Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/August 2014

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 Ian Rose 07:55, 29 August 2014 [1].

Nominator(s): —innotata 07:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is article is about a somewhat obscure bird, and I think it meets the FA criteria by covering most of what there is worth saying about this species. Shyamal also contributed a good bit, and thanks to him and J. M. Garg for the article being well illustrated with images and a distribution map. —innotata 07:07, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There are places where I think the text might need polishing.
Description

• "The Sind sparrow is very similar to the house sparrow, and both sexes resemble house sparrows, but it is slightly smaller and males and females each have features that distinguish them from the house sparrow." This is clunky with "house sparrow" used three times.
  • Changed —innotata 17:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• link mantle
  • Linked an article. Not the most useful one, but it's the best we have. —innotata 17:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• "The male has the crown and nape grey and the lower back and rump rufous." I would put the adjective before the noun: a grey crown...
  • Done —innotata 17:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Taxonomy

• The first three sentences contain "described".
  • Changed —innotata 17:16, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Blyth's description was described" is not ideal, -> "Blyth's description was contained in"? Aa77zz (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I meant published, fixed. —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "and possible relation with" -> "and a possible relationship with"?
  • Done —innotata 17:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Behaviour

• "during which two clutches are raised by most pairs" - perhaps put this at the end of the paragraph where you discuss that both the male and female contribute etc.
  • That explains the duration of the breeding season; most temperate birds only raise one brood per year. —innotata 17:13, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced by this argument. Aa77zz (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

That's the only way to explain the typical duration of the breeding season, given what data exist; this doesn't have that much to do with discussing behavioral patterns during the raising of young. I supposed I could add it as a sentence at the end, but the information seems more helpful there. —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "The nest has an entrance higher on the sides" - I don't understand this.
  • Fixed I hope —innotata 17:17, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Aa77zz (talk) 12:50, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Is there any information published on the colour and size of the eggs?
  • I haven't found any yet. Most contemporary sources omit this information, and the Sind sparrow wasn't collected so much as other species in the 19th century—it wasn't in the British Museum when they published their catalogue of eggs I usually use as a reference. —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Why are some journal articles included in References and others in Works cited? Compare Whistler (1922) and Ticehurst (1922).
  • My preference is to put any very long works, in which it is useful to give the particular pages referenced, in 'Works cited', regardless of their type. —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• When using the journal template the output generated by series= keyword is confusing, consider putting "series=11th series" etc Aa77zz (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• My personal preference (which you can obviously ignore) is to include the volume number of a book with the title - as with Summers-Smith (2009), rather than using the volume= keyword which gives an ugly bold number. Aa77zz (talk) 12:06, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd rather not, where there's no title for the volume. —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A small point - in a number of places it would be good if the text could be rejigged to avoid repetition (provided this doesn't introduce ambiguity):

• "Discovered around 1840, this species went undetected for several decades after its discovery."
• "some birds enter drier habitats as they disperse short distances from their breeding habitat,"
• "and caring for the young, and usually raise two clutches of three to five young each breeding season."

Support - the article meets the criteria. Well done. Aa77zz (talk) 12:24, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "plumage features" As opposed to non-plumage feathers?
  • It's 'features', not 'feathers'? —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sorry... J Milburn (talk) 16:58, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• "Blyth's description was described in" ??
  • Oops, I meant published. —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• "two species bred in the same areas without interbreeding" Would a more useful link not be to biological species concept?
  • Nah, there's a lot more to the biological species concept than sympatry, and sympatry is not exclusive to the biological species concept. —innotata 16:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• It'd be helpful if you mentioned what "Sind" refers to.
  • Added. —innotata 16:32, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Any parasites or predators? Any cultural significance? Any word on how long they live? What do the eggs look like?
  • Probably not much, and it'll be hard to find. In detail: There may be information somewhere on parasites, and maybe individual listings of animals recorded eating this species (although it's hard to tell apart from the house sparrow, so maybe not). Information on eggs is hard to find, since the usual suspects didn't have any of its eggs. I expect there's no information at all on survival; nobody's done a study specifically on it, and if there even are banding records of lifespan (unlikely), they probably wouldn't tell much. As for cultural significance, supposedly it's the unofficial provincial bird of Sindh, but that's pretty tenuous, and I don't have a reference (once again it's hard to tell apart from the house sparrow, so there might not be much!).

Nice looking little article. I made some changes- please check them. J Milburn (talk) 12:19, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Images are mostly fine (File:PasserPyrrhonotusKeulemans.jpg is particularly pleasant). File:PasserPyrrhonotusMap.svg could do with a link to the file on which the map is based, and, ideally, a fuller citation. J Milburn (talk) 16:16, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done. —innotata 01:38, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work, A few nitpicks, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:24, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Hume and Ticehurst noted a resemblance to, and a possible relation with, the Dead Sea sparrow of the Middle East and Balochistan.[17][20] William Robert Ogilvie-Grant and Henry Ogg Forbes noted a resemblance to the Abd al-Kuri sparrow, endemic to the island of Abd al-Kuri, in their 1899 description of that species.[28] This was also noted by Guy M. Kirwan in a 2008 study.[29]
  • Changed —innotata 18:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• 'The Sind sparrow feeds mainly on the seeds of grasses and other plants such as Polygonum plebeium. They may...
  • Changed —innotata 18:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• I thought it was unlikely that the ggs were undescribed, so a couple of minutes searching found a referenced description of the eggs and the original
  • Added. Thanks! —innotata 18:16, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support, all looks good Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:11, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

• FN14, 28: page?
• FN1 has an accessdate but FN36 does not - be consistent
• Be consistent in whether books include locations. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:45, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • All done. —innotata 01:35, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 21:25, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I have gone through the entire text and most of the cited references. The content is excellent and referencing as rigorous as can be expected. Shyamal (talk) 08:54, 25 August 2014 (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 promoted by Ian Rose 07:57, 29 August 2014 [2].

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article was extremely popular when it appeared on the front page as a DYK. I think it will prove equally popular as a TFA. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:30, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. I've looked at the changes made since I reviewed this for A-class. The Germany subsection seems a bit long, but I don't really know how you'd subdivide it. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 14:25, 8 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotcheck not done

• "The cellar itself was not blown up, because this would have meant the destruction of the Church and Castle located above the cellar." - source?
  • Added by a German Wikipedian. Removed until I find a source. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Hinsley et al: British Intelligence is a title, not a series; what is current presented as the title is the volume name
  • Very well. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Mahoney: don't need spaces around dash in dates, don't need both "thesis" and "dissertation", and how does this meet WP:SCHOLARSHIP? Nikkimaria (talk) 12:49, 11 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I found Mahoney on the shelf at the ADFA library. It was academically reviewed and is widely cited in the literature. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:22, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on prose. Here are my copyedits. Good work. --John (talk) 18:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for your edits and your review! Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:07, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Haigerloch Castle Hill needs alt text
• all other toolchecks are green (NFA)
• "(according to American physicists at the University of California, Berkeley who knew the leading Japanese physicists personally)" - I think you could integrate this into the prose, ie "According to American physicists..."
• "first" and "first" The German nuclear energy project seemed very different; German scientists had reputations as leaders in the field, and the fear of Germany developing nuclear weapons first was one of the reasons for the establishment of the Manhattan Project in the first place. Perhaps delete "in the first place", it seems redundant.
• "Norwegian saboteurs and Allied bombers attacked heavy-water infrastructure in German-occupied Norway" seems an inordinately long link, could you link "attacked" or something?
• Pash should be linked at first mention in the body
• General (United States), OSRD, Stadtilm, Reichsforschungsrat, and Erich Bagge are overlinked
• In the Italy section, it would add necessary context to explain that Badoglio headed up the Italian government that had surrendered and joined the Allies.
• (National Research Council) should be added at first mention
• "an African-American truck company" - what is the underlying context? Why mention this aspect of the company?
  • I think it makes it easier for the reader to visualise. It was probably written at a time when there was another round of criticism of the "whitewashing" of American history. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• "less its Company B, which would be commanded by Lieutenant Colonel Wilbur White." This is unclear, was Company B commanded by LtCol White, or the 1269th?
• citations are not in numerical order here, 84,68,85.
• "a separate Manhattan Project organized by Groves" - I thought there was only one Manhattan Project? Or was this a separate team from the Project?
  • A word was missing. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• suggest refbegin and refend templates for the Refences list
• no dash issues (NFA)

