn't prevent a plan, one foils or opposes it.
  • "some levels showcase forward-scrolling and side-scrolling perspectives": "showcase" seems the wrong word: as a verb it means to make use of an opportunity to show off the good qualities of something. And forward-scrolling is not linked; I assume this refers to the scenes where Crash has to escape from a rolling boulder? It's unusual for a video-game character to run towards the player; I think this is clearer in the body, where you say it's the reverse of the usual perspective.
  • "set a goal to create a character-based action-platform game from a three-dimensional perspective, having observed the graphical trend in video games during a cross-country road trip". The source has "Jason and I had been debating our next game for months, but the three-day drive from Boston to LA provided ample opportunity. Having studied arcade games intensely (yeah, in 1994 they were still relevant) we couldn’t help but notice that 2 or 3 of the leading genres had really begun making the transition into full 3D rendering." This doesn't mean they studied the arcade games during the road trip, which would be pretty hard to do. And I think it would be worth connecting the dots for the reader: the road trip was because of the publishing deal, rather than some random trip -- they were moving to LA to work for UIS.
  • "Production ran under the working title Willy the Wombat": not an error, but I see the sources have both "Willie" and "Willy" -- are you confident this is the original spelling? And I'm not sure what "Production ran" means; the body says that was the working name of the character, not the game, but even if the two things are considered to be the same I don't know what "production" refers to. Do you mean "The working name of the game's lead character during development was Willy the Wombat"?
Both the web-archived and commercially published drafts of the production bible demonstrate the spelling to be "Willy", so it's fair to say that's the official spelling. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Joe Pearson and Charles Zembillas were hired to help formulate the game's characters and story": suggest "create" as simpler than "formulate".

I stopped reading the lead at this point and scanned the rest of the article, and found more issues:

  • "Donkey Kong Country was particularly influential in stirring the pair's curiosity as to how such a game could function in three dimensions." The source has 'They specifically loved the Super Nintendo smash-hit Donkey Kong Country. “We were like, ‘how would this work in 3D?’”' I don't think the source supports "particularly influential in stirring the pair's curiosity".
  • "The basic technology for the game and the Crash Bandicoot series as a whole was created somewhere near Gary, Indiana, and the rough game theory was designed near Colorado. Soon afterward, Gavin and Rubin discarded a design for Al O. Saurus and Dinestein, a side-scrolling video game based on time travel and scientists genetically merged with dinosaurs." The source has "Somewhere near Gary, Indiana, the driving technology behind the Crash Bandicoot series is born. By Colorado, a rough game theory is designed. The previous game design, "Al O. Saurus and Dinestein" based on side scrolling, time traveling, scientists genetically merged with dinosaurs, is thrown out." This is too closely paraphrased, and in any case I think you've got the order wrong -- the source mentions the discarded game design last, but it seems clear it was discarded because of the creation of the new design, so it's simultaneous, not sequential. I also think this sort of tongue-in-cheek summarization (i.e. see the source's crack about littering in the next sentence) shouldn't be treated as if it were a precise history. For example, it's not clear what they mean by "driving technology": probably the ideas for it, but surely not any actual code.
Given how vague the "driving technology" part is, I think it might be best to just omit that bit. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Because the main character was Tasmanian, it was decided that the game would take place on a mysterious island where every possible type of environment could be found, with the added reasoning that an evil genius like Cortex would require an island stronghold." The source has "Given that “Willie” was Tasmanian we set him on a mysterious island where every possible kind of environment lurked. Evil geniuses like Dr. Cortex require island strongholds." This is much too close paraphrasing.
  • "The character Ripper Roo was created to humorously demonstrate the dangers of the Cortex Vortex, as well as provide an opportunity for Naughty Dog's animators to practice overlapping action." The source has "Ripper Roo's character was created to show the dangers of the Cortex Vortex...in a humorous way. He also provided a great opportunity to use overlapping action in animation." Again too closely paraphrased, and again slightly inaccurate -- the word "practice" isn't supported by the source. Or if the intended meaning is "implement", it's not clear.

Oppose. I'm stopping there; if randomly choosing paragraphs to review keeps finding these issues, I think more work is needed before this is ready. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: I've addressed all the aforementioned points. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 01:56, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • More than three weeks in and no general supports, but an open oppose. I am archiving this nomination for improvements to be made off-FAC. The usual two-week hiatus will apply.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 14 March 2023 [8].

Ice shows produced by Yuzuru Hanyu edit

Nominator(s): Henni147 (talk) 13:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the self-produced ice shows of Japanese figure skater and two-time Olympic champion Yuzuru Hanyu. With Prologue (2022) and Gift (2023), he challenged the concept of a solo ice show and became the first skater to perform at the Tokyo Dome, one of Japan's largest and most prestigious entertainment venues, in front of a record ice show audience of 35,000 spectators.

Notes:
  • This article is part of a larger series about Hanyu, with the sub-pages about his career achievements (FL in 2021) and Olympic seasons (FA in 2022) being already promoted to featured class in the last two years. Our author team has set up a task force page to coordinate the work on Hanyu's series with the goal to improve it to a featured topic.
  • The users Apqaria (talk · contribs), Marika yuzu (talk · contribs), and pep_on helped out with research and writing for this article. Marika-san was also present in the venues at multiple shows and uploaded pictures to Commons from those days.
  • All online sources have been archived at the Wayback Machine. The readable prose size of the article is currently 19 kB, and it is uniform in formatting with the Olympic seasons and career achievements sub-page (incl. the infobox and citation system). The tables for the shows Continues with Wings and Notte Stellata are planned to be expanded with the programs of the guest skaters as soon as reliable sources are available.
  • This article is not expected to be updated over the next months, with Hanyu being scheduled for other events until the end of June. It is uncertain how many shows he will produce in the next decade, but we structured the article in a way that it's flexible towards possible splits (in solo and ensemble shows for example).
  • This article was mentioned in the DYK column on the mainpage last month.

Henni147 (talk) 13:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sorry. I am not satisfied the prose is at FA level. I made an edit to remove some redundancies [9], but there are other parts that are hard to understand ("challenged the concept of a solo ice show for the first time" and "with a duration of 90 minutes per day" - why per day?). I suggest and a fresh copy-edit focusing on redundancies and non-idiomatic expressions. Graham Beards (talk) 14:40, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Graham Beards: Thank you very much for your adjustments. Regarding your questions:
  • With the addition "per day", we wanted to clarify that shows which were held on more than one day like Prologue (five days in total), lasted 90 minutes per day, not in total. But if you feel that this is clear from the context, we can remove that info.
  • The concept of a solo or one-man ice show is uncharged territory in the sport of figure skating. Hanyu was very probably the first skater in history to produce a solo show of 90 minutes length or more, but there is no source that explicitely confirms it, so we decided to go with the wording "he challenged the concept of a solo ice show [for the first time in his career]". If this makes the wording more clear, I can add it to the article.
Could you name other cases of redundancies or idiomatic expressions? I will try to fix them all. Thank you very much. Henni147 (talk) 15:33, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your response. I think the "per day" is redundant, you would not say a Broadway show was a thousand or so hours long because there was more than one performance! If the solo show was uncharted territory, (you wrote "uncharged"), a better explanation is needed. I am not going to list all the issues I see, nor am I expected to do so by the FAC coordinators. It would be better for you to request a copy-edit by someone new to the article who can bring some strategic distance to the prose. I also suggest that you withdraw this nomination while this is done. Graham Beards (talk) 16:13, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Graham Beards: I apologize for the typo. If you feel that the prose text does not meet the required standards, I can ask for a copy-edit. How can I withdraw a nomination? Henni147 (talk) 16:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
You can request a withdrawal on this page and a copy-edit here Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests. Graham Beards (talk) 16:27, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Graham Beards: Update: Before I request a withdrawal, I would be very grateful to hear your opinion about the latest changes I've made (to have a feedback if we are on the right way). That would be very helpful. I discussed the oppose with our author team, and we'd like to know in which aspects the article doesn't meet the FAC criteria in specific. Redundancies and idiomatic expressions alone should not justify an immediate oppose. Such issues can be fixed quickly. If there are any content-related questions, we will address those as well. Our team has been working relentlessly on this article since December, and this effort should not be in vain. Henni147 (talk) 20:25, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments I tend to agree that this article could benefit from a copyedit, preferably by someone who's not so close to the subject, and that it's not yet ready for FA promition, but I'd like to go on the record that this is yet another example of the higher scrutiny that figure skating articles and bios tend to go through. For example, the above request that Hanyu's importance and notability is explained isn't something that was expected of the ancillary articles about Michael Jordon. I suggest that when this article returns to FAC, that the nominators bring this up as an argument against the objection. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What request? I think you might mean the request below. Graham Beards (talk) 18:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

John M Wolfson edit

I'll have to agree with Graham here and also oppose. Your changes were largely unnecessary and besides Graham's points. More importantly, I don't know who Yuzuru Hanyu is, and besides two-time Olympic champion the article fails to explain his background appropriately. I know there is already an article on him, but I need to know who he is and what he's done in order to fully appreciate the significance of these works. I also don't see much in the way of how ice skating, Olympic or professional, works. Also, while the article mentions audience records, there's nothing on how the critics (if there even is such a thing in non-Olympic ice skating) received this foray. To be quite honest, I wouldn't even approve this for GA at this time. Best of luck in your future work with this! – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 00:51, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@John M Wolfson: Thank you very much for your feedback. Regarding Hanyu's background: Multiple skaters, news outlets, and other experts made the claim for him as the greatest and most complete (or well-rounded) figure skater in history. He was the first male single skater to win all major senior and junior titles and scored 19 world records in the course of his competitive career (amateur level). According to latest numbers from Google, he was the most searched winter sports athlete besides snowboarder Shaun White and the sixth most searched athlete across all sports in 2022. His following and economic impact are on an unprecedented scale for a niche sport like figure skating, and with his latest solo show Gift (professional level), he has elevated figure skating as a performing art form to the level of major rock pop concerts, which was long considered unthinkable. It is difficult to find typical ratings or information about grossings for that reason, but that doesn't make the accomplishment less notable. However, we can add more critical responses in- and outside Japan. That should be doable. I can also write an introductory "background" section with the information mentioned above, and I will take a closer look at the structure of comparable articles like The Fame Ball Tour as suggested by user Yolo4A4Lo. That being said, I will withdraw the nomination here and address all noted issues of the article, including a full copy-edit. Henni147 (talk) 08:20, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That all sounds wonderful! Can't wait to see this article when it's improved and back at FAC. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 17:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • Withdrawn as requested. Note that the usual two-week hiatus will apply.
  • Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:21, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 14 March 2023 [10].

Nier: Automata edit

Nominator(s): ProtoDrake (talk) 12:54, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about...the 2017 action role-playing game Nier Automata, developed by PlatinumGames and published by Square Enix. Developed by many of the same staff members behind the original Nier, it was a commercial and critical success, and has gone on to see media expansions and crossovers with other series. The article became a GA in November 2020, and has gone through a copyedit by the Guild of Copy Editors. ProtoDrake (talk) 12:54, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
    • Done.
  • File:Simone_de_Beauvoir_%26_Jean-Paul_Sartre_in_Beijing_1955.jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:22, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Nikkimaria: I did some hunting and found another image showing the two that seemed to have appropriate copyright tags. --ProtoDrake (talk) 15:11, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support for prose by Shooterwalker edit

This is a long one so it will take a while to work through it. I feel confident it is within reach of FA, with some work.

