Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/J. R. Kealoha/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 promoted by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 01:22, 13 September 2016 [1].

J. R. Kealoha edit

Nominator(s): KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:07, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about J. R. Kealoha, the only Native Hawaiian combatant of the Civil War whose gravesite (in the island) is known by modern historian. Efforts to posthumously honor him especially his unmarked grave occurred at a period of renewed interest in Hawaiian soldiers who fought in the American Civil War while Hawaii was an independent kingdom. At this point, this article contains all existing knowledge about this figure. I believe it is not far from a Wikipedia:Very short featured articles. KAVEBEAR (talk) 19:07, 18 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:17, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments -- recusing from coord duties...

  • I've copyedited so pls let me know any concerns there; outstanding points re.prose/content:
    • "he and another Hawaiian soldier met the Hawaii-born Colonel Samuel Chapman Armstrong, who recorded their encounter in a letter home" seems over-detailing for the lead.
    • Does it really take three citations to source the sentence "The marker was formally dedicated and unveiled on October 25, 2014"?
  • Re. images, I'll take Nikki's review as read.
  • Re. sources, all links work, and nothing leapt out at me as a serious concern reliability-wise; formatting looked okay as well. I'm not sure that the documentary Hawaiʻi Sons of the Civil War needs to be in External Links when it's cited in the text, but that's a minor thing.

A nice, succinct, article -- I can see the number of sources employed and appreciate that info on these guys is often thin on the ground. Before I support, I'd like to see further commentary from others more experienced in Civil War-related history, perhaps Wehwalt and Coemgenus, to name two who come to mind, though I appreciate there probably aren't many editors that familiar with Hawaiian participation... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:45, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Don't know a thing about it, though 'll take a look at it, and will poke around for sources, but you must allow me a few days, as I am traveling and have also promised Montanabw a review.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:06, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I'll take a look today or tomorrow. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:25, 14 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Tks guys -- I've checked the edits made since my last pass, and see no issues and no reason to withhold support. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:53, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Support

  • There's not a lot known about Kealoha, which concerns me, but everything that is known is presented in an orderly and readable manner. Articles like this are always hard to assess for FA, but I think there shouldn't be a problem.
  • The sourcing all seems impeccable, no complaints there.
  • The only error I noticed concerns the location of Camp William Penn--it was in Cheltenham, Pennsylvania, not Philadelphia. --Coemgenus (talk) 15:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • I corrected the location for Camp William Penn. I got that connection with Philadelphia from Benjamin Cox's source. As for the additional info about Kealoha, this is all that is known about him. Thanks.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 03:44, 16 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)

  • "Hawaii-born", "Hawaiʻi": consistency
  • "has come to represents": ?
  • Support on prose per my standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 20:43, 21 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agreed with Wehwalt about the Sons of the Civil War. We don't repeat information in the lead, and this information is prone to misinterpretation. I tried to fix it, twice. - Dank (push to talk) 08:22, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I've looked at the article. I don't see anything glaringly wrong or problematical. My internet's sort of intermittent right now but when I get a chance I'll run some searches through my GMU databases and see what I come up with. A number of specific comments:

  • "unconditional surrender" (lede and body) Was Lee's surrender truly unconditional? There were certainly terms granted, everyone was paroled and allowed to go home with small arms, horses, etc.
  • I don't see why Hawaii is sometimes spelled with the ', and sometimes not.
  • It is an okina, glottal stop commonly used in Hawaiian spelling. It is pretty consistent in the article. the only instances It is not used isin quotes, when referring to the state or territory unit (this is in the MOS for Hawaii wikiprojects), and or when suffixed by -ian. This is common practice used in writing about Hawaiian history.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He was among a group of more than one hundred documented Native Hawaiian and Hawaii-born combatants, the "Hawaiʻi Sons of the Civil War", who fought in the American Civil War while the Kingdom of Hawaiʻi was still an independent nation." I think some rephrasing should be done to make it clear they didn't fight as a group, as this sentence could be read to imply. I also don't see the need for the whole long title twice in the lede, especially given its evident recent coinage.
  • I'm reverting back to the version used in the intro for Henry Hoolulu Pitman's article. If it work there I think it should be fine here. I don't think it would come off as they fought in a group..--KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • " a United States Colored regiment" I would cut all but "a regiment", piping to those two words perhaps
  • Abbreviated to USC to add variation.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • "volunteered and enlisted in the military regiments of various states in the Union and the Confederacy." I might consolidate to "volunteered for service in the forces of the Union and the Confederacy" That should be broad enough to cover state regiments
  • It is unclear if the clause in the first paragraph of "Life", relating to opposition to slavery, refers to Hawaiians or New Englanders.
  • I don't see that problem and it can mean both to be honest because both the New Englanders and Hawaiians apposed slavery. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's not clear why DVA changed its mind.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:37, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because they never did. I restore the original wording because the 2009 policy change which came into effect in 2012 is a significant reason why they were denied. The Hawaiian group relied on a private monument maker to create the marker. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:42, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Wehwalt: Let me know if there is anything else to address. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:47, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support I've now run some searches, and came up with articles in the Hawaii papers that are already used as sources or contain analogous information. So although the subject is small in available information, the article appears comprehensive and it's well written and otherwise seems to meet the FA criteria.--Wehwalt (talk) 06:09, 26 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

  • "only next of kin could request VA memorials" Presumably VA means Dept of Veteran Affairs but you need to explain this.
  • Unsure what you mean here. Do you just want me to clarify what VA means or explained the ruling? I mean the previous sentence already mentions United States Department of Veterans Affairs in full. It might be redundant and repetitive to mention it in full again and VA is a common abbreviation in the US. The latter I won't know how to do yet, but I've read how cases such as Kealoha have influenced the VA in changing their stance in recent years in regards to veterans who died more than 100 years ago. I plan on expanding that in the future once the sources are more available.
  • It would be better to show it as "United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)" at first mention. Then it is clear to non-US readers what VA stands for in the next sentence. Dudley Miles (talk) 18:01, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 5 looks odd. Why the "&" at the beginning?
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/J._R._Kealoha/archive1&oldid=1079645529"