Great article as always, just needs a few small tweaks. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 11:42, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• • Thanks for your review! All your points have been addressed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • No worries, supporting now. Regards, Peacemaker67 (send... over) 23:52, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - all OK

• 2 AIP source links have been dead - replaced them (please check image sources).
• AIP sells those images apparently, but as (clearly) PD-US their usage should be OK here.

All images are PD-US or "own work" with complete source and author information - OK. GermanJoe (talk) 13:57, 27 August 2014 (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 promoted by Graham Colm (talk) 06:26, 23 August 2014 [3].

Nominator(s): —Cliftonian (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a young boy from an Rhodesian mining village who became the top-scoring World War II flying ace for both his country of birth and his ancestral home of Greece. Seeing action in Europe and the Mediterranean, Ioannis Agorastos "John" Plagis played an important role in the Allied defence of Malta during 1942, led No. 126 Squadron RAF during the invasion of Normandy and was shot down over Arnhem during Operation Market Garden. After returning home in 1948 he moved into the north Salisbury street that had been named after him—his address was 1 John Plagis Avenue—and became a relatively prominent businessman, serving on the board of Central African Airways. He also forayed into politics as an associate of fellow WWII RAF veteran Ian Smith, running unsuccessfully for the Rhodesian Front in the 1962 general election. The story has a sad ending, unfortunately—Plagis died in his mid-50s, reportedly by suicide, in 1974.

This article passed a GA review about a year ago and I believe it now meets the FA criteria. Any and all comments are welcome. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:23, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support – only two comments, neither of earth-shaking importance:

• Early life
  • Showing my ignorance, I imagine, but I'm confused by Plagis's adopted citizenship: you mention that in 1939 he lacked British citizenship, but that after the war he took Rhodesian citizenship.
    • The Empire and Commonwealth had one common "British" citizenship until after the war, when it was decided to have separate (albeit at this time still linked) citizenships for each Commonwealth country. Southern Rhodesian nationality was therefore separate following the British Nationality Act 1948 (Westminster legislation) and the Southern Rhodesian Citizenship and British Nationality Act 1949 (passed at Salisbury). I think any explanation of this in the article would be unfortunately long and obstructive so I think it would be best to sidestep it by simply saying he "was not a citizen"—the meaning of this is clear from context. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • That will do nicely. Tim riley talk 19:15, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• First tour of operations
  • "having spent the night with a girl, drinking" – it doesn't bother me, but remember that line of Tom Lehrer's: "In my youth there were words you couldn't say in front of a girl; now you can't say 'girl'."
    • Point noted, but I don't really know what would be better in this case. "female friend"? "young woman"? "young lady"? In my view this needlessly dances around the point and, at least in the last case, sounds frankly patronising. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think "young woman" might be more prudent, but I leave it entirely in your hands while I retreat to a safe distance. Tim riley talk 19:15, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent article: readable, comprehensive, well proportioned, fully referenced, good images. No hesitation in supporting for FA. Tim riley talk 10:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much for the support and the very kind words, Tim—I'm glad you like the article and enjoyed reviewing it. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

SupportComments: Mainly trivia, but there are a few points I think that need looking at. Otherwise a neat and informative short article.

• In lead: "about a year" sounds a little casual. Perhaps "After a spell as..."

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Early life: lose the unnecessary parentheses around "during which he was commissioned..." etc

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• First tour:

• "increasingly precarious at this time" – you have not specified a "time"

• Have substituted "in March 1942"

• "escorted by the battleship HMS Malaya" this marginal detail overloads a fairly complex sentence, and could safely be deleted.

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "Thirteen of these Spitfire reinforcement operations..." I'm a bit confused by "of these", as the only operations thus far mentioned are those to do with getting the Spitfires to Malta.

• OK, have removed "of these", don't think we need it

• "girl" → "girlfriend"? (to avoid pedantic objections) – and a whole night "drinking"? Yeah, yeah...

• Re: girlfriend, OK. Re: drinking, well, that's what the source says... —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I think "colonial Governor" should be either "colonial governor" or "Colonial Governor", without the mix of capitals

• I've taken the word "colonial" out to remove this issue

• Again, "about a year". You could safely say "a year" here, to avoid the casual feel.

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Second tour:

• "put in command of" → "made commander of" possibly neater?

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "his usual personal decorations" – readers might need reminding

• Have substituted "He added to this a full rendering of "kay" and other personal decorations."

• "Leading No. 126 Squadron on raids into Normandy during the Allied invasion, Plagis also took part in many of the attacks on German positions in northern France and the Low Countries that followed over the next few months. The syntax is wrong; it fuses two separate activities: (1) his raids into Normandy and (2) his subsequent attacks in northern France and the Low Countries. I suggest: "After leading No. 126 Squadron on raids into Normandy during the Allied invasion, Plagis took part in many of the attacks on German positions in northern France and the Low Countries that followed over the next few months". That will do it.

• OK. Thanks! —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• There's the same problem with "Leading the wing despite being two ranks below wing commander, he was officially promoted to squadron leader on 28 March..." You could simply add "After..." to the front of the sentence, or for variety say: "He led the wing despite being two ranks below wing commander, before being promoted to squadron leader on 28 March..." Note that I have deleted officially - were there unofficial promotions?

• In a nutshell: it is not uncommon in an operational situation, particularly where the unit is constantly evolving due to deaths, casualties etc for semi-official "temporary" or "acting" promotions to be made in the field, and sometimes held for years, without the official ("substantive") rank actually changing. It is also possible for an officer to serve in a role higher than that suggested than his rank without such a promotion being made (as was the case with Plagis, who filled the role of a wing commander while keeping his lower rank). Anyway the point is that I included the word "officially" to make clear this wasn't a field promotion. I think you're right that we don't really need it, though, so I've binned it. Thanks for this —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "He was furthermore..." no need for "furthermore"

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Post-war service:

• "wartime contributions" – "exploits" possibly stronger?

• Yes —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• One of the best-known Rhodesian flyers of the war, he married in 1954 and had three sons and a daughter." Unrelated facts shouldn't be enjoined within a single sentence. I think I would ditch the words "One of the best-known Rhodesian flyers of the war", as this fact is well established.

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "perhaps most prominently" is editorialising. Suggest replace with "including"

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "and ran for it" → "and was its candidate"

• OK —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "who often associated with him and Smith" – do you mean "socialised"?