  • Gameplay
  • "Nier: Automata is an action role-playing game (ARPG) in which players take the role of combat androids from the YoRHa units across an open world." -> I might focus more on the gameplay and less on the plot (YoRHa units) just to make the opening sentence clearer.
  • Reworked.
  • The organization of this section is important and could be better. The later paragraphs seem focused (combat, more combat, character progression, character death). But the first paragraph is all over the place: genre, plot, navigation, camera perspective, quests, shops, multiple endings.
  • I'm not sure the best way to improve it, but worst case, the WP:PYRAMID rule is good guidance. The first sentence covers the genre and essential gameplay (and sometimes theme). The second sentence should try to cover the three-ish main actions in the game (e.g.: third-person action, dialog, character levelling). You can take a elaborate on those (e.g.: third-person action includes combat and platforming), but ultimately save the most detail for the later paragraphs. The first paragraph should be broad, and very readable.
  • I decided to arrange it by Standard premise and structure - Combat - Progression and death mechanics - Genre shifting and the ending system.
  • "In addition to standard navigation on foot, use of a special item allows the player to summon a wild animal to ride and in some scenarios to pilot a flying mech to fight enemies." -> "In addition to standard navigation on foot, the game features scenarios with flying mech battles, as well as a special item that can summon wild animals to ride."
  • Sorted, hopefully.
  • "the camera shifts from its standard third-person perspective to an overhead or side-scrolling view while navigating in some environments." -> "the game is mostly played in a third-person perspective, with a few side-scrolling sequences."
  • Hopefully sorted above.
  • "navigate by jumping between platforms or over obstacles." -> "jump over obstacles."
  • Sorted.
  • "Combat is action-based hack and slash; the player fights enemies in real-time in a variety of in-game environments" -> "The player will fight enemies in real-time close combat." (variety of environments is implied)
  • Sorted, hopefully.
  • "During battle, the player can use light attacks—which are fast but weak—and heavy attacks, which are slower but more powerful." -> The player will use light or heavy attacks, preferring speed or damage, respectively."
  • Didn't use this specifically, but rewritten.
  • "The player can evade enemy attacks and, with successfully timed button presses, can gain temporary invulnerability and launch a counterattack that deals heavy damage." -> "The player can also evade incoming attacks, gaining invulnerability or counterattack bonuses based on timing."
  • Done.
  • "The player is assisted by a Pod, a flying robotic assistant that can launch customizable ranged attacks varying from simple gunfire to heavy-hitting hammer attacks." -> "The player has a flying robotic assistant called a Pod, which can launch customizable ranged attacks such as lasers, bombs, or missiles."
  • I had to rewrite this bit, but hopefully it's sorted.
  • The mix of alternate genres feels like it would go better in a different paragraph, and might even be a good way to organize the miscellanea that don't really fit in the first paragraph.
  • Hopefully sorted above.
  • "While attacking, the player can alternate between both weapons and attacks to create combination attacks." -> this sentence breaks up the connection between the other two sentences, and might fit better later in the paragraph. Or maybe even the previous paragraph about attack types.
  • Dropped.
  • "Weapon Stories—a recurring element in both Nier and the Drakengard series—in which weapons are found throughout the world and have unique stories attached to them, are also featured." -> This is a little unclear -- how are the stories attached?
  • Dropped.
  • "initial lead 2B is an attacker with two weapons available, second protagonist 9S has one weapon and specializes in hacking into enemies to deal high damage, and later-character A2 plays similarly to 2B with the extra ability to briefly boost attack-power by sacrificing health." -> "the first protagonist 2B alternates between two weapons, the second protagonist 9S combines weapon attacks with hacking into enemy robots, and the final character A2 can sacrifice health to briefly boost their attack power."
  • Done.
  • What are the bonuses mentioned in the last paragraph? I'm guessing experience?
  • Dropped.

We can start there, and keep working through the article in time. Shooterwalker (talk) 13:46, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Shooterwalker: I can tell this is going to be a lot, but don't hold back. I also did some condensing/trimming on the upgrades/chips/death bit. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:42, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking that on, and it already has made a substantial improvement. Let's keep going with the other sections. We can come back with one more pass at the end.
  • Settings and characters
  • "androids have attitudes that distinguish them from their fellows" -> "each android has a distinct personality"
  • Done.
  • Does YoRHa have an etymology or meaning?
  • Nope, it's meaningless.
  • "The YoRHA forces fight alongside pre-YoRHa Earth androids known as the Resistance to drive back the Machines." -> "Fending off the Machines, the YoRHA forces fight alongside pre-YoRHa Earth androids known as the Resistance."
  • Done.
  • "and are of the same model as two characters in Nier;" -> how important is this? It would flow better if this were removed, or even shorter.
  • I cut that bit.
  • Plot
  • "views" -> "viewpoints"
  • Done.
  • "initial invasion" -> "initial Machine invasion"
  • I've rewritten this.
  • "After opening a route for future missions" -> this is a little unclear. Is that actually how the early game is framed?
  • Yep.
  • "by Anemone" -> "by resistance leader Anemone" (I know this is already stated, but reinforcing it can help for outside readers.)
  • Clarified.
  • Is machines capitalized? Either will do, but be consistent.
  • Yes.
  • "she witnesses the destruction of Pascal's village, then its children committing suicide out of fear when attacked." -> "she witnesses the destruction of Pascal's village, then its children committing suicide out of fear when attacked." -> she witnesses the destruction of Pascal's village, including its children committing suicide pre-emptively."
  • Did my best, but the children deaths happen after the village is destroyed.
  • The separate arcs seem out of place. At the minimum, it should be in its own paragraph. It might even need another sentence, just to explain where the arcs fit into the whole story. (Literally, beginning, middle, or end.)
  • I've split them into a paragraph at the end. And they're optional.
  • "fire an ark" -> "launch an ark"
  • Done.
  • "the possibility the restored" -> "the possibility that the restored" or even "the expectation" or "the conspiracy". Something like that.
  • I rewrote this a little.
This section is pretty well written. See what you can do here and we'll move onto the development. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:14, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Shooterwalker: I think I've sorted out everything above. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:00, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Moving onto the next section...
  • Development
  • "sequel provided" -> "sequel, provided that"
  • " Development, which began in 2014, included six months of pre-production" -> " Development began in 2014, and included six months of pre-production"
  • "A system of "free time" in which Yoko could work when possible without clashes was developed, reducing the difficulties." -> "To reduce the scheduling conflicts, the team organized a system of "free time" where Yoko would be available to work."
  • Scenario and themes
  • "he working much more on the script than on those of his previous games. He delivered the script nearly five months late; aside from minor changes, the narrative remained the same throughout development" -> "This script took the most work of all his games to date, and while the story only experienced minor changes through development, it was delivered nearly five months late."
  • "when reviewing his story" -> can drop this / it's implied
  • "Saito also said the story is about love, which he stated is unusual because the central cast are robots, which are not normally associated with emotions" -> "Saito also said the story is about love, which he felt was unusual for a story about robots, which are typically written as non-emotional."
  • Art and game design
  • "although he had prior experience developing action games" -> "with his prior experience focused on action game development".
  • "Taura's main concept" -> " Taura's main design goal"
  • "development ," -> minor typo here
  • "the camera" -> "the perspective" (for people who might not understand the meaning of camera in a game design context)
  • "The developers thought Yoshida would decline the offer due to his busy schedule but Yoshida was willing to join the project because some staff members at his company CyDesignation were fans of Nier." -> "The developers thought Yoshida would be too busy to contribute, but he was willing to join the project due to fans of Nier working at his company, CyDesignation."
  • "Yoshida joined the company a little later in the process than usual so Taro gave him a general guideline of sleek designs with black as the dominant color" -> "Yoshida joined the company later in the character design process, so Taro gave him a general guideline of sleek designs with black as the dominant color"
  • "When creating the character models, the developer had difficulty making them seem alive despite their mechanical nature" -> "He/they also had difficulty making the character models seem alive due to their mechanical nature."
  • Music
  • "A theme song for the game was created; versions were sung by both Evans and new singer J'Nique Nicole." -> "Monaca created a theme song, which was sung by both Evans and new singer J'Nique Nicole."
  • Localization
  • "8-4's biggest difficulty was writing the android characters; while these are ostensibly emotionless, they have distinctive personalities, and much of the relationship between 2B and 9S revolves around emotion." -> "8-4's biggest challenge was translating the android dialog, as it was difficult to balance their purported emotionlessness with their highly emotional relationships and distinct personalities."
  • "When the estate of philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre objected to the use of his name in the game, the character Sartre was renamed Jean-Paul in releases outside Japan."
It's a long section, but it does cover a lot of ground and reads very well. Take a look at those suggestions and we can keep going. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:43, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Shooterwalker: Did my best with all above. Also added some info about the theme song. That section hadn't been properly updated since prior to the game's release. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:49, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all your improvements. Let's focus on the next section.
  • Release
  • "At the time it was announced, the game was 10% complete." -> When was it announced? It's easy to lose track. This might fit better in the previous paragraph.
  • In fact, the conversation about the title might be an appropriate place for a paragraph break, since those thoughts are related.
  • "A2's playable role was not intended as a surprise revelation; the development team used the character's long-haired design for footage of a late-game boss fight in which she had short hair, making her change of appearance less obvious" -> This sentence is unclear, and there's probably a simpler way to explain what's happening here.
  • "it was decided a late-2016 or early 2017 release would give Nier: Automata more of a chance of commercial success. The delay gave the developers more time to improve the quality and gameplay balance." -> "To mitigate competition, the team decided to release the game for late-2016 or early 2017, which also allowed the team more time to refine the game."
  • Versions
  • Mixing verb tense can be confusing. Try to stick with past tense.
  • "Square Enix worked with Japanese rock band Amazarashi, lead singer Hiromu Akita was a fan of Nier, to produce a song called "Inochi ni Fusawashii", which was inspired by the game's world." -> There's a lot going on in this sentence. See if you can simplify it, but I can always try my best to help.
  • The DRM statement seems unresolved. If it never turned into anything it might be worth removing.
  • "Saito stated the release of a version for Xbox One was being considered" -> "Saito stated that the release of a version for Xbox One was being considered"
  • " Yoko wanted more character outfits and accessories; following the mobile game Nier Reincarnation, he chose a kimono and accessories theme." -> There's nothing grammatically wrong here, but it reads as three unconnected thoughts.
  • "The port's subtitle" -> I've skimmed a few times and I'm not sure what this is.
  • A lot of this section feels too detailed, particularly the details about what was in each game package. A lot of it feels like pedantic discussions about what should be in the game and when it should be released, after a development section that focused on more important and interesting decisions. I defer to you on what you think the average reader needs to know, but consider trimming some of the details that clutter the main point.
I know that advice might not be the most clear. So just use your judgment and we can keep going when you're ready. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:19, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Shooterwalker: Did my best with the comments above, did a lot of trimming and some rewriting. Hopefully it's more focused and readable now. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:07, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That helped a lot. Let's keep going.
  • Reception
  • "lauding most aspects of it despite one reviewer finding customization cumbersome." -> I can see how talking about the one thing they didn't like adds a sort of "balance", but I think it ends up just leaving out the main point. I might rewrite this statement to focus more on what they did like, if you even need to mention minor criticisms at all.
  • "apart from its side quests" -> same thing here. For the left-field comparison to Metal Gear, what was it about those games that they compared?
  • "Game Informer reviewer Joe Juba wrote a lot of enjoyable elements in the game's narrative and gameplay are obscured by confusing or obtuse mechanics." -> The sudden negative sentence feels a little out of place. This might still be the right paragraph to mention it, but it could use a better transition.
  • "but said the PC port is lacking" -> "but criticized the PC port"
  • "in spite of its content" -> you can probably drop this. Sentence is clear without it.
  • " was positive about its presentation and design but noted some gameplay elements did not work as expected and lack depth" -> "was positive about its presentation, but criticized some gameplay elements as awkward or lacking in depth."
  • "difficulty identifying with" -> "found it difficult to relate to"
  • "The gameplay was generally enjoyed but several reviewers found a lack of depth in combat compared to previous PlatinumGames titles" -> "Reviewers generally enjoyed the gameplay, but several critics felt that the combat lacked depth compared to previous PlatinumGames titles."
  • The paragraphs in this section seem to jump between a lot of different thoughts, especially the last one (before sales). It's not bad, but consider whether you can try to organize different types of commentary into different paragraphs. (e.g.: "good / mixed / bad, or overall / gameplay / story / graphics and sound, or some hybrid of the two.)
  • Sales
  • "and it success was seen as surprising compared to the low sales of Nier" -> "and its success came as a surprise compared to the low sales of Nier."
  • Additional media
  • "new revisions to the original stage play, a spin-off, a musical version, and an all-male spin-off play were produced" -> "the team worked on additional stage productions including an all-male spin-off, a musical version, and a revised version of the original."
  • "features a scenario around the character, themed moves, and weapons; and an alternative white variation dubbed "2P"" -> "includes unique weapons and abilities, a full scenario about the character, and an alternative white variation called "2P"."
  • The collaborations sound more like crossovers. Would this be a more suitable title? I leave it up to you.
That covers everything. I know it's been a lot, so thanks again for all your work. We'll probably still need to go over it one more time for any lingering issues, but I feel confident this will set it up for FA, and make it easy for future reviewers. Shooterwalker (talk) 12:30, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Shooterwalker: Did my best to address the above, including rearranging the reception to be more of a flow (Going through the reviews, I arranged it like that becaus the way things are phrased would've led to a ton or repetition or redundant information). --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:38, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Coming back to this with some fresh eyes. Hoping that we can nail this with one last round of revisions.
  • Lead
  • "Nier: Automata was originally released for the PlayStation 4 and Windows via Steam, and an Xbox One port with the subtitle Become as Gods Edition was published the following year." -> "Nier: Automata was originally released for the PlayStation 4 and Windows via Steam, with the Xbox One port Become as Gods Edition published in 2018."
  • Sorted, I think.
  • "during each of which additional story elements are unlocked." -> "with each playthrough revealing new story elements."
  • Done.
  • "and includes switches between " -> "It also includes gameplay from other" (start with a new sentence)
  • Done.
  • "roles in Nier" -> "from (the original) Nier".
  • Altered.
  • "Artist Akihiko Yoshida taking charge of character design." -> the grammar here is a little funny, but this is also an opportunity to explain who this is.
  • Done.
  • "references several philosophies and" -> I might drop this since the rest of the sentence is stronger, and explains it more clearly.
  • Done.
  • "media expansions" -> this is a little vague. I might just say books and stage plays.
  • Done.
  • Gameplay
  • "the sectioned open world." -> "an open world." The meaning of sectioned isn't clear here and I'm not sure it adds anything.
  • Done.
  • "using light or heavy attacks, and combining them for" -> "using both light and heavy attacks for"
  • Done.
  • "The first 2B alternates" -> "The first protagonist 2B alternates"
  • Done.
  • "combined light attacks" -> "combines light attacks"
  • Done.
  • Overall this section has a better flow and seems more clear now.
  • Synopsis
  • "Later, A2, another playable character, is introduced: A2 in an obsolete attack android with a taciturn personality who often acts alone" -> "The game later introduces another player character named A2, an obsolete attack android who often acts alone."
  • Done.
  • I'd start the plot section by stating the obvious. "The story of Nier: Automata is told through multiple playthroughs from different character perspectives."
  • Done.
  • Consider a paragraph break before the third playthrough.
  • Done.
  • "it is revealed " -> you use this phrasing a couple of times, and it's not really clear how it is revealed. Is it something they discover in the environment? Is it something that's explained by another character?
  • Altered it to characters learning it, which happens in bits between 9S and A2. Sorry if this isn't ideal, but the storytelling style in Automata is deliberately disjointed.
  • "Machine Network offers him the chance to join them" -> a proper noun would probably be more clear than a pronoun here.
  • Altered the phrasing.
  • Development
  • " narrative concerning the world's inherent unfairness and prejudices the characters are forced to confront" -> "narrative about confronting prejudice and unfairness in the world."
  • Done.
  • "The narrative references numerous influential philosophers and thinkers, after whom some Machine characters are named after such as supporting character" -> "The narrative references numerous influential philosophers and thinkers, with Machine androids taking notable names such as supporting character"
  • Done, but Androids don't use them.
  • " to work on the sequel" -> I think you can drop this, since it's implied.
  • Done
  • " be crisper" -> "be more concise".
Where was this? I can't find it anywhere.
  • " The team also needed to decide about the voice acting, whether to use regional accents or to alter voice types; for instance whether to change one character's high-pitched child voice to a more mature one to avoid annoyance to players." -> I think this might be phrased better in terms of what they actually decided. Right now it sounds like they didn't decide anything.
  • Done
  • Release
  • "Square Enix announced the game's official title " / " An official title had not been chosen by the time of its announcement" -> These two sentences seem to contradict each other. I'm not sure if it's because the sequence is unclear, or because it needs to be rephrased. These two thoughts also seem connected enough that they should be in the same paragraph, unless I'm missing something.
  • Sorted.
  • " the team decided to release Nier: Automata for late-2016 or early 2017, " -> " the team decided to delay Nier: Automata until late-2016 or early 2017,"
  • Done.
  • " Yoko appreciated the delay because it gave the developers more time to finish the game " -> "Yoko appreciated having more time for the team to finish the game."
  • Done.
  • " released Windows personal computers" -> " released (on/for) Windows personal computers"
  • Done.
  • " To alleviate this problem, the companies considered using the digital rights management (DRM) system Denuvo." -> similar to the localization choice above, it sounds like they considered it, but it's not clear if they did anything about it. It's better to talk about what they did. And if they didn't, I might clarify that, or drop it entirely.
  • I just dropped this.
  • "some themed after the mobile game Nier Reincarnation" -> needs punctuation.
  • Done
  • Reception
  • " themes met" -> " themes were met
  • Done
  • The third paragraph might deserve to be before the second, just as a matter of WP:WEIGHT. The game received acclaim across all platforms, and it's probably more fair to lead with the positive reviews, and saving the issues and criticisms for later. In fact, that second paragraph might be best at the end of this section.
  • I...have no idea what you meant by that above. I already tried to arrange the individual critic comments from most to least positive, but clearly that somehow hasn't worked. I've moved the summary back to the bottom of the section, if that sorts whatever issue you found.
  • Additional media
  • "A manga adaptation of the YoRHa stage play that is titled YoRHa Pearl Harbor Descent Record, began serialization on Square Enix's Manga UP! online manga service." -> "The stage play was also adapted into a manga called YoRHa Pearl Harbor Descent Record, which began serialization on Square Enix's Manga UP! online manga service."
  • Done
  • "The DLC, which was released on December 19, includes" -> "Released on December 19, the DLC included"
  • Done
I know it's been a lot. But my hope is this will make it easier for additional FA reviewers to sign off on this. The prose is very close to FA quality. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:48, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Shooterwalker: Addressed all I could. Awaiting reply. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:35, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Gave it another look over and I feel good about recommending it for FA based on the prose. It couldn't hurt to have another set of eyes on it, but the article reads clearly and comprehensively to me. Thanks for all your hard work on this. Shooterwalker (talk) 04:44, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review edit

