Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Alec Douglas-Home/archive1

Comments from Crisco 1492

Image comments

• Quite a few which need touch-ups. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2012 (UTC)
  • I'm no expert on Wikipedia's policies on images, and shall await the outcome of the reviews you propose of the individual pictures. I will just say that as the Heath and Wilson pictures come from the same source it presumably follows that if Wilson is okay then so is Heath. As to Butler and Macmillan I'll await developments. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • I've nominated two for deletion. I would appreciate if perhaps you replaced the ones with questionable sourcing with ones with better sourcing. I'll be glad to help in that regard. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:42, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Here's one for Gromyko (b&w)
      • Can't find anything for Butler or MacMillan.
      • File:Arthur Neville Chamberlain 03.jpg seems to be owned by the LOC and is therefore PD. They purchased it and the copyright in the 1940s, according to this
      • File:Edward Heath Allan Warren crop.jpg should be fine for Heath once Warren adds a date — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:17, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
        • I've replaced the Gromyko image as requested. As the existing Chamberlain one is out of copyright in the UK, perhaps I should put a copy in en.wikipedia? It is nearer in period to the relevant time: the one mentioned above was probably taken at the turn of the century. I'll wait for the green light to replace the Heath image. I can put a picture of Macleod vice Macmillan. There is an image in Commons, but I'd need to crop it and I don't know what licensing tag to use. Suggestions welcome. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
          • Regarding Chamberlain, to be hosted on Wikipedia an image need only be PD in the US. If not PD in the US, then it cannot be hosted here except as fair use. I'll look at the Macleod image. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
          • I'm confused with that image. Not sure if the user is the photographer or not. The image is included here without attribution, but was published in April (the file upload was in March) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:44, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
          • File:Edward Heath Allan Warren crop.jpg is ready if you want to use it. File:Iain Macleod crop.jpg is available, but as I noted above I'm unsure of the copyright status. I'd recommend removing Butler's image as it is almost definitely a copyvio.
            • Heath and Macleod - thank you very much. I'll remove Butler and Macmillan. Apropos what you say about the Chamberlain image, I'm puzzled over the function of the {{PD-old-70}} template: can you enlighten me? Tim riley (talk) 10:04, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
              • Per Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights: "A work can equally be in the public domain in its source country but still under copyright in the United States: any non-posthumous work published after 1922 by a British or German author who died between January 1, 1926 and December 31, 1941 falls into this category." The painting is probably in copyright in the US until 2034, as the US extended foreign copyrights automatically in 1996 with the Uruguay Round Agreements Act. The PD-old-70 is for other countries which judge copyright based on the death date of the author and does not guarantee that a work is PD in the US. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:17, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I think I've now acted on all your suggestions for replacing and removing images. Tim riley (talk) 10:39, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Prose comments

• who served as Prime Minister... - I think Prime Minister should not be capitalised, as it is not followed by the name of the country or a proper name. Same with "a Prime Minister", as this is prime ministers as a whole
  • We grappled with this at peer review. The MoS is no help on this. The consensus was for ulc, otherwise one ends up with weird forms such as "lord privy seal" Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• Parliamentary aide to Neville Chamberlain, - Why the big p and small a?
  • lc would be fine. Done. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• was taken ill - took ill, perhaps? Either way, you have it twice, so perhaps a little variety.
  • Redrawn Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• result of a sexual scandal involving a senior minister in 1963, - Is his name worth including in the lede?
  • Happy to add it if there's a consensus to that effect. I'd say John Profumo's name should go in the lead of a Macmillan article, but probably not of Home's. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Alright
• "of his party" ... "of his party"
  • Redrawn Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• post of Foreign Secretary which he had held between 1960 and 1963 - Why not have the years above and just put "post of Foreign Secretary which he had previously held."
  • Redrawn Tim riley (talk)
• "born in Mayfair" ... "born to Lord Dunglass"
  • I think we ought to include his place of birth. (It is, by the bye, remarkable how often Scottish aristocrats would arrange for their childen to be born at the family's London house rather than at the country house. It was quite clearly the done thing, but I have never discovered why.) Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • I was thinking of the repetition actually.
      • Oh, I see. Dealt with. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• reforming Prime Minister Earl Grey - This sounds a little awkward to me. Does this mean Grey led a reform, or that he was reforming / recuperating after making some mistakes?
  • This is a relic of the article before I began revamping it. I felt a certain obligation to leave it in, but I don't think it is very interesting and will gladly blitz it if there is a consensus to do so. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Now done.
• "Among the couple's younger children was the playwright William Douglas-Home." - "His younger brother was the playwright William Douglas-Home."
  • But the existing draft makes it clear that there weren't just two of them. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Among his younger brothers, perhaps. I think we should focus on the relation to Alec
      • Neater, but ambiguous. That was how I first thought of it, but I realised that it could be read as saying that William was Alec's uncle rather than his brother. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• who was styled Lord Dunglass until 1951. - What's the policy on bolded text outside the lede? Seems awkward to me.
  • I originally had all Home's titles in bold in the lead, but at PR it was agreed not to do so (I was outvoted on this). Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Don't bold names outside the lead, at least not at FAC. - Dank (push to talk) 23:32, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Unbolded. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• Unionist party - Isn't the proper name Unionist Party?
  • I'd need to capitalise the Party for the Tories, Labour and Liberals too. Preferable to keep caps to a minimum, I think. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• he lost to his Labour opponent - Who was the opponent? Might be notable.
  • A man called J C Welsh. I'd never heard of him and there is no ODNB (or Wikipedia) article on him. I don't think it would add anything helpful to put his name in. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Fair enough, although I'd think that a member of House of Commons would be inherently notable due to the position (it would be similar to a member of the House of Representatives in the US, right?)