• Yes, why not. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Suicide: I'm a bit surprised that, given the statement that he had never truly readjusted to civilian life, there has een no previous mention of depression or other evidence of maladjustment. This is 26 years – half his lifetime. Thus his suicide comes as a complete surprise. Is there nothing in the sources that gives earlier clues as to his state of mind prior to his taking his life?

• Not that I can see, and indeed this was also surprising to me, hence me placing the qualifier "according to Lauren St John, an author from Gadzema" before it. I am still looking for sources online but it seems there are very few for the latter part of his life. Getting hold of back copies of Rhodesian papers like the Rhodesia Herald would be very helpful for investigating this further. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Another thing that surprises me is that, given he was one of Rhodesia's best-known and most decorated air aces, had a street named after him, was a friend and confidante of Ian Smith, etc., there is no public record of his date of birth or the date of his death. Surely the latter was reported in newspapers?

• Again, see above. I am sure it would have been reported in the Herald and probably other Rhodesian papers too but unfortunately the archives I know of are not geographically feasible for me to visit (the ones I know of are in Zim, South Africa and Australia). It does not seem implausible to me however that Plagis might have had an obituary in the UK press as he was a decorated RAF war veteran. I will keep digging and try to find more information. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton (talk) 15:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks Brian for the kind words and the review. I will mention here that my attempts to find more information on Plagis online have unearthed that it seems he was somehow involved in the episode in 1966 when L. Ron Hubbard attempted to set up a "haven for Scientology" in Rhodesia before being deported. Hubbard apparently "purchased an interest in the holdings and Investments of Mr. John Plagis, a local property owner, and a holding company was being formed for them". A google search for "Plagis hubbard" throws up mentions of a legal case, Plagis v. Hubbard 1975 (1) SA 469, but unfortunately I can only get the book previews for these. I think this warrants further investigation and inclusion in the article, so I'll get on that as well. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:27, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• It might be worth breiefly adding mention of the Hubbard connection, which could be cited to The Chronicle via the courtesy link. If more comes to light you could expand. As Plagis won the DFC it his highly likely that an obit appeared in The Daily Telegraph, but without a death date, that would be hard to find. You could ask Tim if he can help – he seems to have means of accessing old newspapers, though not necessarily the DT. I don't think, however, that these issues should delay the article's promotion to FA, and have upgraded accordingly. Brianboulton (talk) 13:36, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much for all your help Brian. I have requested Tim's help in this direction. —Cliftonian (talk) 18:07, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Images are appropriately captioned and licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:39, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Nikki. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:51, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments -- Recusing myself from delegate duties to review...

• Copyedited the expression as I tend to do, so pls let me know any concerns there.
• Style-wise, a few things:
  • I'm pretty sure we don't start with rank in the lead unless it's one-star and above. I can't point to a guideline on that but it's one I've observed through dozens of military bios at MilHist A-Class Review and at FAC so it seems to be the convention.
    • I don't remember seeing this guideline but I have no problem taking this out. —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've never seen the point of the post-noms line at the top of the infobox, given they're in the first line of the lead and are spelt out at the bottom of the infobox. Certainly they aren't required, although they don't seem to be forbidden either, so will leave to you.
    • Someone else seems to have taken these out. —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Likewise the flag icons in the infobox seem superfluous to me. Again, though not forbidden, many of us get by without them without any objection at ACR or FAC. Again, will leave to you.
    • I personally like the little flags in this kind of article so I'll leave them there for now, but I don't feel particularly strongly about this and if consensus says take them out I will do so. —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Content-wise, just a few things:
  • "He was officially promoted to flying officer on 1 October 1942." Looks to me based on the Gazette entry at FN25 that he was a probationary Flying Officer.
    • OK, fixed this. —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He led the wing despite being two ranks below wing commander, before being promoted to squadron leader on 28 March." FN30, the only citation for this statement, simply records his promotion to squadron leader. Has some other source drawn attention to his rank relative to commanding a wing?
    • Not that I can see. In fact a quick check shows the sources referring to this posting seem to incorrect refer to him as a wing commander when he wasn't one at the time. Probably simpler if we just take this fragment out and rephrase. —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • On a related note, I see the conversation above re. UK newspaper obits. I have access to The Times and Sunday Times digital archives through the National Library of Australia and a search there revealed nothing on Plagis after his DSO in 1944. Interestingly, though, that item refers to him as Squadron Leader Plagis, before his substantive promotion in March 1945, so it may be he was acting or temp s/l while he was leading the wing, meaning that in effect he wasn't two ranks below wing commander anyway...
    • That seems likely. Regarding obituaries, the British Library claims on its website to have back copies of the Rhodesian papers, and Tim is going there in a few days, so I have asked him to have a look. —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Article structure and level of detail seem fine. Obviously be good to find out some more on his death, especially the date, but I've had at least one bio promoted to FA without that, so I wouldn't say it should hold up promotion as long as the effort's been made.
  • See above re: death date. —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Image licensing looks okay, all sourced from Imperial War Museum.
• No issues leapt out re. source formatting/reliability.

Nice work as usual, John. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:24, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much for the review and the kind words Ian. I'm glad you like the article. Cheers —Cliftonian (talk) 08:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Well, it's great to see you bringing your considerable article-writing talents to a WWII ace bio -- I'll scan again when/if Tim provides any further info from the library but confident enough to support in any case. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thank you very much Ian! I'm flattered you hold me in such regard. Hope you're well and have a great rest of the week. —Cliftonian (talk) 11:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

There's only three images, so this will be quick:

• File:Royal Air Force Fighter Command, 1939-1945. CH7610.jpg Fine.
• File:HMS EAGLE and HMS MALAYA in the Mediterranean during Operation 'Spotter', which delivered 16 RAF Spitfire Mk Vs to Malta on 7th March 1942. A7840.jpg Fine.
• File:Spitfire VBs 40 Sqn SAAF over Tunisia 1943.jpg Fine, but oh god I wish we could get this high-res. Adam Cuerden ^(talk) 16:54, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for this Adam. I do like that one myself, particularly as the roundel is in Luton Town colours... ;) —Cliftonian (talk) 18:37, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

• "KAY": Small caps are deprecated per WP:SMALLCAPS.
• Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. (Just the one comma!) - Dank (push to talk) 23:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much for this Dan, have a great weekend. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yep. - Dank (push to talk) 13:41, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update regarding research into death

I am very thankful to my friend Tim, who has located The Rhodesia Herald for 1974 on microfiche at the British Library in London. He has ordered it for Wednesday (20/8), and will check through for an obituary for Plagis. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:33, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry to report that I have drawn a blank. There may have been an obit in The Rhodesia Herald in the latter half of 1974, but I'm afraid I ran out of time at the BL today after reading through all the news pages of the Herald (there is no obit section as such) from 1 Jan 1974 to the end of June. I had underestimated how much longer it takes to scan images of pages with the naked eye rather than pressing search buttons on digitised pages, and alas I ran out of time half way through the year. So sorry, Cliftonian! Tim riley talk 17:19, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On the contrary, thank you for trying so hard to help! I can't imagine reading through half a year's worth of 40-year-old African newspapers could have been much fun for you. Oh well, it's a shame we couldn't find anything but I guess we'll have to draw a blank on this for now. There is no reason the death date cannot be added later if an obituary shows up. Thank you again Tim for making such an effort and investing so much of your time. It is really appreciated. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:27, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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. Graham Colm (talk) 06:26, 23 August 2014 (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 promoted by Ian Rose (talk) 00:30, 23 August 2014 [4].