@ProtoDrake: Nice to see this article being nominated especially with the new anime. I might make comments but I'll do the source review meanwhile.

  • Every source happens to be wp:reliable source
  • Every reference is well formatted
  • The only thing that seems lacking are translations to the Japanese references in the formatting. Do that and I'll pass the source review. Keep up the good work.22:16, 17 February 2023 (UTC)Tintor2 (talk)
@Tintor2: I've added trans-titles to non-English references, and also archived remaining references and done some ref formatting for consistency and accuracy. --ProtoDrake (talk) 12:59, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Pass the source review.Tintor2 (talk) 14:53, 18 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review edit

Add col scopes, row scopes, and a caption to the awards table per MOS:DTAB. Heartfox (talk) 02:21, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Done @Heartfox: Thanks, Indagate (talk) 13:01, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by Indagate edit

Quick thing noticed when doing the above, Reference 111 to https://www.platinumgames.com/archives/awards is a primary source, better for it to be secondary if possible please. Thanks, Indagate (talk) 13:03, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Indagate: Thank you for the help. And I've addressed the primary source issue as far as possible. The awards are now sourced from either the award website/source itself, or a website reporting on nominees/winners. --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:41, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks better, thanks Indagate (talk) 13:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment edit

This has been open for nearly four weeks and has only picked up the single general support. I have added it to Urgents, but unless it receives further in depth reviews over the next four or five days I am afraid that it is going to time out. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:04, 10 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hate to do it, but I'll be archiving this per the above note. Hog Farm Talk 02:23, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 11 March 2023 [11].

Markham's storm petrel edit

Nominator(s): Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Markham's storm petrel, described as "one of the least known seabirds in the world". This passed GA in 2020 with a review by Dunkleosteus77 (talk · contribs). A peer review by Z1720 (talk · contribs) in 2021. Thus, I bring to you this article for FAC consideration. Thank you in advance for all those who review. I have asked for a co-nom at Wikipedia:WikiProject Birds, that is still open if you're familiar with the topic. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • What is the source of the data presented in the map? What is the base map used?
    • Now switched to a new map which notes the base map and the data source. Therapyisgood (talk) 18:22, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also on the map, see MOS:COLOUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments from Jim edit

An initial query or two about referencing style. Firstly, you use sentence case for Spanish article titles, and title case for English titles, including translation of the Spanish. How does this fit with MoS? Secondly, you need to italicise binomials in article titles as well as in the text Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I don't think we normally link countries or continents
  • Hydrobates and Wilson's petrel are over-linked
  • large compared to other members in the genus, which also comprises small seabirds.— isn't the last clause redundant?
    • Cut, but I'm open to re-adding. I think Dunkleosteus77 emphasized that I explain terms, so that's where that might have came from. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • current practice as of 2008— How current is 2008?
  • ''Its iris is brown— need to restate subject I think, link iris, link endemic
  • Sexes are alike in terms of physical description. Its eggs are described as pure white without gloss.— Its eggs doesn't have an obvious subject, the previous subjects were Sexes, Tail, and Adult male... Also, I don't think you have said that juveniles are similar to adults even in the hand
    • Added subject. Will get to the juveniles when I find a source. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Do you have a source for the "juveniles" statement? Therapyisgood (talk) 07:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • Yes, the BoW page linked below says There are no known morphological differences between adults and juveniles. In other species of storm-petrels, birds can be recognized in the hand using the shape of the tip of the feathers. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • As previously mentioned, the map needs clarification. I appreciate that at-sea map are a bit vague, and the map in Onley and Scofield bears little resemblance to that in Cornell Birds of the World, but all the more reason to be clear on your data source
  • You don't mention moult other than in passing. There isn't much to say, but Onley p 233 says that moulting adults are seen in the southern spring and early summer, moulting juveniles several months earlier
  • egg colour (white) not mentioned? In Paracas, the incubation averages 47 days (range 37-70 days, n = 28; 16) Both the male and female share incubation duties. In Paracas, incubation shifts lasted three days or less (16). No details on the breeding colonies in Chile. Should be included, if you can't source it, its in BoW Medrano, F., J. Drucker, and A. Jaramillo (2021). Markham's Storm-Petrel (Hydrobates markhami), version 2.1. In Birds of the World (T. S. Schulenberg, S. M. Billerman, and B. K. Keeney, Editors). Cornell Lab of Ornithology, Ithaca, NY, USA. https://doi.org/10.2173/bow.maspet.02.1
  • IUCN needs full name and link
  • an estimate by Barros et al., who estimated up to 20,875 — Are you convinced the estimate is accurate to units level? If not, needs rounding
  • birds believing they had already reached the coast— needs some qualification unless inter-species telepathy was involved
  • a large amount of juveniles—large number
  • ''En Peligro de Extinción should this be italicised? Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

12:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

  • I think that the only other comments I'd make is that the appearance of the egg is under Description, rather than breeding, which seems odd, and that BoW gives the mean egg size as 32.2 x 24.2 mm (n = 155; 16). Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Therapyisgood, I think we are nearly there. As far as I can see, you haven't added the egg data above. With regard to the map, unless its creator can enlighten you (hasn't edited at commons for a year), you might well have to redraw using an identified blank map from commons. The range obviously won't be exact, but we need to know what source you use, and we tend to use blue for non-breeding, see project page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:56, 1 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't visit the bird project talk page much these days, so I didn't pick up you were writing this, otherwise I could have helped before FAC. I've changed to support above, good luck Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:28, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Queries Support by WereSpielChequers edit

Thanks for writing this, I learned something here

  • I'm intrigued by "After hatching, fledglings make their way to sea" as it implies the lack of a chick phase and a biology more reminiscent of turtles than birds. Having read Breeding_phenology_distribution_and_conservation_status_of_Markham_s_Storm_Petrel_Oceanodroma_markhami_in_the_Atacama_Desert Which specifically mentions finding chicks, birds returning to the nest, and the time periods for the breeding season, I think the bird does have a chick phase between hatching and leaving the nest as a fledgling.
  • Clones. Re "Adult males have a wingspan of 172.7 millimetres (6.80 in) compared to a wingspan of 169.8 millimetres (6.69 in) in adult females" these are very specific measurements. By comparison, in Wilson's_storm_petrel#Description there is a wingspan range with the largest individuals 10% larger than the smallest. Could this be the measurement of the type specimen or an average rather than a standard? ϢereSpielChequers 22:43, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • These are both very good points. For the second one, the measurements are of a sample of 6 males and 5 females. See here on Internet Archive. I can't find a better source for wingspans and tarsus size, but have clarified based on the source. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:32, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks, do we know anything of lifespan yet? I'm assuming there have been some ringing programs. ϢereSpielChequers 11:17, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • Another good point. I can't find anything on lifespan. Therapyisgood (talk) 23:57, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
          • Thanks for looking, if the sources don't yet exist for this, well we can't go beyond the sources. ϢereSpielChequers 08:36, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jens edit