The person's name might be of interest elsewhere, but not, IMO, to readers of this article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

• "and get his message across" - Convey his (intended) message, perhaps? Get his message across sounds rather informal.
  • After forty years in the public service I have Plain Words in my DNA. This may be a matter of preferences on each side of the Atlantic: it is, perhaps, significant that the peer reviewers are all English and didn't find the phrase unsuitable. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Fair enough, if it's considered formal enough in British English.
• coalition "National Government" - coalition "National Government" or "National Government" coalition?
  • Either. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "and in 1937 the incumbent, Stanley Baldwin, retired and Chamberlain succeeded him. " - Feels clunky. How about and in 1937, after the incumbent Stanley Baldwin retired, Chamberlain took the post." or something like that.
  • The idea of succession is important to the doings of the Tory party of that period. I think one needs the commas round Baldwin otherwise one implies that there was also an unincumbent Stanley Baldwin. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "Peace with honour" and promising "Peace for our time." - Does Peace need to be capitalised here?
  • That's interesting. I find I have transcribed the sources wrongly. Honour needs to be capitalised and the second Peace doesn't. Now done. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "Nevertheless, he firmly maintained all his life" - Dunglass?
  • Well yes, but I was hoping to dodge saying "Dunglass maintained all his life" as he wasn't Dunglass all his life. I think, on balance, I prefer the theoretical ambiguity to a prominent incongruity. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• Citation needed tag added x3
  • Addressed Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• Dunglass lost his Parliamentary seat in the Conservatives' defeat at the landslide Labour victory at the July 1945 general election - Too many clauses. Perhaps "At the July 1945 general election Dunglass lost his Parliamentary seat to a landslide Labour victory." or something similar.
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "In July 1951 the 13th earl died, and Dunglass succeeded him, inheriting the title of Earl of Home together with the extensive family estates, including the Hirsel, the Douglas-Homes' principal residence." - This should probably be split in two.
  • Done. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "Macleod got his way" - Any more formal terms?
  • Changed to "had his way" Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "In 1960 the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Derick Heathcoat-Amory, insisted on retiring, aged sixty;" - "In 1960 the 60-year-old Chancellor of the Exchequer, Derick Heathcoat-Amory, insisted on retiring;" perhaps?
  • Trimmed. On reflection it's irrelevant here how old he was. What matters is that he insisted on going. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "Halifax in 1938–40" - Wikilink "Halifax" to the proper target. Lord Halifax, mentioned below?
  • Good! Done. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "under water" - One or two words in British English?
  • It depends. If used as an attributive adjective it would be "an underwater test", but otherwise, as here, it's two words. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
• "sexual scandal involving a senior minister" - Once again, who?
  • John Profumo, but two Profumos in one sentence would seem excessive. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Agreed. Perhaps a senior minister?
      • Excellent idea. Done. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• "He let it be known that if he recovered he would be willing to serve as a member of a Home cabinet were he to be invited." - Perhaps "He let it be known that if he recovered and were invited he would be willing to serve as a member of a Home cabinet.
  • I'll ponder on that. I grappled mightily with this sentence, trying to stop the two conditionals getting in each others' way, and concluded that keeping them as far apart as possible was the best option. (I don't, by the way, believe for a second that Macmillan really meant it.) Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I deleted the last clause - it goes without saying that he'd have to be invited. Feel free to replace if you think I'm crazy. -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:35, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Hmm. I'll continue to ponder. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

K, that's it for now. I'll continue when those have been addressed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

I've addressed these points and look forward to your further suggestions. Tim riley (talk) 08:49, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

• CN tag x3
• "in November 1965 unilaterally declared that the country was no longer a British colony but was independent" - "in November 1965 unilaterally declared independence" perhaps?
  • Yes, better. Done. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
• the Rev David Sheppard - Why not the Rev David Sheppard?
  • It's a perhaps misplaced effort to be consistent with the piping for knights. "Sir Alec Douglas-Home" looks awful, whereas Sir Alec Douglas-Home though more work for the writer is easier on the reader's eye. Piping Sheppard's "Rev" follows from that, though I'm quite happy to pipe just the name if people prefer it. Tim riley (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Is "the" part of his title?  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
      • I'd say so. You couldn't refer to anyone as "Rev John Smith" - the definite article is always used. Tim riley (talk) 09:56, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
        • This is a US/UK usage difference. -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:41, 20 May 2012 (UTC)