Nominator(s): Cg2p0B0u8m and Tim riley talk 21:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not the least of the 1840s generation of composers (Dvořák, Fauré, Rimsky-Korsakov, Sullivan, Tchaikovsky et al) was Massenet, who came to embody French opera of the Belle Époque. After his death in 1912 his music went out of fashion, although his most popular opera, Manon, held its place in the repertoire. In recent decades there has been a revival of interest in his music and many of his neglected operas are being staged. He left some delighful but highly unreliable memoirs; we hope the present article is more reliable. Many Wiki-colleagues contributed to the recent overhaul, and the peer review had an all-star cast. We look forward to suggestions, and, we hope, support. Tim riley talk 21:32, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support I had words at the PR, and also supplied a couple of articles for the research. The article is well-written, comprehensive without wordiness. Well done.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:56, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support on prose. I gave my comments at the wonderfully thorough PR, and the article has only improved since. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:16, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: An excellent composer biography, to which I gave the full review treatment at PR, and was rewarded by the adoption of almost all my points and quibbles. The article is pleasant and informative, and in my view deserves a specially gilded star for including an image of the utterly delightful and swooning beautiful Renée Fleming (she's 55! I can't believe it). That really made my evening. Brianboulton (talk) 23:03, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The support of Wehwalt, Crisco and Brian is greatly appreciated – thanks to all three. Tim riley talk 08:23, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Very nicely put together and hugely interesting. One small point, in the "Later years" section, which reads "main biographical detail of note of his latter years": should that be latter years or later years? - SchroCat (talk) 11:35, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly, SchroCat! We must work together on an article sometime. I wrote "latter" deliberately, but am quite willing to be told that "later" would be better. Very happy either way. If you prefer the latter (later) to the former (latter), pray amend forthwith. Excuse me, I think I need to go and lie down. Tim riley talk 14:26, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: I read the article at PR, since when there have been a few changes. Altogether it is excellently written, most sympathetic and informative. Just one small niggle: in the "Recordings" section, there's two consecutive sentences which start "It was...". I think it may be better to start the second of these ("It was released on compact disc in 2008,") with "It has been released on compact disc...", which would also have the advantage, I think, of immediately alerting readers that we're no longer talking of events during Massenet's life. Alfietucker (talk) 19:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent! Thank you for the support and for the unwinking professional eye on the prose. Your suggested tweak shall be twuck as soon as I have signed this... Tim riley talk 20:19, 16 August 2014 (UTC) Tweacation now accomplished. Tim riley talk 20:24, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Very nice article, certainly has my support (although I am not myself a great Massenetien). Couple of v. minor points on a first read: why not links for 'Pardon de Ploermel' and Meyerbeer in M's first published work? Also, first sentence of Later Years (and elsewhere), perhaps capital c for Conservatoire, as we are talking of a particular one?--Smerus (talk) 11:50, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for that support, Smerus. I've amended as you suggest. Tim riley talk 09:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Media check (GermanJoe) - all OK

• all images and sound files are either some kind of PD-old or released by their author - OK.
• authors (if known) and sources are provided for all files - OK.
• some files are only suitable for en-Wikipedia, but tagged as such - OK. GermanJoe (talk) 00:25, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for that check, GJ. Always a relief to get a clean sheet. Tim riley talk 09:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Excellent article, well written, well sourced. Carefully balanced in coverage. Gives a clear overview of the life and achievements of the composer.--Ipigott (talk) 06:59, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support gratefully acknowledged, with many thanks. Tim riley talk 09:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

• I would think refs 21, 36, 39, 41, 55 and 56 need accessdate parameters.
  • The MoS lays down that for web-only sources the retrieval date should be included when there is no publication date, and so when a publication date is given it is never my practice to include access dates as well. Tim riley talk 09:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Understand, cheers for clarifying. Lemonade51 (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 55 should notify readers that the source is written in French
  • Done. Tim riley talk 09:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 57's page number is C17 (article was printed in the Observer Review supplement) Lemonade51 (talk) 15:49, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Pleased you spotted that omission (and thank you for finding the page number for me). Now amended.

Thank you very much for that review, Lemonade. I hope my explanation of my logic as regards the first point is acceptable. Tim riley talk 09:44, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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. Ian Rose (talk) 00:30, 23 August 2014 (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 promoted by Ian Rose (talk) 00:28, 23 August 2014 [5].

Nominator(s): Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Nagato-class ships were the first battleships to be armed with guns greater than 15 inches (380 mm) and followed the Japanese policy about having individual ships more powerful than those of their potential enemies. The Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) knew that they could not out-build other powers and individual superiority was their only route for success. Reserved for the decisive battle that the IJN anticipated against the US Navy during the Pacific War, they did not see much action during the war. Mutsu was destroyed in an accidental magazine explosion in 1943 and her sister ship Nagato ineffectually participated in the Battle of Leyte Gulf in 1944. Lightly damaged during the battle she returned home for repairs that Japan could not afford to make. She was modified to serve as a floating anti-aircraft battery and survived the war. She was used by the Americans as a target ship during their post-war atomic bomb tests. She sank during the second one of these and is now a diveable wreck at Bikini Atoll.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:11, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: I've looked at the changes made since I copyedited this for A-class. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 01:05, 29 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Re-read it; now supporting on prose per standard disclaimer (though I'm not disagreeing with Wehwalt's comments). - Dank (push to talk) 19:51, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

• File:Nagatoarmor.svg: possible to provide a translation of the labels?
  • Not really, unless someone fluent in German who knows Inkscape volunteers to rework the labels.
• File:Mutsu20.jpg is tagged as lacking source info, as is File:Nagato_1939.jpg
• File:Nagato1944.png: source? Nikkimaria (talk) 20:38, 2 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think that the zealots over on Commons have deleted the latter two and I can only offer my explanation from Mutsu's FAC last year for Mutsu20: I'm not sure what to do here. Under Japanese law the image is copyright-free because of its age, regardless of its source. But I can't swear that it's PD in the US without a source. I can delete it although I strongly suspect that it's PD as well because of the URAA. I think that I'm going to need to upload some more photos of these ships to upgrade the graphic content of this article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've replaced the single questionable image and added a few new ones that should have good licenses.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:15, 20 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Armor cross-section could be larger
  • Done.
• File:Nagato1944.png still needs sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • How so? Alexpl created it himself.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, but on what basis? Where does the information conveyed come from? Nikkimaria (talk) 11:43, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well done as usual. Just a few comments:

Background

• "and the government ratified that policy in 1907" maybe "adopted" for ratified?
• " re-evaluate several times" perhaps "several times re-evaluate"

Design

• "used formerly" "formerly used" sounds better, but I note you use the word "used" twice in that sentence. One should probably go.
• "that had occurred a year previously" the previous year

Armament

• "The unsatisfactory 2-pounders" you have not mentioned problems with them.

• I wish I knew, none of my sources specify why, although I have my suspicions. I've deleted "unsatisfactory".

Armor

• " 100 mm armor plates above the main deck and 215 mm (8.5 in) plates below it" what is the rationale for having a conversion on the second stat and not on the first?

• Measurements are only converted on first use.