I think that the Taxonomy section needs work. I felt that it is too vague; the succession of information suboptimal; and hard to follow. Some details below to illustrate this:

  • Hydrobatidae probably diverged from other petrels at an early stage. – This is vague; what does "at an early stage" mean? For this, we need some idea how old the petrel group is.
    • Looking at this now. Therapyisgood (talk) 02:29, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
      • Took me a while but I finally found a source which places petrels with "sustantial radiation" by the Miocene. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:05, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Storm petrel fossils are rare, found dating from the Upper Miocene in California. – I don't understand the sentence. What does "found dating" mean?
  • Wilson's storm petrel, Oceanites oceanicus, in the physically similar but only distantly related Oceanitidae, may have been the first storm petrel to inhabit the Northern Hemisphere, thus possibly starting the subfamily Hydrobatinae of which Markham's storm petrel is a member – That is impossible, as Hydrobatinae can't be within Oceanitidae when both are considered monophyletic taxa.
    • I'm no expert, so I've cut the sentence though the source says something to that affect. Therapyisgood (talk) 05:44, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hydrobates, the only genus in the family, – would help to point this out much earlier when introducing Hydrobatinae.
  • It was formerly defined in the genus Oceanodroma before that genus was synonymized with Hydrobates. – Which is repeated in the next paragraph? Better keep information together, and not fragment it like this.
  • Anything about the genus "Cymochorea"? Is this still valid, and if not, which what genus has it been synonymised?
    • It is not still valid. I beleive it's been synonymized with Oceanodroma but I am having a hard time finding a source. Therapyisgood (talk) 17:26, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • a British explorer and naval officer who picked up a specimen off Peru. – only "a specimen", or is it the type specimen on which the first description was based? That should be mentioned.
  • though practice as of 2008 recognized them as different species – what does "though practise as of 2008" mean? "Subsequent research"?
  • reclassified Oceanodroma markhami as Hydrobates markhami based on reclassification in – "reclassified" based on "reclassification" is poor wording.
  • volume 1, by founder of HBW Josep del Hoyo and British ornithologist Nigel J. Collar – This might be excessive detail when compared to the rest of the taxonomy section which for my personal taste is a bit sparese in detail.
  • Its name in Spanish literature is – can this be generalised to "Spanish language", or is that name only used in written texts?
    • Generalized. Added a name with a ref according to Spanish wiki. Therapyisgood (talk) 00:55, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • with its species predominately endemic to the northern hemisphere. – Here, it would be great to add the number of species to provide context. Only needs a single number in front of "species", but would be a bit more informative.
  • and is comparatively large compared to other members in the genus. – I would add this comparison bit to the other comparison at the beginning of the paragraph. First discuss the taxonomy (family, genus, and how the Markham's is different; then discuss the evolution).
  • Will continue reading later. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:37, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • I will get to these shortly, thank you for the review. Therapyisgood (talk) 22:35, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 2016, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) reclassified Oceanodroma markhami as Hydrobates markhami based on HBW and BirdLife International Illustrated Checklist of the Birds of the World, volume 1, by Josep del Hoyo and British ornithologist Nigel J. Collar. – Not sure here, but shouldn't this sentence organised the other way around: If del Hoyo first introduced the combination "Hydrobates markhami" (this is what you want to say?), then this should be stated first. If needed, you then could add that this has then been adopted by the IUCN (if this is important; maybe it can also be removed). This way, it is in chronological order and much less confusing.
  • This PeerJ paper (https://peerj.com/articles/12669/), in Fig. 1, has a wonderful photograph of this species in dorsal view in flight. That would be a great addition to the article; the image is under a free licence!
  • the whitening produces a broad grayish bar that generally extends closer to the wing's bend than what American ornithologist Robert Cushman Murphy observed as a somewhat similar mark in the black petrel Loomelania melania (Procellaria parkinsoni) – this is a bit too long to read and comprehend in one go, I suggest to make two sentences out of it.
  • Is above sentence talking about the upper side of the wings? That is not clear to me, too.
  • Murphy described the species as difficult to distinguish in life from the black petrel, with the chief difference being a much shorter tarsus. – This could be misleading, as it might suggest that this is the only feature for differentiation. However, the band on the upper side of the wings seems to be the key feature. I suggest to group these two together, and reformulate to make it clear how these species are separated.
  • Two female specimens taken from 00°18′N 81°51′W in August 1967, both with small gonads and unused oviducts, had heavy contour molt and light fat. – Optional: I am not sure what to make out of this information; a bit of context here would greatly help. What are the implications of this observation?
  • "no known morphological differences between adults and juveniles", even in hand – I think that WP:MOS somewhere requires page numbers for quotes.
  • Markham's storm petrel has a more leisurely flight pattern than that of the black petrel – should this simply be "then the black petrel"?
  • and state that Markham's storm petrel has a similar flight pattern to Leach's storm petrel. – this could be much shortened to avoid repetition of "Markham's storm petrel" again in the same sentence.
  • petrel typically flies greater than one meter – I am not an English expert, but wondering if this should better be "more" instead of "greater"
  • Canadian author RGB Brown – any reason you don't call him an ornithologist? He publishes a lot of technical literature, and alone for this reason should qualify as one?
  • the birds tended to glide over two observations, with shallow and rapid wingbeats,[18] though an observation by American ornithologist Rollo Beck described its wingbeats as slow – I can't follow this one. First, what does "over two observations" mean? Second, how does Beck's statement contradict this (as implied by "though")?
  • After further exploration in November 2013 based on the recording,[20][26] in 2019, – I can't quite follow; is it 2013 or 2019 when the discovery was made?
  • Both the female and male engage in duties related to incubation. – Does that simply mean they both incubate? If so, it could be formulated as such. Otherwise it is not clear what "duties related to incubation" are; all activities within the breeding season are to some degree related to incubation.
  • Mean width of the widest part of openings to nest burrows in Chile was measured at 10.3 centimetres (4.1 in) with a standard deviation of ± 3.1 centimetres (1.2 in), with the narrowest part measured at 6.8 centimetres (2.7 in) with a deviation of ± 1.9 centimetres (0.75 in). The average depth of the burrows was greater than 40 centimetres (16 in). – Optional: In my opinion, the standard deviations are excessive detail that makes it hard to read. It could be shortened to "On average, the nest burrows were 40 cm deep; the burrow openings were 10.3 cm wide at their widest part and 6.8 cm at their narrowest part."
  • The average depth of the burrows was greater than – this does not make sense: Is it an average depth, or a minumum depth (as suggested by "greater than")?
  • After hatching, in Chile, the fledglings move towards the sea after a chick phase. – "quick" compared to what? As it is, the "quick" does not convey any information. Better be more specific with a measured time span if that is available. I am also not sure what that means – moving towards the sea: Do they stay on the shore or do they swim (while still being fed by their parents)?
  • The proportion of birds that feed or rest, compared to flying in transit, was significantly higher in austral autumn than spring in Spear and Ainley's 2007 study. – Here, I think the reader wants to know what this proportion is. How much food is consumed while flying, how much while resting? The information that this proportion is higher in autumn seems to be of secondary importance?
  • Rodrigo Barros et al. – to be accessible, "et al." should either be linked or, better, replaced with "and colleagues". --Jens Lallensack (talk) 14:06, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Medrano combined a new colony description with previous findings by Barros in 2019 – 2019 referrs to Medrano or Barros?
  • 3,300 fledglings had been grounded due to their lights – How can a fledgling become grounded? If it can fly, it is no longer a fledgling, right?
  • the Chilean MMA produced a Recuperación, Conservación y Gestión de Especies [Recovery, Conservation and Management of Species] plan – difficult to read; I would use the English translation only, and if the Spanish original is needed it could be placed in a footnote.
  • as updating a light pollution standard to mitigate the effects of artificial lights on the birds – does "updating" mean that such a standard already exist?
  • Description of the voice is missing?

Funk edit

  • As this appears to be the nominator's first animal FAC, it's probably good with another review by a zoology editor. I'll have a more thorough look when Jens is done. FunkMonk (talk) 14:27, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • There appears to be a bunch of WP:duplinks, which can be highlighted with this script:[12]
  • Hard to figure out who took the taxobox photo, pinging uploader Sabine's Sunbird. Could need a description template. FunkMonk (talk) 14:27, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Any cladogram?
  • Other relevant images? Habitat, prey, predators?
  • The sole eternal link seems a bit random?
Therapyisgood, nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:47, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Gog the Mild: I want to withdraw this for now. Therapyisgood (talk) 03:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn as requested. Note that the two-week hiatus will apply.


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 10 March 2023 [13].

Germanwings Flight 9525 edit

Nominator(s): Prhartcom (talk) 05:21, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the infamous crash of a commercial jet aircraft because of suicide by pilot.

I brought this article to GA years ago and ensured it has accurately improved over the years. I believe it is ready for FA. Tell me what you think. Prhartcom (talk) 05:21, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment by a455bcd9 edit

Do we have the datasource for File:Altitude Chart for Flight 4U9525 register D-AIPX.svg? a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 07:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have just asked User talk:Justass for this. I see that they are not active much anymore but I hope they reply. It appears to be derivative of the facts that are stated in the article, though. 13:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC) Prhartcom (talk) 13:48, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Is it from this? - SchroCat (talk) 19:17, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nice find, SchroCat; I have added this to the article. I also found this, which was already in the article. Hope this is okay, a455bcd9. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
None of these two graphs are strictly identical to ours: is that still fine? If it is, the source we choose (one of these two) should be added on Commons. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 15:57, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Prhartcom and A455bcd9: Is this fixed now? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:18, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SC edit

Putting down a marker. - SchroCat (talk) 23:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead
  • I'm not sure "unfit to work" needs quote marks – it's a common phrase
  • "As of February 2017": Just "By 2017" would suffice, I think
Done. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Flight
  • "takeoff" is two words, according to the OED
  • "the largest piece of wreckage was "the size of a car"": you need to assign this quote to someone. John Smith of the Official Body described the largest piece of wreckage as "the size of a car" or similar
That would be great, but it turned out the words were written by the anonymous author of the Air News article. I have removed the quotes for now, but we may need to excise this from the article. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It doesn't need to be removed: you can go with "According to Air News..." as long as it's attributed to something. - SchroCat (talk) 11:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Aircraft
  • Would it make more sense to put the Aircraft section above the Flight one? (Your call – I don't push the point)
I got exited by this idea and tried it, then was surprised to find it was better left the way it is. Try reading it as if it was moved and you will see what I mean. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Investigation
It was worse than that; the first link was a redirect from the bureau name in French. Fixed and removed second link. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Cause of crash
  • "co-pilot" is a duplicate link
  • "Brice Robin": Just "Robin" – you've already introduced him in the section above
  • "six weeks later": Not sure we need that, as you've given the date
Done. But for your third point. I reversed the "six weeks later" and the date; I think its (hopefuly) better? Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Investigation of Lubitz
  • "Prosecutor Brice Robin": Just Robin
Done. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Political
  • "coordinate": as this is written in BrEng, it should be "co-ordinate"
But Wiktionary doesn't say that's BrEng. If you are certain, then we should change Wiktionary as well. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't trust Wiktionary as far as I could throw it! I go by the OED, which hyphenates. In BrEng the hyphen is used where two vowels may be pronounced incorrectly, so co-operate with two sounds isn't pronounced as coop. - SchroCat (talk) 11:11, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Commercial
  • "half-mast" (picture caption) should be hyphenated
And that was a redirected link from half mast to half-mast as well. Fixed. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regulatory
  • "Lufthansa CEO Carsten Spohr": you've already fully introduced them above
Changed to "CEO Spohr"; hope it is it okay. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That makes it a false title. - SchroCat (talk) 11:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Compensation
  • "deliberately crashed the passenger aircraft": just "aircraft"
  • "As of February 2017": just "By February 2017"
  • "the training center in Arizona": as this isn't the formal name, the spelling should be "centre"
Done, except I am confused by the first point; what do you mean? Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry - that was unclear: I meant that instead of "deliberately crashed the passenger aircraft" you should have "deliberately crashed the aircraft". - SchroCat (talk) 11:18, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Notes
  • FNs 1 and 2 both need references
Checking into this. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this helps! It's all superficial little things, so I'm leaning heavily towards support. It's a good read – very tightly written with nothing overly-detailed or extraneous. – SchroCat (talk) 17:15, 12 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-you for your encouraging review, SchroCat! Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Prhartcom, have all of SchroCat's comments been addressed? If so, could you ping them? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:19, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Buidhe edit

  1. The lead length seems a bit too long compared to the body length. I would consider trimming the lead slightly.
  2. Why are there some citations but not consistently cited in the lead? I would go with citing only things that aren't cited in the body, this is the standard way to do it at FAC.

(t · c) buidhe 19:57, 14 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; checking into this. Prhartcom (talk) 05:05, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Prhartcom, how is this going? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:20, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Harry edit

I saw this episode of Air Crash Investigation.

  • Some of the links look like Easter eggs, eg: crashed, deliberately caused, suicidal tendencies
  • The runway number strikes me as an unnecessary detail
  • was due to arrive at Düsseldorf Airport by 11:39 you mention it was behind schedule; is that the original scheduled arrival time or the revised ETA?
  • You only need to give the timezone once, except where there might be confusion.
  • Don't link commonly understood terms, eg scramble, suicide note, blind
  • I believe Gendarmerie nationale normally takes a definite article
  • The French Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis for Civil Aviation Safety (BEA) opened an investigation You've already introduced the BEA above; just "The BEA opened" will suffice here.
  • According to French and German prosecutors, the crash was deliberately caused "According to" sounds like it's an opinion to be subject to scepticism but it's the determination of an official body and not widely disputed; suggest "prosecutors concluded..."
  • medical secrecy requirements "secrecy" carries connotations of conspiracy, at least to me; "confidentiality" is more common in British English
  • Then-Prime Minister Manuel Valls Drop the "then"; Wikipedia is supposed to be timeless and we know politicians don't hold office forever
  • CEO Spohr Just Spohr; you've introduced him above
  • Are the range of nationalities of the victims' nationalities really relevant?
  • The International Busines Times is flagged as unreliable; suggest you carefully consider your use of it
  • Are there no relevant books or journal articles that could be cited? A very quick glance at Google Books and Scholar throws up some sources that might be worthy of consideration but I haven't evaluated them for detail or reliability.

In all, very good work on an incident well worth documenting. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:54, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi Prhartcom, this seems nearly there. Would it be possible for you to address the outstanding comments? Gog the Mild (talk) 21:54, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Dear colleagues, apologies for the delay; it has been RL. I will address these. I am grateful to you. Prhartcom (talk) 02:14, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility review edit

Add col scopes and row scopes to the table per MOS:DTAB. Heartfox (talk) 02:24, 7 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Ian edit

Recusing coord duties to review, article is succinct, seems comprehensive and generally okay prose-wise, allowing for some short paragraphs/subsections. I copyedited so let me know if you think I misunderstood anything -- other points:

  • I'm not sure what need there is to have citations in the lead, I'd expect anything currently cited there could/should be cited in the main body.
  • Bodo Klimpel, mayor of Haltern am See, reacting to the deaths of 16 students and 2 teachers from the town, said that people were shocked by the crash -- Reporting people were shocked by the crash is pretty limp considering what had happened, and you already have something earlier that's more telling re. the mayor and the town, i.e. Haltern's mayor, Bodo Klimpel, described the crash as "the darkest day in the history of [the] town". I would just remove the "shocked by the crash" quote (you could move the "darkest day" one to that position, but then you have the Lufthansa boss in the next subsection using similar words so I'd suggest not).

Spotcheck of sources (this version) for accurate use and avoidance of plagiarism or close paraphrasing:

  • FN29 -- source mentions helicopters but nothing about Gendarmerie nationale and Sécurité Civile.
  • FN18b -- okay.
  • FN21 -- source appears to require subscription so should be marked as such; I would liked to have checked this as it's comparing the deadliness of the crash to incidents.
  • FN30 -- this site would not open for me.
  • FN18c -- source effectively confirms most passengers from Germany and Spain but can't see 18 nationalities mentioned.
  • FN16b -- source notes captain's flying hours in total and on type but doesn't seem to mention 10 years of experience.
  • FN75 -- okay.
  • FN26b -- okay for accuracy but became "curt" when the captain began the mid-flight briefing on the planned landing in the WP article is a direct copy from the source and needs paraphrasing.
  • FN156 -- okay.
  • FN110 -- okay for accuracy but not paraphrasing... WP article: Under German law, employers do not have access to employees' medical records, and sick notes excusing people from work do not give information about medical conditions. Source: Under German law, employers do not have access to employees' medical records, while sick notes excusing a person from work do not give information on medical conditions

Based on the above spotcheck, unless I have missed anything, I would have to oppose -- out of ten checks three are clean, two I couldn't tell and five are problematic in some form, so I think the nominator needs to go over all the refs before a second spotcheck is performed to see how things have improved. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:46, 8 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • This is a month in and has no supports and an oppose on the spot check. So I am archiving it for the issues above to be addressed off-FAC. Hopefully we will see the article back here before too long, although the usual two-week hiatus will apply.
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 6 March 2023 [14].

Diprotodon edit

Nominator(s): Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the largest marsupial ever, and the first Australian fossil mammal ever described, an elephantine wombat which lumbered across the continent until 40,000 years ago. This would be only the 3rd marsupial FA, after Tasmanian tiger and Tasmanian devil, and the 1st prehistoric marsupial Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:10, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Tammar wallaby and Koala are also FAs. LittleJerry (talk) 20:39, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Evolution_in_the_past_(Plate_55)_BHL21155651.jpg: what is the author's date of death?
1951 Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest adding full name and dates to description. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Diprotodon_optatum_(2).jpg: what sources support this illustration?
it was reviewed at WP:PALEOART Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Link? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, looks like it hasn't, I've added it now and I'll remove the image from the article in the meantime Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:16, 21 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Diprotodon_molars.jpg: what is the author's date of death? Ditto File:Diprotodon_femur_interior.jpg, File:Diprotodon_femur_exterior.jpg
1892 Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Suggest adding dates to description. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 01:56, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Extinct_monsters_and_creatures_of_other_days_(cropped).jpg: where is that licensing coming from?
It's the cropped version of File:Extinct monsters and creatures of other days (6288822378).jpg Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That version has conflicting information. To what does the CC license apply, versus the PD status? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
it looks like it first came to Commons via Flickr (hence the CC) but the image itself comes from a publication which has entered PD Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 01:49, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Fire-stick-_Lycett.webp: when and where was this first published?
Australia, 1820, in an album Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Was the album legally published? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:26, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Would PD-1996 work better? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 01:49, 17 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Bunyip_1890_(cropped).jpg: which of the Australian rationales is believed to apply, and what is the status of this work in the US? Nikkimaria (talk) 01:44, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"the creator [J. Mcfarlane] died before 1 January 1955" according to https://bearalley.blogspot.com/2018/04/j-macfarlane.html he died in 1936; added pd-US-expired Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 17:02, 16 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Jens Lallensack edit

  • and was able to colonise most of Australia – "did colonise"
colonised Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • probably one facing backwards like a wombat. – "like in wombats"?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conversely, there is no solid direct evidence of – "conversely" seems the wrong word here; do you mean "however"?
On the other hand Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 1830, bushman George Ranken – What does "bushman" mean here? Wiktionary tells me "A person who lives in the bush, especially a member of a community orfo ethnic group who lives in the bush". That would suggest to me that he was an Aboriginal Australian; is that the case?
The source uses the word "bushmen" prefacing George Ranken, but in a footnote it clarifies he got to Australia in 1821, so maybe "colonist"? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Better I think, yes. "Bushmen" is simply misleading. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 00:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • They were excavated – what is "they" referring to? The "fossil assemblage" is singular, so "It"?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • there were no serious scientists in Australia – I fear that "serious" is judgemental and inappropriate. There was a "formal expedition" that excavated the remains, so on what basis can we claim these were not "serious" scientists? This is thin ice in my opinion.
The source says "...the lack of scientific expertise in the Australian community at the time..." and then introduces Owen. Maybe, "At the time these massive fossils were discovered, in the early years of colonial expansion, few minds were turned towards purely scientific careers"? Though this may be stretching the source Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would stick to the source as close as possible; maybe just "Australia lacked scientific expertise" or something similar. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:06, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I would avoid too many of the same words like "lack" due to close paraphrasing. LittleJerry (talk) 18:57, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mitchell published the correspondence in his journal.[3] – that would be volume 1, right? But you are citing volume 2.
The letter is in volume 2, volume 1 only has a footnote Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 03:57, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • attracted quite an audience – maybe too colloquial? "attracted a large audience"?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • the largest from Lake Callabonna – the largest fossil, or do you mean individual?
largest assemblage Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • ; in their 1975 review of Australian fossil mammals – I suggest to start a new sentence here; the sentence is too long.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, adult Diprotodon specimens come in two distinct size ranges; … – this part seems to be a bit out-of-place. You discuss species, then size ranges, and then species again. Do species first, and then have a paragraph on the size ranges?
the size variation was one of the "subtle anatomical variations", they're all part of the same thought Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cladograms: On my screen the cladograms are one above the other, not left or right as indicated in the text.
yeah Wikipedia just made desktop view like mobile view, fixed Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • better adapted to the spreading dry and open landscapes – steep claim I would say: Can we argue that a species was poorly adapted to its environment? Where is that covered in the source?
it says diprotodontids are the most diverse group of vombatomorphs ever, and "While many vombatomorphian families... were extinct by early Miocene times, diprotodontids were one of the few to increase in diversity throughout the Cenozoic, appearing to benefit from the opening up of Australia's forests" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • than other vombatiformes; and attained a – I think the ; needs to be removed or replaced with a comma
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • By the Late Miocene, diprotodontians became the most common marsupial order in fossil sites, a dominance which endures to the present day; at this point, the most prolific diprotodontians were diprotodontids and kangaroos. – I can't follow. How can a dominance in fossil sites endures to the present day (fossils do not form from one day to the next)? Is "at this point" referring to the "present day"?
diprotodontians are still the most abundant marsupial order Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 1977, Archer suggested that Diprotodon directly evolved from the smaller Euryzygoma, – Most of the "Evolution" section is not directly about Diprotodon but provides context. This sentence, however, might be the most important information that directly concerns Diprotodon of the whole section; yet I fear it gets a bit lost, being attached to a longer paragraph like this.
  • The Phylogeny section seems to miss an important information: What are the closest relatives of Diprotodon? Do scientists agree on the sister taxon or do different hypotheses exist? Were these closely related forms very similar in morphology and size to Diprotodon?
The only diprotodontid I see anyone trying in some way to relate to Diprotodon is Euryzygoma mentioned in Evolution, but you can see in the Beck 2020 cladogram that they decided not to group them as sister taxa with no explanation, so I'm not sure what to do here. It's probably because the diprotodontid fossil record is pretty fragmentary Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The description is easy to follow and accessible. However, it only compares Diprotodon with modern marsupials, but does not stay how to distinguish it from its closest relatives. What were the diagnostic features? If you think this is too technical, consider adding just a sentence to the "Phylogeny" section giving some examples to provide an idea how paleontologist diagnose this taxon.
Owen didn't specifically give a list of diagnostic features as he was describing the entire skeleton, he just started going off with comparisons (which I guess is kinda the same thing). Price seems to give a lengthy description of the topography of each tooth, which I guess would also be diagnostics, but I think far too specific Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • than Murray's guesstimate – again, I think "guesstimate" is judgmental and has to be avoided. Just say "estimate". Instead of writing "more analytical approach", I would go for "more sophisticated approach".
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Using Burness's methods, Diprotodon is 25% larger than expected – expected by whom? Murray's estimate? If so, write "than previously assumed"? --Jens Lallensack (talk) 16:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, but it's not important enough actually to explain it, so I just removed it Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Adult Diprotodon skeletons can measure 160–180 cm (5 ft 3 in – 5 ft 11 in) at the shoulders, and 275–340 cm (9–11 ft) from head to tail. – this is slightly mis-representing the source, which is clearly about size in life, not the size of mounted skeletons.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Still, the low seasonal δ13C values (its carbon isotope ratio remained about the same in both winter and summer, so it ate the same proportion of C3 and C4 plants regardless of their seasonal abundance) indicate that Diprotodon was a selective eater, at least more so than the modern wombat. – I think this needs clarification and has several issues. First, where is "its" referring to, to the delta-13-C? If so, how can it be both "low seasonal" and "about the same in both winter and summer"? And why does this indicate it was a selective feeder? Lastly, the addition in the brackets is better placed in a separate sentence; this sentence is too long and confusing as is.
fixed Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • These fossilised herds – this does not seem to be covered by the sources? Diprotodon graveyards could have accumulated over time (therefore comprising members of multiple herds). A single herd (as implied in "fossilised herds") can only be demonstrated when there is exceptional evidence; does such evidence exist?
In a few places, the source says things like "As the [Bacchus Marsh] assemblage is thought to represent individuals trapped in muds of a drying marsh, it is possible that a single herd was sampled" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, but then we need to add the word "possible" ("possible fossilized herds"), it is very important. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • and paw dimensions – paw dimensions or track dimensions? These can be quite different.
fixed Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • The marsupial metabolic rate is about 30% slower – a rate is low or high, not fast or slow, I think – so it should be "lower".
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • or as fast a generation time – and here, I think a time has to be "short", not "fast".
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Using the relation between female – I would say "based on the relation …" to avoid confusion; otherwise people might rightly ask "who is using it?"
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • most especially following – drop the "most"?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • across most any habitat Australia – almost?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • such as the thylacine, modern kangaroos – needs to be "which included the" instead of "such as the", right?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • smaller sized Diprotodon – "smaller-sized"
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • At the time of Roberts et al. – should be "When Roberts et al. published their analysis" or something like that.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • though at the time it was not impossible – should be "it was not considered impossible", right?
"ruled out" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 19:52, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Dunkleosteus77 ? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:38, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I've been a lot busier than I was anticipating. I'll try to get to these this weekend Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 00:42, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support – but please change "fossilized herds" to "possible fossilized herds", as discussed above. Nice work! --Jens Lallensack (talk) 17:20, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Funk edit