Construction

• "and a similar arrangement" perhaps "in exchange for a similar arrangement"--Wehwalt (talk) 00:24, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• See how my changes satisfy your comments. Thanks for looking this over.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not into warfare and naval vessels so will be able to give an outsider's perspective. A few points on the prose:

• "Nagato did not fire her main armament against enemy vessels ..." - Do you mean her weapons in general or was there a single main armament, and if so, what was it?
• "... resisted penetration by 200-kilogram (440 lb) torpedo warheads in full-sized trials." - What do you mean by "full-sized trials"?
• "Although the United States Navy planned to arm its Colorado class with 16-inch (406 mm) guns before the Nagato class was designed, Nagato's 41-centimeter (16.1 in) guns made her the first dreadnought that was launched armed with guns larger than 15 inches (381 mm)." - Why mm in some measurements and cm in others?
• "He estimated that his ship would displace as much as Nagato," - What does this mean?
  • Added a link.
• "The ships had a stowage capacity of 1,600 long tons (1,600 t) of coal and 3,400 long tons (3,500 t) of fuel oil," - Why do the conversions for coal and fuel oil differ?
  • Umm, what do you mean? They're both given in long tons and converted into metric tons.

Yes, but the long tons equals the metric tons in one case but not in the other. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "The US Navy did not learn their actual speed until about 1937" - maybe you should include "capabilities" or somesuch.
• " an armor thickness of 305 mm on the face, 230–190 mm (9.1–7.5 in)" - Having been so assiduous at giving conversions, did you miss this one and others later in the paragraph?
  • See my response to Wehwalt above; the some of these had been converted earlier.
• "increased by 38 mm (1 in) on the upper deck and 25 mm on the upper armored deck" - And this one needs a further significant figure.
  • Good catch.

More later. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 11:09, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I always like it when non-Ships people review my articles as y'all are almost certain to catch any undefined jargon or unclear explanations. Look forward to the rest of your comments.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "They now operated Nakajima E4N2 biplanes until they were replaced by Nakajima E8N2 biplanes in 1938." - I don't like the "now", and the two "they"s refers to different things.
• In the short table in the ships section, I suggest you arrange for the English and Japanese names to be on different lines as on my screen, the Japanese is split awkwardly in two.
• "Mutsu again served as the Emperor's flagship during the annual maneuvers and fleet review in 1933." - The wording in this sentence is almost identical to the previous one. Could it be expressed differently?
• "The sisters were refitted in 1941 in preparation for war, which included the fitting of external degaussing coils and additional armor for their barbettes." - The use of "which" in this sentence is a bit awkward.
  • I'm not sure that I agree with you, but I'm open to suggestions if you have any.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:35, 17 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• "They arrived at Truk on 17 August." - The previous sentence was talking about Mutsu, so the use of "they" is inappropriate here.
• "A coal-burning donkey boiler was installed on the pier for heating and cooking purposes" - What does the "pier" mean here?
• "The Times has named Nagato as one of the top ten wreck diving sites in the world." - Has the radioactivity dissipated to acceptable levels then?

• That's all. The article is very well-written and laid out. Much of the technical information was beyond me, but for the general reader there is plenty of interesting non-technical stuff and for the specialist reader there appears to be all the detail he might require. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:45, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• None of my sources explicitly mention any diminution of the radioactivity, but I've added a source that states that she was opened to divers in 1996, presumably when the US Gov't deemed it safe. I think that I've addressed all of your other concerns; see if they are satisfactory. Thanks again for reviewing this.

• Now supporting this candidacy on the grounds of prose and comprehensiveness. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 05:15, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note -- Think we just need a source review now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:23, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done

• FN63: missing italics
  • Fixed.
• FN62: link isn't working for me. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:14, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Works OK on my computer just now. Thanks for reviewing these.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:48, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support but with one question:

• "15 of these were oil-fired while the remaining half-dozen consumed a mixture of coal and oil." Is there an article one could link to about the coal-and-oil engine? I think most readers won't have heard of it (I hadn't) and might like to know more.
• Very nice article, good luck with it. --Coemgenus (talk) 12:24, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I rephrased to clarify that the ships had some boilers that used coal with oil sprayed on to increase the energy yield. Thanks for looking this over.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:34, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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. Ian Rose (talk) 00:28, 23 August 2014 (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 promoted by Ian Rose (talk) 00:46, 23 August 2014 [6].

Nominator(s): PresN 19:30, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When you think of the best 16-bit RPGs ever made, 1993's Secret of Mana is assuredly on the list, up there with Chrono Trigger, Final Fantasy VI, and EarthBound. Heck, according to GameRankings, it's one of the best SNES games ever made in any genre. And now, it's available to you for your reviewing pleasure! The article has been fairly solid for a long time—it's a well-known game, after all—but in January I pushed through, rewrote almost all of it, and got it up to GA level. After sitting on it for a few months, I'm still pretty pleased with the way it turned out, and I think it can go all the way. Early-90's games can be hard to source, as the games journalism (cough) field was small and mainly offline, and this game got a surprisingly small marketing push in America for how much it sold in Japan (it's the 21st best-selling SNES game ever, but 80%+ of the sales were in Japan), but I think I've hoovered up everything that could be found and made a pretty nice article. Feel free to explain to me exactly how I'm terribly wrong, or to shock me with easy supports. In any case, thanks for reviewing! --PresN 19:30, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I fielded this page's GAN! Nice to see you've gone a bit further with it; I'll put down some comments later today. Tezero (talk) 20:01, 17 July 2014 (UTC) Alright, here I go. Just a warning; I'm gonna be more stringent with the prose than I was at GAN:[reply]

• The intro's a bit long considering the size of the article; Reception/Legacy in particular is given a lot of real estate. It could stand at two-thirds its current size and be just fine.
• "the hero, the girl, and the sprite" - Popoi and Primm should be named.
• "Flammie, a miniature dragon which is controlled by the player and able to fly freely across the world, represented by an overworld map" - Minor question, but is Flammie's gender given?
• "In an unspecified time period" - A little wordy; I'd prefer "Sometime".
• "The three main characters do not have names in the original SNES release" - Does the player pick their names?
• "scamming people at the dwarves' freak show" - This is phrased as though this show is referenced earlier, but the reader knows nothing about it. At the very least, go like "a freak show held by dwarves".
• "as well as with her father for setting her up for an arranged marriage" - With whom?
• "Mana Sword, and" - Shouldn't be a comma here.
• "amnesiac sprite child" - What does he remember back to?
• "Over time, however, Thanatos narrows his selection to Dyluck" - Does it say elsewhere in the game why he picks Dyluck? If not, why is this an "over time" process?
• What does the Mana Beast look like?
• How does it reveal itself?

I'll be back for Development and onward later. Tezero (talk) 01:39, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replying here instead of inline.

• I don't know why FAC has decided in the past few months that we should all move to 2-paragraph intros, but I disagree- right now game release info, plot, gameplay, development, reception, and legacy get like 1-2 sentences each; any further cut down and I'd be skipping sections. I've done intros this long for much shorter FAs.
• Done
• Flammie's male, but it's never relevant beyond that pronouns need to be gendered in English, and I don't see a good way to integrate it into the sentence.
• Done.
• Yes, added.
• Fixed; sorry, characters was clawed out of a lengthier plot section.
• Done.
• Done.
• Video game amnesia, not real amnesia, so all of it, even though he obviously knows language and stuff. The quote is "This child received such a shock from drifting here, it lost all its memories." - It's included in the cited quotes.
• Reworded it; the relevant quote is "For ages I have been searching...for a human with the power to conquer this world... ...one born in the shadow of darkness, and raised in the light of Mana. Dyluck is the one. I cannot wait any longer. My body has grown weak! It is time! Using his body I will take the Mana Fortress, and rule the world!"
• Renamed creature to dragon; it looks kinda similar to Flammie, but a lot bigger, more monstrous, and less friendly
• Reworded to "flies in"; it just kinda... shows up. Flies up to the party from below the screen.