  • Marking my spot until I get time to read. FunkMonk (talk) 21:10, 2 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
FunkMonk ? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:30, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'll to to give it a look soon. FunkMonk (talk) 19:05, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At the time these massive fossils were discovered, it was generally guessed that the fossil assemblage represents rhinos" Jarring and unecessary change in tense, say "represented".
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They were not formally described until Mitchell, while in England publishing his journal, brought them to his former colleague, English naturalist Richard Owen, in 1837." Very choppy sentence structure.
better? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah. FunkMonk (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and the acceptance of its apparent replacement "australis" has historically varied widely." Youn should make clear that this is the universally accepted name today.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Would be good to show some of the first known fossils in the history section.
Yeah, now that desktop view displays like mobile now, there's a lot more space for images Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "still classified the molars from Wellington as "M. australis"." The last binomial you mentioned included Deinotherium, so spell out if this binomial uses Mastodon.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He also continued to describe Diprotodon as likely elephantine.[6] In 1847, a nearly complete skull and skeleton was recovered from the Darling Downs, which confirmed this characterisation.[8]" This reads as if he thought the complete skull confirmed the elephant classification, which seems improbable.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link Australian Aboriginal at first mention.
is it not? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First mention in the article body is "Fossils were first noticed here by an aboriginal stockman", which is unlinked. FunkMonk (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Fossils were first noticed here by an aboriginal stockman working on a sheep property just east." When?
doesn't say, presumably 1893 or 92 Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Diprotodon means "two protruding front teeth"" But what does the specific name optatum mean?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In addition to D. optatum and "D. australis", several other species were erected " But as you explain it, these two were not intended as different species, but names for the same, so it's somewhat misleading. Just mention the valid name.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Explain joey, this is hardly a well-known term outside Australia.
really? It's like one of the common baby names, like kid for goat or lamb for sheep Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Arguable, but I've only heard Australians saying it in documentaries. FunkMonk (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Synonyms are usually not written in quotation marks. That's reserved for invalidly published names.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • An image like this of a fossil in situ[15] would be interesting in the history section.
  • The title "In culture" is very vague and inclusive, and would attract all sorts of trivia. Something like "Cultural significance" would be better for weeding out unimportant info.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • This restoration[16] was just uploaded some days ago, maybe it's better than what we had before.
I'll add it to the paleoart review Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:24, 19 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like it's made by a palaeontologist[17], so should be safe. FunkMonk (talk) 14:41, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • You could avoid the giant white space created by the two cladograms by placing them side by side like in for example Elasmosaurus.
  • "probably a response to the lower quality plant foods available in a drying climate, requiring them to consume much more." But couldn't this also have the opposite effect?
  • "and are thus far more likely to fossilise and be discovered than those other megafauna" Perhaps pipelink preservation bias.
  • "Diprotodon skull reconstructions showing the cranial bones (left) and the frontal sinuses (right)" Could be specified that the right image is based on CT scans.
  • "The occipital bone, the back of the skull" Could be a vaguer "at the back of the skull", as there are other bones in the general area.
  • Perhaps place the size section first in the description section, as this is usually dealt with first.
  • With the contrast and lighting fixed, this museum mount[18] would arguably be better in the Vertebrae section than the old 1910 image. I can try to fix it up.
I've now improved the contrast. FunkMonk (talk) 09:07, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found this photo[19] of a skull that was unlabelled on Commons, it has an interesting history, having been found due to floods in 2011[20], so could perhaps go under "Fossil evidence". Also shows a part of the skull otherwise not illustrated.
  • "relevant to closing the jaw" Sounds rather vague, as it had all sorts of other functions. Why not "used for closing the jaw"?
  • "thickening as it approaches the body of the mandible (where the teeth are)" Never heard this terminology, seems to be humanocentric? Just say dentary bone?
  • "are coated in cementum like kangaroos." Like in kangaroos. Otherwise it sounds like kangaroos are coated in cementum...

Support Comments from Jim edit

  • I think in the lead, just Richard Owen, without the title, he was knighted for many more years Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:57, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • ....in weight. Females were much smaller than males. It supported...—perhaps ....in weight; females were much smaller than males. It supported... to keep subject of "it" clear.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Owen compared the tooth to that of a wombat or a hippo—and a hippo?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diprotodontoidea family tree according to Australian palaeontologists Karen H. Black and Brian Mackness, 1999 (left),[27] and Vombatiformes family tree according to Beck et al. 2020 (right):[22]Diprotodontoidea family tree according to Australian palaeontologists Karen H. Black and Brian Mackness, 1999 (left),[27] and Vombatiformes family tree according to Beck et al. 2020 (right):[22] —This verbless sentence appears to be acting as a heading, so either needs formatting as such or made into a sentence eg The Diprotodontoidea family tree according to Australian palaeontologists Karen H. Black and Brian Mackness, 1999 (left),[27] and the Vombatiformes family tree according to Beck et al. 2020 (right):[22] are shown below.
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:41, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In large kangaroos, females usually reach sexual maturity and enter oestrus soon after weaning, and males need double the time. — needs tweaking, males don't reach oestrus
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 08:48, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, changed to support above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:23, 17 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment edit

I realise that the nomination is attracting some attention, but it has been open for over four weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it makes significant progress towards a consensus to promote over the next four or five days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:32, 15 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination has now been open for well over five weeks and seems no closer to a consensus to promote. Unless this changes over the next couple of days it will be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:34, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

SC edit

Putting down a marker to stay the hand of Gog the enforcer - SchroCat (talk) 16:02, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I presume this is written in AusEng? If so, take my spelling and hyphen comments as being from a position of complete ignorance! Having said that, three of the following four are likely to be wrong, with one possible:

  • In Size: "ahve": have and "cartilagenous": cartilaginous?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Extinction: "rockshelter": is that really one word?
either variation is acceptable Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Mythology: "burdgeoning": burgeoning?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Lead
  • I'm not sure what is meant by "browse": is there an alternative word that can be used for the non-technical reader?
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On the other hand": is there a way of avoiding this slightly cumbersome wording?
"However"? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 18:45, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More to come, likely tomorrow. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:36, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Research history
  • "colonist George Ranken": "colonist" is an odd description that doesn’t aid understanding (his nationality doesn't affect what he did). Is there a better descriptor? Farmer?
The source only describes him as a bushman or a colonist, and someone above commented that bushman is vague Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This describes him as a farmer. It also gives information about what he did with the fossils he found, which could be included. - SchroCat (talk) 21:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I added he was a farmer but the part of handing them off to the University of Edinburgh while in England is already in the text (he more specifically gave them to Owen who was alma mater there) Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "generally guessed that the": "generally thought that the"
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "They were not formally described until Mitchell, while in England publishing his journal, brought them in 1837 to his former colleague, English naturalist Richard Owen.": a bit garbled and a bit too much unnecessarily detail. Maybe "They were not formally described until Mitchell brought them to his former colleague, English naturalist Richard Owen."
This has been changed, but is more unclear than it was before. SchroCat (talk) 22:31, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
it's more confusing with the clause "while in England publishing his journal" appendaged onto the end? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In 1838, while studying a piece of a right mandible with an incisor, Owen compared the tooth to that of a wombat and a hippo, and designated it as a new genus in a letter to Mitchell, as Diprotodon": again, a little cumbersome with the letter factoid in the middle. There are two options here:
  • "In 1838, while studying a piece of a right mandible with an incisor, Owen compared the tooth to that of a wombat and a hippo; he wrote to Mitchell and designated it as a new genus: Diprotodon"; or
  • "In 1838, while studying a piece of a right mandible with an incisor, Owen compared the tooth to that of a wombat and a hippo, and designated it as the new genus Diprotodon". You can change the next line to say that when Mitchell was told, he included it in the journal
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the one time": once?
I prefer "the one time" so it's clear it's talking about the aforementioned usage, otherwise it sounds like an introduction Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • You have "Darling Downs" and "the Darling Downs": is the definite article needed?
Where is the definite article not used? Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "rather complete": rather complete? Are they complete or nearly complete?
What's wrong with the word "rather"? I've used it as a descriptor many times without problems, like Ambulocetus, Solo Man, Homo antecessor, etc. Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "in dry lake- or riverbeds" Looks (and reads) a little oddly. "in the beds of dried up lakes or rivers" may be better
"lake- or riverbed" is a perfectly valid phrase Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a sheep property just east": again, a little odd. "a sheep property to the east"?
that works too Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Diprotodon individuals over a few acres, and more were uncovered": this sentence covers 80 years and is a bit surprising (we were looking at Hurst's activities at the beginning!). Maybe a full stop after acres and continue from "More were uncovered..."
done Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Multiple herds of these animals at different times probably got stuck in the mud during their crossing while the water was low during dry seasons". Again this is a bit bumpy to read through and if we're reporting something in WP's voice, "probably" shouldn't be included. Hypotheticals should always be attributed. Possible rewording could look something like "Bloggs considers it likely that several herds of Diprotodon crossed the (river or lake) while the water was low during dry season and became stuck in the mud"
You can't use definitive wording in these kinds of matters, because it's not like we have witnesses to the event. And, if I do "Bloggs says xyz" then it sounds like Bloggs came up with the idea and he's the only one really saying it Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is a problem (still). Naming someone who has said something doesn’t mean they were the first. _ SchroCat (talk) 22:35, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I found the first guy who said it, so attributed Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "several other species were erected": erected? Identified, maybe? If this is technical use it fails WP:JARGON, if it isn't, then it's not in the OED!
It's not jargon and it's never been an issue before, and I wouldn't use the word identify because it sounds like a real and valid discovery, which clearly it wasn't because the names are no longer used Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It’s not in the dictionary as a meaning that is clear here. - SchroCat (talk) 22:29, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
erect as in the sense to set up or establish Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Also, adult Diprotodon specimens": never start a sentence with "Also" on WP – it just looks like something that's been forgotten and added in later. The sentence and the one that follows seem to be unconnected to the opening sentence of the paragraph and the final one. (ie, you mention the other species, then talk about the differing/non-differing sizes, then move onto the other species again. It's a bit of a confusing paragraph – at least for a non-specialist like me.
added "Among the variations was size difference" Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Australian palaeontologists": aside from repeating Australia from three words previously, their nationality is unimportant as far as this article goes. Just "Palaeontologists" will suffice
Including nationality when introducing a person is pretty standard (or at least commonplace) on the paleo side of Wiki, such as in Oxalaia, Cimoliopterus, Paranthodon, etc. Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nationality isn’t important: the names and findings are. - SchroCat (talk) 22:35, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Personally I like reading the nationality to see how multinational (or not) research on the subject is, and it's a harmless, unobtrusive addition Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 23:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I, as a reader, don’t feel it’s unobtrusive. The constant repetition of nationality makes me wonder if there is a reason: are American palaeontologists better or worse at some aspects than French or Australian ones? Do British or German ones have an advantage or disadvantage? There are about fourteen references before the family tree: for the general reader this looks like the nationality actually matters somehow ... but it really doesn’t. It’s a distraction that doesn’t add anything for the general (or specialist) reader. - SchroCat (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It's more like scientists from these places seem to be taking more of an interest in this topic, you're reading way too far into this if you think the average reader is interpreting the small mention of nationality as racist or whatever it is you're implying Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 01:27, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I’m not implying anything of the sort. I have given the reasons quite clearly. - SchroCat (talk) 06:00, 3 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Bullet list: "erected", as before; nationalities, as before
  • "Australian palaeontologist Gilbert": nationality as before