@Tezero: alright, responded to everything you've posted so far. --PresN 23:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "The real-time battle system used in Secret of Mana is described" - Minor, but perhaps this should be "has been described". It's not a recent description, and perhaps one or more of the creators will die before too long.
• "a lack of sequential text" - ???
• "Other Western localizations were done to German and French" - Is "to" the right pronoun, and is "Western" necessary?
• "Kikuta was originally chosen for Secret of Mana after Kenji Ito, who had composed the soundtrack for Final Fantasy Adventure and was originally slated for the project, was forced to drop it due to other demands on his time such as the soundtrack to Romancing SaGa." - Not awful, but kind of a run-on.
• "to create an immersive three-dimensional sound" - clarify
• " Rather than use premade MIDI samples of instruments like most game music composers of the time, Kikuta made his own MIDI samples that matched the hardware capabilities of the SNES so that he would know exactly how the pieces would sound on the system's hardware instead of having to deal with audio hardware differences between the original MIDI sampler and the SNES." - Also quite a dinosaur-bite, as my dad would say.
• "covers both "ominous" and "light-hearted" tracks" - I'd prefer "includes", or switch "tracks" to "themes".
• "The title track to the game, "Fear of the Heavens", was designed by Kikuta to sync up with the title screen as it slowly faded in due to hardware limitations; at the time trying to match the audio and visual effects in a game was rare." - Hardware limitations? This seems contradictory. Did he succeed in innovating or not?
• "Secret of Mana was one of the first soundtrack releases in North America for the North American version of a Japanese game" - Had North American adaptations of Japanese games received soundtrack releases elsewhere? If not, strike "in North America".
• "with the catalog number N25D-019"/"catalog numbers PSCN-5030 and NTCP-5030" - Relevance?
• Actually... Given how droning and repetitive the text in this paragraph is - which is, to a large extent, not your fault - it might work better as a bulleted list.
• "Secret of Mana shipped 1.83 million copies worldwide" - should be "had shipped" or "has shipped"
• "were also highly reviewed" - There could easily be more releases, so I'd prefer "have also been highly reviewed".
• Why is Re-releases part of Reception, especially when they're discussed earlier? I'd put it in Development.
• Not a strict objection, but why is the image of Flammie flying a GIF? It doesn't move.

Everything else looks fine, I'd say. Tezero (talk) 23:37, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Responses:

• Done
• Moved down and reworded
• Dropped Western and changed to into
• Split
• Reworked a bit, though those word choices were Kikuta's
• Split
• changed to includes
• reworded
• done
• Removed
• I'll see what I can do, but embedded lists are rarely the answer.
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Don't know, that's just what the original image was, and I left it in the article. GIFs don't need to be animated, by the way, that's not their only purpose, though PNG might be better for this image since there aren't large color blocks.

--PresN 20:33, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, then. Interesting about GIFs, that; I did not know that. Tezero (talk) 05:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Can you expand the "legacy" part of the article? }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 03:53, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not really; if I had sources to do so I would have, but I don't. That's the problem with games from the early 90s that weren't that popular in America as compared to Japan, and whose series kinda faded out outside of Japan- Seiken 3 never got released in English, and Seiken 4 (Legend of Mana) was the last one to do well at all. --PresN 23:23, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support, everything in this article is fine. =D }IMr*|(60nna)I{ 13:31, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments.

• I agree that lede sections of 3 paragraphs sound fine by me. However, some of the lede feels... inconsequential? Is the speed of the translation or the fact that the game was retranslated for iOS really that important? Also, the reference to two rather minor games in the lede seems to undercut the claim to be influential later on. Both these bits feel quite cuttable, not because the lede is too long otherwise, but because they aren't really impactful for the lede.

• I ought to clarify this: I'm not against ledes longer than two paragraphs per se; I'm guilty of that many times over, with an article I have at GAN right now having a four-paragraph lede. Rather, I thought it went into a lot of detail given the amount of text in the article's body. I think I can still support how it is, but like with SnowFire, a bit of compression would be appreciated. Tezero (talk) 05:37, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I'm not sure I agree with using the character names in the article. How influential is the iOS version compared to the original? The old "Nintendo Power" and other printed sources always simply referred to them as the Boy, the Girl, and the Sprite. Online fansites have traditionally used "Purim" for the Girl's Japanese name rather than "Primm" as well. Anyway, I'd rather stick to Boy/Girl/Sprite myself short of some evidence the iOS default names are the commonly used ones now, but suppose I'll defer to your judgment. (That said, regardless, can this reference be included for the names? More useful than the Japanese page currently there.)
• "The hero, while unable to use magic, excels at fighting... the sprite is physically the weakest." Uh, not to be "that guy", but the differences in damage & health in the cast are actually quite minor. Checking the IGN review linked as the reference, it doesn't say the sprite is physically weak either, merely noting that he's the master of offensive magic. I'd leave it at just what the IGN review says - the Boy masters weapons quickly, the Girl casts mostly defensive & healing magic, the Sprite casts mostly offensive magic.
• "mana represents an ethereal, but finite, energy source" --> If it was 'finite' how did the world ever recover? I got the impression from the SNES translation more that bad things happened when the old civ used too much at once for evil purposes, not that it was like oil where once it's gone it's gone. I'd suggest removing 'finite' and add "technologically advanced" next to civilization, as it should be made clear it was a modern-esque civ.
• "Dyluck, who was ordered by the King to attack Elinee's Castle, which is considered a virtual suicide mission" --> Is this something added in the iOS version? I don't recall anyone being particularly sure it was a 'suicide mission', and a quick check of the SNES script seems to confirm. It's not even really that relevant, all that matters is the Girl rans after him to save him - I'd just cut the part out about 'virtual suicide mission.'
• " leaves the castle to join the hero in his quest, hoping to save Dyluck as well" - Actually, it's more "the girl leaves the castle to save Dyluck, accompanying the Boy as well." The game is interestingly consistent on this, she's only interested in saving Dyluck; if the Boy doesn't even go try to catch up with Dyluck and goes directly to Gaea's Navel, the Girl will leave the party for a time and state she's going to Dyluck.
• "Unbeknownst to the Emperor or his subordinates, they are being manipulated by Thanatos" -- Thanatos is a chief advisor to all of these people, so it's pretty beknownst. The fact he later betrays them is mentioned later.
• "as well as music from Bali" - Bali, the Indonesian island? Bali, the name of some other musician? Seems like a classic case for a wikilink....
• Per above, a lot of the information in the soundtracks section feels repetive, and the perfect kind of data to slough off in a sidebar infobox.
• Is it worth also mentioning the referenced RPGFan article comments about the blisteringly poor reception to Secret of Mana Genesis, that it's 'arranged' but almost identical to the OST?
• 'Kikuta has said that they are "how he wanted the music to sound when he wrote it"' - #1, this is one of those vague bland useless quotes that might as well be cut anyway. #2, it's not clear in the text who you're even quoting from (it is RPGFan in this case) if you want to keep it.
• Is there anything more to say in the re-releases? New reviews, commentary on the differences, etc.? Or even just a statement that these re-releases generated little notice. (Incidentally, if there isn't, that argues more for using the Boy/Girl/Sprite names per the above, but that's just me.)
• "Secret of Mana has been on numerous all-time "best games" lists" --> This is more a pet peeve of mine, but tons of Wikipedia articles these days are just in love with mentioning every minor listicle they get mentioned in - this song was listed as one of Random British Magazine's 25 hottest songs of the summer, etc. It's great you dug all this up, but I'd personally suggest sticking some of the awards in a footnote. (For example, IGN usually provided *two* Top 100s every year, one reader-voted and one editor-submitted. And there'd be random churn each year. That's a lot more than 100 games that make such top 100 lists over time, for all that Secret of Mana is in fact great.) Feel free to disagree though, lots of good WP articles seem to be in love with these lists of mentions, so.