Done to the end of Research history. I have concerns on the text with this article and we're only at the end of the first section. It's a bit bumpy to read through – not just the scientific information, which often causes problems in flowing prose, but in the history and description, where I keep tripping over awkward constructions and odd phrasing or word choice. – SchroCat (talk) 15:42, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through one of the lower sections and see other problems in the prose which I think should be cleared up before coming to FAC. I'm reluctantly going to oppose this (something I dislike doing), but my recommendation is that you withdraw this nom and go through PR to get the prose issues sorted before returning. - SchroCat (talk) 17:33, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Most of your comments are purely stylistic so I ask you to reconsider Dunkleosteus77 (talk) 20:53, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, these are not stylistic, and neither are many of my other concerns. Saying that something passed elsewhere isn’t a defence. Neither is claiming these are ‘just’ stylistic. Just glancing down the page the following caught my eye “They [the sinuses] may have also helped dissipate stresses produced by biting more efficiently across the skull”: reading literally, this is saying by the efficient way the sinuses bit across the skull, they dissipated stress. There are several such points where a reader will both trip up on and be confused by the prose. You don’t have to take my comments or my oppose on board (these are just my opinion, after all), but I’m not inclined to withdraw the oppose. - SchroCat (talk) 22:14, 24 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Just clarifying, my oppose isn’t on stylistic grounds, but on FAC criteria 1.a: “well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard”. - SchroCat (talk) 23:21, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Would it help sending it to the WP:league of copy editors? FunkMonk (talk) 12:11, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It might, but this has been open a long time and, as Gog noted earlier, is still not approaching consensus to promote. I'm afraid it's time to archive this and work on improvements outside the FAC process. A visit to PR before another try here also seems worthwhile. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:38, 6 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Buidhe via FACBot (talk) 5 March 2023 [21].

Frances Cleveland edit

Nominator(s): Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Frances Cleveland was first lady of the United States during the presidencies of Grover Cleveland. She became an instant celebrity after marrying the sitting president in the White House, and her popularity may have surpassed even his. I improved this article as part of my personal project to bring every first lady article to GA status, but I put some extra work into this one and I believe it has the potential to be a featured article. Note that this is my first FAC. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:44, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination edit

  • Hi Thebiguglyalien, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:48, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Frances_Folsom_Cleveland.jpg is missing a US tag and author date of death
  • File:Frances_(Folsom)_Cleveland,_1864-1947,_full_length_portrait,_standing,_facing_right;_in_formal_gown_LCCN2005686653.jpg: when and where was this first published? Ditto File:Frances_F._Cleveland,_head-and-shoulders_portrait,_facing_left_LCCN2002695293_(cropped).jpg, File:Mrs._Frances_Cleveland_with_trowel_at_building_foundation_ceremony_-_LCCN2014680806_(cropped).tif
  • File:Review_of_reviews_and_world's_work_(1890)_(14780390264).jpg should have a more specific tag
  • File:First_ladies-cleveland.jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:14, 21 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria: This is definitely not my area of expertise, and it seems there's not much guidance for these things. I've added alt text to the images, and I did my best with the tags, though I doubt I did it perfectly. I also found the author info for File:Frances_Folsom_Cleveland.jpg. I do not know where to find publication info or how to implement it to comply with the WP:FACR; the Library of Congress database the photos are derived from doesn't seem to have it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:06, 22 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Essentially, in terms of FACR and image licensing, you need to ensure the images have tags that are supported by evidence. So for example, File:Frances_F._Cleveland,_head-and-shoulders_portrait,_facing_left_LCCN2002695293_(cropped).jpg has a tag that indicates it was published before 1928. Can you identify a pre-1928 publication? If no, then we need either a different tag or a different image. US copyright tags are (often) based on publication, so identifying the earliest publication you can find will help you select an appropriate tag. For finding publication info, the sources you've used for the article are among the best places to look, as they often include images and may include attribution for earlier publications of those images. You can also try an image search like TinEye or similar. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:00, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from Freoh I don't have time to give a full review, but I will make a comment as someone seeing this with fresh eyes: the relationship between her and Grover is kind of weird, and I think that it could be written with a smoother transition from the paternal phase to the romantic phase. This looks like a good source:

Extended content

"At what time Cleveland’s interest in Frank Folsom became more romantic than paternal is a matter of minor scholarly debate. Biographer Annette Dunlap hinted at a date as early as 1875, when Frank Folsom was eleven years old (Dunlap, 2009: 14). Historian Rebecca Edwards argued that the “romantic interest” was an 1884 political strategy (Edwards, 1997: 62–63), aimed at preventing in the future the type of scandal that Cleveland’s first presidential campaign had suffered when the press discovered that he might have fathered an illegitimate son." (p. 269)

Obviously, not a lot of details are known about how this romantic interest started, but I think that this article would flow better if this was stated more explicitly, rather than jumping into a marriage proposal to her "uncle".      — Freoh 02:20, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've added a sentence to this effect. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:27, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks I've checked randomly throughout the article:

  1. Footnote (FN) 3:245: Source says: "Franks education began at Madame Brecker's French Kindergarten and continued at Miss Bissell's School for Young Ladies". Article says: "Folsom began school at Madame Brecker's French Kindergarten and then Miss Bissell's School for Young Ladies" link to source
  2. FN 3:242 - Source says: "Soon thereafter they gave two receptions, one for the diplomatic corps and one for the general public". Article says: "After the Clevelands returned from their honeymoon, two wedding receptions were held, one for the diplomatic corps, and one for the public." link to source
  3. FN 4:142 - is okay. But it goes to the next page, so should be cited as pp. 142-143
  4. FN 13: Source says: "Frankie was very attached to the servants, remembering them on their birthdays and at Christmas with little gifts". Article says: "She maintained a close relationship with the White House servants, giving them gifts on their birthdays and on Christmas" link to source
  5. FN 11:275 - Source says: "She received thousands of letters and in turn had a typewriter taken up to her office desk typing her public correspondence herself". Article says: "Cleveland received thousands of letters, and she had a typewriter brought to her desk so that she could manage her own communication with the public" link to source
  • I tried to verify one from the "Private life" section but the book isn't viewable. Noting however that most of that section is cited only to that single source.

Of the five random checks, four show close paraphrasing. Suggest withdrawal and top-to-bottom rewrite. The sourcing isn't great, because the article relies mostly on tertiary sources and the prose needs work too. Victoria (tk) 22:19, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Victoriaearle, I'm curious how you would have me do it differently, especially since there are WP:LIMITED ways to write biographical facts about a person. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:44, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Speaking only to the paraphrasing issue (I haven't reviewed the article sourcing as a whole), these spot checks seem fine. It's just a restatement of basic facts in different words. Definitely not worth a top-to-bottom rewrite because of this. Larataguera (talk) 00:48, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The first one about the dame schools should probably be moved elsewhere in the chronology - the previous sentence is about Cleveland buying her a baby buggy. Since the family moved after her father's death, do we know where they were when she attended these schools? If so, I'd weave it together that way - something like "while living in xxx she was sent to kindergarten and later to a dame school - Miss Bissel's school for young ladies (young ladies suggests later, perhaps before high school). Alternatively I'd put all the education in one para.
The one about the receptions can be combined with the previous sentence: "The couple left the White House that evening. They went to Oak Park but much to Cleveland's irritation reporters followed their movements closely so they cut their honeymoon short, returning to Washington where diplomats and the public were hosted in separate events".
The thing is, it's difficult to rephrase based on a single sentence; it's best to use summary style based on an entire passage.
Pinging SandyGeorgia who is more steeped in this than I am these days for a second opinion. Also pinging Gog the Mild who asked for spot checks. I hadn't intended to check the entire article and don't have the time for it, so maybe someone else can take over? Victoria (tk) 03:28, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In the first example given by Victoria, there are plenty of ways that can be re-phrased (eg, Folsom completed her primary education at Miss Bessell's School for Young Ladies following her start at Madame Brecker's French Kindergarten ... I'm sure others can do better than that, but there are quite a few ways to do it).
But what stands out to me while looking at that is that there is no sense to the paragraphing around that.
  • Frances Folsom was born in Buffalo, New York, on July 21, 1864, to Emma (née Harmon) and her husband, Oscar Folsom, a lawyer who was a descendant of the earliest European settlers of Exeter, New Hampshire.[1] She was the older of two children. Her sister, Nellie Augusta, died in infancy in 1872. All of Frances Cleveland's ancestors were from England and settled in what would become Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and New Hampshire, eventually migrating to western New York.[2]
  • A long-time close friend of Folsom's father, Grover Cleveland met his future wife when she was an infant and he was twenty-seven years old. He was fond of her, buying her a baby carriage and doting on her as she grew up.[2] Folsom began school at Madame Brecker's French Kindergarten and then Miss Bissell's School for Young Ladies.[3]: 245 
She's called both Frances Folsom and Frances Cleveland in the same paragraph. Why? I had to read and re-read to figure out who was who (they're both her?). So the first para is about her parents, birth, sister and ancestors ... it's unclear why we go from her parents, to her sister, and then back to her ancestors again, rather than parents, ancestors, sister ... or ancestors, parents, sister. Then in the second paragraph we have her future husband combined with her primary education. Why isn't her future husband introduced in the next paragraph? Some work on paragraph structure might be in order.
The second example is clearly too-closely paraphrased. But again, there's a flow problem:
  • Frances became first lady upon marrying the president.  The Clevelands spent a week in Deer Park, Maryland on honeymoon, where they were closely followed by reporters. After the Clevelands returned from their honeymoon, two wedding receptions were held, one for the diplomatic corps, and one for the public.
Why do we even say she became first lady upon marrying the president (is that ever not the case?). How about:
  • After a week-long honeymoon in Deer Park, Maryland, where they were closely followed by reporters, they held separate wedding receptions for the diplomatic corps and the public.
Similarly four and five are indeed too close. When a writer is having a hard time like this, a new approach is needed. One needs to set the sources aside and write in their own words rather than picking pieces from sources and trying to juggle the words. These four out of five examples demonstrate there is indeed a problem. Appreciation to Victoria for doing the check, and I suggest a withdrawal is in order for re-working. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:34, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Requesting withdraw and archive as nominator. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:42, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Best of luck to you, Thebiguglyalien; my old refrain used to be that the fastest route to promotion is a speedy withdrawal for re-working. Keep at it! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:53, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
SandyGeorgia if you've time for a quick question: I've been starting to follow the FA process to better understand it. I understand the concerns about flow, and also how poor flow could arise from a series of closely paraphrased sentences taken from different sources. I had commented earlier that I thought these paraphrasings were OK, because I was thinking in terms of copyvio concerns. Are your issues here purely related to flow arising from picking pieces from sources and trying to juggle the words, or would you have copyvio concerns with these phrasings? (Obviously you aren't terribly concerned or the material would have been removed?) Thanks for helping me understand this process so that I can hopefully contribute more later on. Larataguera (talk) 05:11, 5 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Hog Farm via FACBot (talk) 4 March 2023 [22].

Barry Sanders edit

Nominator(s): NSNW (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Sanders is a former running back for the Detroit Lions American football franchise, playing mostly in the 1990s. This is a Level 5 Vital Article in Sports Figures, and I believe it is up to FA standards. I've been working on it off and on for about a year I think, and got it to GA status last June. After further improvements I'm ready to give it the test. This is also my first FA nomination, though I have nominated (and promoted) a FL candidate some time ago; so if there are moments where I don't exactly know what you are talking about then please be patient with me. NSNW (talk) 23:49, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First-time nomination edit

  • Hi NSNW, just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:54, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Captions need editing for grammar
    • Trimmed up the caption on the Jets logo image, that was the only one that looked like it needed editing.
  • File:Barry_Sanders_HOF_bust.jpg: what is the copyright status of the bust? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:10, 4 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • The image itself was under a CC License, but after taking a closer look at the Freedom of panorama in the United States jurisdiction, where the photo was taken, only buildings and architecture are non-copyrightable. I removed the image just to be safe. NSNW (talk) 17:35, 5 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments edit

  • "Barry Sanders[1] (born July 16, 1968) is an American former professional football player" - can you find a way to reword this to allow use of the full term "American football" so that people don't think it refers to real association football? :-)
    • Fixed.
  • "where as a junior in 1988" - a junior what.....?
    • Rewritten to be 'college junior'
  • "Sanders unexpectedly retired from professional football after 1998" - "after 1998" could cover any date up to today
    • I rewrote that so that it's now 'in 1999' (he officially retired in the year 1999, by after 1998 I meant between the 1998 season and before the next season in 1999, but it's clearer now).
  • "The Lions retired Sander's " => "The Lions retired Sanders'"
    • Fixed.
  • "Sanders and two of his brothers worked as roofers assistants" => "Sanders and two of his brothers worked as roofer's assistants"
    • Done.
  • "Before this, he enjoyed playing biddy football" - what is "biddy football"? Is there an appropriate wikilink?
    • Changed it to youth football and wikilinked.
  • "sophomore year, but his brother Byron started before him in that position during Barry's junior year" - "sophomore year" and "junior year" mean nothing to me, are there appropriate wikilinks?
    • I redid the last part of the sentence and wikilinked both schooling years.
  • "the Sanders family had to "scrimp and save to get buy"" - the last word should be spelt "by". Is the spelling incorrect in the source or is this just a typo in the article?
    • It was a typo; fixed.
  • "Sanders did not become the starting running back until the fourth game of his senior year" - again, don't know what a "senior year" is, is there a link?
    • Linked.
  • "because of his short stature, Sanders received scholarship offers" => "because of his short stature Sanders received scholarship offers"
    • Removed the comma.
  • That's what I got as far as the end of "early life". Back for more later...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:47, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • "He was named a second-team All-American" - what does this mean?
    • Clarified as a 'College Football All-American' and linked.
  • "adding another 516 yards on special teams" - this is the second mention of "special teams". Move the wikilink to the first
    • Done.
  • "in just three-quarters of action" => "in just three quarters of action"
    • Done.
  • "Most consecutive games scoring two or more touchdowns: 13 (from Nov. 14, 1987, through 1988)" - write November in full
    • Done.
  • That's what I got as far as the end of the college section......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:11, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]


  • "Sanders, a junior," - again, a junior what?
    • Changed to 'Sanders, a college junior'.
  • "were given significant penalties for its violations" - there seems to be some plural/singular inconsistency here
    • I don't know if this fully fixes it but changed to 'their violations'.
  • "was impressed with his athletic ability after Sanders lifted 225 lbs (102 kg) for 21 reps" => "was impressed with Sanders' athletic ability after he lifted 225 lbs (102 kg) for 21 reps"
    • Done.
  • "During the game, the Lions installed a special phone line in one of the press boxes to monitor Christian Okoye who, at the time, was tied with Sanders for the league rushing title" - say who Okoye played for
  • That's what I got as far as 1991.... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:56, 6 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More comments edit

  • "While rushing 39-yards for a touchdown" - pretty sure this should be "While rushing 39 yards for a touchdown"
    • Done.
  • "The 1995 season began against the Pittsburgh Steelers, Sanders recorded 21 rushing attempts for 108 yards." => "The 1995 season began against the Pittsburgh Steelers; Sanders recorded 21 rushing attempts for 108 yards."
    • Done.
  • "The Lions posted a 10–6 record and made the postseason with a wild card spot, where the Lions faced" => "The Lions posted a 10–6 record and made the postseason with a wild card spot, where they faced" (less reptitive)
    • Done.
  • "despite the victory being guaranteed by teammate Lomas Brown." - what does this mean? How did he guarantee it, given that it didn't happen?
    • He "guaranteed" before the game even started that his team would win, only for them to lose. It's in quotations now if that fixes it.
  • Don't think the Jets logo adds anything and seems to just be there for the sake of it.....
    • Removed.
  • "Sanders had a season that's" => "Sanders had a season that is" (no contractions)
    • Done.
  • "the Lions faced the Buccaneers, whom were playing" => "the Lions faced the Buccaneers, who were playing"
    • Done.
  • "Sanders would have surpassed the record if he hadn't retired early" => "Sanders would have surpassed the record if he had not retired early"
  • "NFL MVP and OPOTY" in little table) - you'll need to write MVP and OPTY out in full (with the abbreviations in brackets) as the abbreviations have not been used prior to this (either that or add the abbreviations earlier)
    • Added some abbreviations to earlier mentions.
  • I would suggest the stats table needs a key, as I for one have no idea what GS, FD, and possibly some others, mean
    • I added a kind of first draft on expanding the legend; I will improve it later.
  • " In commemoration of the 150th-year of college football" => " In commemoration of the 150th year of college football"
    • Done.
  • "Sanders' oldest son, J. Sanders" - this is not a standard way to refer to a person (nobody would refer to the early 21st century president as simply "W. Bush", for example). I think in this case you are going to have to write young Barry's name in full
    • Done.
  • "Sanders introduced ESPN's Monday Night Football game between the Chicago Bears and Lions on October 10, 2011" => "Sanders introduced ESPN's Monday Night Football game between the Chicago Bears and the Lions on October 10, 2011"
    • Done.
  • "the 1st player to appear" => "the first player to appear" - ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:51, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done. NSNW (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • All of these have been responded to. NSNW (talk) 12:59, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One more comment edit

  • Something I seemingly forgot to mention previously - per MOS:COLOR, you can't use just colour to highlight something in the table. You'll need to use a symbol too.... ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:39, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Done. NSNW (talk) 23:57, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:57, 2 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note edit

This has been open for more than three weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it will have to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:16, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: - apologies, I forgot all about this one, I'll check back in shortly -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:50, 1 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, but we're still only one support it, after about a month. This one has effectively stalled out, so I will be closing it. The normal two-week waiting period is waived here. Hog Farm Talk 02:14, 4 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Buidhe via FACBot (talk) 20 March 2023 [23].

Vivien Lyra Blair edit

Nominator(s): Pamzeis (talk) 11:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm not really sure about this one...

Vivien Lyra Blair is probably best known for her role as Princess Leia in Obi-Wan Kenobi, but before that, she appeared in Netflix films that have been pretty popular (Bird Box and We Can Be Heroes) as well as the critically acclaimed video game Telling Lies. All of which she accomplished before the double digits! And that's where it kinda gets tricky with writing an article about her... not much is known about her life and her career's just starting out so this article is prettyvery short. Iff promoted, this would be the shortest FA by prose, clocking in at ~3500 characters and ~500 words (though not by bytes due to the many references). Honestly, it seems doubtful that this article could meet criteria 1b and 1c, but I believe it does, as I've tried my best to include every (relevant) detail that I can find. And even though I expect the article to change significantly as Blair's career evolves, I'm asking for an assessment of the current version of the article and whether it meets the FA criteria. Anyways, if the article changes in the future, it could always be delisted. Thanks! Pamzeis (talk) 11:24, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review. There are no images. Are any available? Nikkimaria (talk) 22:06, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: I don't doubt the thoroughness of your research. But even so, much of what is here often reads like hagiography or advertisement—'critics praised her as "charming",[14] "endearing",[15] "feisty",[16] and "delightful"[17]' or 'In 2022, Comic Book Resources described her as "an acting powerhouse who will one day take home all the statues".' Even if I don't question CBR's competence in predicting future acting powerhouses, I feel these cannot be considered NPOV judgements because they obviously won't really be able to criticise her with such an intensity if the opposite were true (i.e. if her performances were bad). They're being nice about a kid; that's fine but you can't base an FA on that.

It's a decent GA but we'll need to wait a few years while she builds a larger body of work and basic info about her (date/place of birth etc) becomes available.—indopug (talk) 09:45, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Doesn't meet 1b in particular and probably wouldn't meet 1e. You've obviously put a lot of work into this and it's not a reflection on you or your research, but I don't think it's possible to write a comprehensive biography of a 10-year-old at the very beginning of her career. And the article will obviously change dramatically with any future major roles she takes so won't remain stable for long. We do have FAs of people whose careers are still active but in most cases they've reached the top of their profession after a lengthy career and it's unlikely that coverage of any new roles they take on would completely overwhelm their biography. I respectfully suggest withdrawal. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:18, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose: I hope my comment does not come across as a pile-on. I have a great deal of respect for Pamzeis, and I think it is admirable that they have done work on younger individuals (with Shaylee Mansfield being promoted to the FA level last year). Pamzeis did reach out to me a few months ago on my talk page and voiced concerns about the article's length. As the above reviewers have already said, I just think it is too soon to put this article through the FAC process when in all likelihood, it will look very, very different several years down the line.

There actually was a conversation on the FAC talk page last year (here) that partially raised questions about FACs and "young people who are in the early stages of their careers", but it did not really focus on this topic. I am sorry, and I hope this does not come across as rude. I just thought I should comment given the nominator did reach out to me in the past about this particular article. Aoba47 (talk) 23:08, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • @FAC coordinators: Given the above comments, I would like to withdraw this nomination. I'd like to thank the reviewers for their time. Hopefully, I'll be able to work on this again in the future. Pamzeis (talk) 01:11, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. (t · c) buidhe 04:27, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Buidhe via FACBot (talk) 28 March 2023 [24].

Tiger edit

Nominator(s): Dancing Dollar (let's talk) 15:18, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the largest cat species, the tiger, a very influential animal in human history. Dancing Dollar (let's talk) 15:18, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • I see you have only made one edit to the article. You'll see in the instructions at WP:FAC that "Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it." Have you done that?
    Nominators are expected to be able to answer any and all questions abut the article - to be completely familiar with the subject matter: do you have access to the sources used in the article and are you in a position to answer such questions? - SchroCat (talk) 15:51, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • @SchroCat: I can answer any question you may throw at me, but should I ping regular editors of the page or should I become a regular editor myself, I mean there are still information that are missing. Dancing Dollar (let's talk) 16:37, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • If there is still information that is missing, then it shouldn't be listed at FAC. FA criteria 1b. says articles must be "comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context". Are you saying this isn't comprehensive? - SchroCat (talk) 17:51, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Never mind what I said there, the article is finalized. The article is essentially complete, no other content needs to be added, it's a very satisfactory article, no improvements needed. Please assess the article. New information has not been added to the page for years. Dancing Dollar (let's talk) 18:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm pinging @BhagyaMani, LittleJerry, and Sandhillcrane: They'll help me with this nomination. Dancing Dollar (let's talk) 16:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Procedural oppose for the moment. The article may or may not be complete, but without the input of the main editors to support the nomination, this won't go anywhere. The fact there is a tag in the article doesn't help. - SchroCat (talk) 18:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Regrettably, I likewise oppose. This is my first time doing so at FA, but I firmly believe that article needs some major work before it can be considered for FA status. In addition to the nominator not being a major contributor (as discussed above), the article is sprinkled with seemingly irrelevant trivia. Certainly it is a fine GA, but I recommend withdrawal of this nomination and submission to PR instead, at least until the main authors respond to their summons. Unlimitedlead (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • I cannot comment about most of the article, but the "Relationship with humans" and "Cultural depictions" sections seem worse than the rest of the article: sources of poorer quality, lack of recent updates, possibly some WP:WTW and WP:SYNTH. I also spotted numerous grammar mistakes when skimming. It would be better if these GA-level issues were removed before nomination. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:05, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. (t · c) buidhe 22:35, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Archived_nominations/March_2023&oldid=1147641732"