Nice work overall, of course. SnowFire (talk) 03:48, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Responses:
• Dropped the less-important bits
• Removed all places where I used their name directly; the fact that they have names outside of the initial NA release is mentioned once in gameplay and again in setting, but that's it. The iOS version isn't a big enough deal to contradict the lack of names originally; it's just the only version I've played so I over-weighted it. Used that English reference as well.
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Done
• Given that there's an entire Mana music article, I just pulled out a bunch of the boring bits- length, publishing dates, publishers, etc. Tried to rework some of the sentence flow to make it less choppy- most of this section was copied from a GA I did years and years ago, and it shows.
• Added as a comment after the Kikuta quote
• Sourced
• Added a little comment that there were fewer reviews for the other versions, even if they still got high scores- they are just ports, after all, which usually don't get much.
• Dropped some of them, since they got laborious. What I really want is to replace the whole thing with a source that says definitively that SoM is considered one of the best 16-bit RPGs, or one of the best SNES games, and I guess I'm using top-100 lists as a proxy for that. For a more modern game I could just use awards, but... 1993.
• @SnowFire: --PresN 20:03, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I made a few changes myself - please take a look and modify if needed. Anyway, Support. I will say that while I think this article is FA quality, there is still room for improvement, especially in the Reception & Legacy section, just I'm sure it'll be aggravatingly hard to get good sources for it. (I think the Edge quote is a bit hyperbolic when it claims SoM arrived "unhyped and unheard of" - anecdotally, SoM was Known among people who owned a SNES, certainly among anyone who enjoyed action-RPGs, and 300K sales in NA was *just fine* by standards then. And of course there are surely more Japanese sources lurking out there.) SnowFire (talk) 06:34, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• As always, feel free to revert my copyediting.
• "The Japanese release referred to the three protagonists as Randi, Primm and Popoi ...": It's probably not necessary to say this three times.
• Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. Very readable, and a very easy copyediting job. - Dank (push to talk) 01:43, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much, and I've pulled the extraneous Randis- thought I'd chopped it down to two, but I guess not. --PresN 03:47, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Happy to help. - Dank (push to talk) 04:00, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support: A great article. Props to PresN for putting up with a very long and intensive review. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 20:41, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• 3 fair-use images of sufficient low resolution and valid rationale (see second comment) - OK.
• The third fair-use -of a Mode 7 screenshot- is a close call (we have a separate "Mode 7" article, where such a screenshot may be better). But if it's a significant feature of this specific game, it should be OK here aswell.
• Other images of developers are CC, with sufficient source info and personality rights tag - OK. GermanJoe (talk) 20:34, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. Tezero (talk) 21:23, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• 8. You might consider linking Nintendo World Report.
• All sources look reliable, though you might want to specify right away in the citation somewhere that 34 is an interview since Square Haven doesn't otherwise look like an RS.
• Spotchecks (is this enough?):

• 34: good
• 54: good
• 44: good, but you might want to specify that these differences are between the SNES originals and the rearrangements
• 24: good, though it took me a bit to find "FF III" as I'd been looking for the more general "Final Fantasy III", "experience", and "level up"
• 14: good, I assume
• 64: good in that it contains the appropriate content, but it was a dead link for me (archive), though this may be because of this library computer's lousy Windows-Firefox setup. I'd recommend checking a few for dead links.

Tezero (talk) 21:38, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much! swapped deadurl=no to deadurl=yes for the IGN top100 lists; all three live links are dead for me too. --PresN 21:49, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, cool. Continue to support based on sources. Tezero (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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. Ian Rose (talk) 00:46, 23 August 2014 (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 promoted by Ian Rose (talk) 00:44, 23 August 2014 [9].

Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:05, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about one of the four paintings in a famous painting series by Norman Rockwell. It has sufficient stand-alone encyclopedic content to merit consideration here. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:05, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified WP:HUMAN RIGHTS, WP:VISUALARTS, WP:HOLIDAY.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:12, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have notified the GA2 reviewer Wehwalt.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:15, 12 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment leaning support. I did do the GA and gave it a strong going over then. I own a set of the war bond reproduction and spent some time gazing at this one (masterly) before re-reading the article. Very well done. A few minor comments:

• My spellcheck says "advisment" is misspelled.

• Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:38, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "relied on neighbors for advice as well as critical commentary in addition to their service as his models" too much added on, a sentence should not have "as well as" followed by "in addition to".

• Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:50, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "received filled 25,000 orders" either or both?

• Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:41, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• There is one sentence in "Reactions" that deals with European reaction. I would insert that into the second paragraph where this is discussed in greater detail.

• Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:46, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• "It propounded the discussion of rights of citizens who should bear the allegiance to the democracy" I'm not quite certain what this means.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:34, 4 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• The source says that by pairing the Essay with this painting "the editors of the Saturday Evening Post were illustrating the necessity of the reciprocal relationship between the liberal democratic state and its citizens. The state was obligated to provide a minimal level of subsistence for all of its citizens if all of its citizens were to owe the state the duties and obligations of loyalty, allegiance, identification and, ultimately, self-sacrifice." (page 212)--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:20, 5 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Perhaps something like "It made it clear that while citizens had obligations to the state, the state had an obligation to them to provide a basic level of subsistence."--Wehwalt (talk) 00:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:02, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support--Wehwalt (talk) 00:28, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Feel free to revert any of my copyedits.
  • I made one tweak.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:10, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• by artist and illustrator Norman Rockwell: isn't an illustrator an artist? Why not just by artist Norman Rockwell or by American artist Norman Rockwell?
  • I chose the latter.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:12, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Having been partially created on Thanksgiving 1942, it has become an iconic representation of the Thanksgiving holiday: is it iconic because it was partially painted on Thanksgiving, or because it appears to be a Thanksgiving scene? I'd've thought the latter.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:40, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• It has been widely imitated and parodied. is redundant with the following sentence.
  • Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:14, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• were enduring hardship at the time: should be obvious, but you might want to explicate what hardship you're talking about.
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:04, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Freedom from Want was published with a...: shouldn't this go with the other publication information in the second paragraph?
  • Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:38, 7 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• The illustration is an oil on canvas: I feel like it should read "oil painting on canvas", even though that should be obvious
  • Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:34, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• not actually eating because the painting depicts emptiness: the concept of "emptiness"? If so, in what way?
  • How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:43, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• In addition there is a covered silver serving dish that would traditionally hold potatoes, according to one source.: this is awkward, in that we've just jumped from the table to the curtains and back again. Also, we should be naming the "once source".
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• However, another source describes this as a covered casserole dish.: and the "other source"
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:15, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• The table is the central element of the painting. Then this should probably be stated before the table settings and curtains.
  • Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:19, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• use fine artists men, real artists: is there a comma or something missing here? Can yu double-check the quote?
  • Grammatically, there should be commas after the word war in each sentence, but as you can see in the online source, the commas don't exist in the quotes.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:37, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• In mid-November, Hibbs wrote Rockwell pleading that he not scrap his third work in order to start over.: this jumps out suddenly---probably best to explain what would cause him to want to scrap it before having Hibbs try to stop him.
  • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:51, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• soon under the advisement: is "advisement" really the word you want here?
  • changed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:03, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• the magazine was soon going to place restrictions on four-color printing, so Rockwell had better get the work published before being relegated to halftone printing: the reader likely won't know why the magazine would do this
  • If you are talking about placing restrictions on four-color printing, I don't know why and we don't need to know why here. I presume it has something to do with cost efficiency or technological advancement. I don't need to know which and neither does the reader.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:12, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • No, the reason almost certainly has to do with wartime rationing, which is important in the context. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 21:55, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • As much WP:OR as my 2 possible reasons.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:04, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • It would be OR if I were telling you to add it without a source. I'm asking you to check the sources. If it does have something to do with the war (which it almost certainly does), then that's important in the context; if it's not, then that should be made clear, as many readers would assume it (as I would) as it was common at the time. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 11:40, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • I have expanded this point as much as the source will permit. The source says the government was forcing the change, but does not clarify whether this was part of the military strategy.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:55, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
            • Okay, that's much better than it was. If you ever happen to come across a history of th emagazine at the library or something that specifies it was rationing, it would be a good idea to add that. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:13, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Jim Martin appears in each painting in the series: who's Martin, and is he the only one who appears in each paintig?
  • Isn't it clear that he is an Arlington neighbor. He is the only one that we have a source for appearing in each image. Also since some of the works only have 2 or 3 subjects, there can't be too many people who are in them all.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:14, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • It only becomes clear when he's named again shortly after; I'd suggest putting this after that, then. Is it the source that says he was the only one who appeared in all four? Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟
      • I have fixed the link for that WP:IC. However, you still need to have a Time subscription to read it in its entirety. I am unable to confirm what the source says at this time. I sourced this before this content was behind a paywall.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:05, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• as Hallmark at Christmas, according to Linda Rosenkrantz: maybe this would be better as a quote; I don't think "as Hallmark at Christmas" is vey encyclopaedic.
  • Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:23, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• associated with Regionalism: should explicate that REgionalism is an art movement; otherwise it might appear as, say, a political thing.
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:26, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• perceived as a depiction of American overabundance.: somewhat redundant with the preceding sentence; perhaps combine them somehow?
  • How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:29, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 21:59, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• that is described as coy: who descrives it so?
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:34, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• overall I find the "Reactions" section kind of repetitive; ideas mentioned once are brought up in later paragraphs again. It would be best if you could go through this section and reorganize it.
  • Ewulp helped out.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:41, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• catch as catch can manner: too informal for an encyclopaedia
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:44, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• written when Rockwell was "at the height of his fame as America's most popular illustrator.": why is this quoted rather than paraphrased?
  • How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:01, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

———Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 01:33, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Bulosan's essay spoke on behalf of those enduring the socioeconomic hardships domestically rather than those enduring sociopolitical hardships abroad: this doesn't have sufficient context for it to make sense---which hardships are "the" hardships? Also, the home vs abroad thing was a criticisim, rather than an aspect of the essay, right? I might shorten it to something like "Bulosan's essay spoke on behalf of those enduring domestic wartime socioeconomic hardships".
• a special occasion for "sharing what we have with those we love": attribution?
  • fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:58, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Rockwell's work came to be categorized within art movements and styles such as Regionalism and American scene painting. It sometimes displays an idealized vision of America's rural and agricultural past.: Is the "idealized vision of America's rural and agricultural past" an aspect of Regionalism and American scene painting, or are these independent statements?
  • The IC includes a quote in this case. Let me know if there is still an issue.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • That would probably be better as a footnote, then, wouldn't it? The note's longer than the on footnote you do have, and I doubt many would think to click through to the IC to see that (I sure didn't). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 06:18, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

———Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:13, 10 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, now I'm ready to support (although I'd still like to see something done about that note). Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 06:18, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The album one's fine, and the one of Norman Rockwell is free. I am, however, concerned about the FUR for File:Freedom from Want.jpg; two categories are simply given "n.a.", while "Purpose of use in article" and "Minimal use" could use a bit of beefing up, the latter category not even ending with a period. I'll watch this FAC; alternately, you can ping me when this has been fixed. Tezero (talk) 05:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FUR now beefed up.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:40, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review passes. Source review and one more support still needed. Tezero (talk) 15:51, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The few issues I found were quickly fixed and I heartily support this article for FA. Below are my comments. As requested, I have struck those comments that have been fixed. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings to you, TonyTheTiger. I have just read the president's speech that inspired this painting as well as the Four Freedoms article, and feel ready to review this article. *I'll start with a complement: "Until then, Freedom from Want was not a commonly understood or accepted universal freedom" is a powerful sentence that really hooks the reader into reading more.

• "enduring wartime hardship at the time" – Redundant "time" and also redundant "at the time" from earlier in the sentence.
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:02, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Which do you like better: The passive "Freedom from Want was published with a corresponding essay" or the active "The Post published Freedom from Want with a corresponding essay" ?

• • Changed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:12, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

***Great; by the way, I wasn't being sarcastic, sorry if it sounded that way, I meant to sincerely ask is it worth stating the facts in a passive way in order to accentuate the object rather than the subject, as maybe the subject (The Post) is entirely unimportant. It actually could be (e.g., for the first couple of passive sentences still in the lead, the unmentioned object is unimportant so the passive voice is quite worth it.) If, however, the subject is as important as the object, than by all means use the active; your fix is correct. Prhartcom (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2014 (UTC) *"rather than those enduring sociopolitical hardships abroad" sounds important, but if it were cut, it would greatly strengthen the sentence's main idea, which is "Bulosan's essay spoke on behalf of those enduring the socioeconomic hardships domestically and it thrust him into prominence". Perhaps convert the cut passage into an introductory phrase (e.g. "Despite ...") which would add counterpoint to that main idea.[reply]

• • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:16, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Notice that every main idea presented in the lead is executed in a single sentence, with the exception of the description of Bulosan's essay, which takes two. While I was reading the lead I half-expected that second sentence to be the start of a different topic, then found out it wouldn't be. If you'd like to have that consistency, perhaps an expertly applied conjunction or semicolon and a few cut phrases (e.g. "as part of the Four Freedoms series") will do it. You could combine the solution to the point above with this solution.

• • I don't really understand the point as it relates to the article and the remedy is equally confusing.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:20, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • It looks like you solved it! Each sentence in the lead now sticks to one main idea each. It's a very well-written lead. Prhartcom (talk) 18:40, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "emptiness" = "the themes of Puritan origins of Thanksgiving." Really? I would like to know more as I never considered that, but no reason is given to equate the two. Perhaps only a small hint or reminder could be added?

• • The source is online. If you look at that, you can tell if I am summarizing the source correctly. There is really no further connection in the source though.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:01, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • You're right; the author assumes we're supposed to know what that means. Prhartcom (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "'The last war you ...'" This quote, I assume, is cited in Fischer 2004? I ask because there is no citation after it but there is one in the next sentence. Consider adding a reference footnote directly following the quote, since it's a quote, after all. I think a comma is needed between "war" and "you" (it's okay to punctuate someone's quote).

• • That quote is in half of the books on Rockwell. It is a quote. Above I explained to another reviewer that I believe two comma are missing.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:00, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Then you can fix them. It may be a quote, but we, as editors, are allowed to make simple punctuation changes (See MOS:QUOTE). My main suggestion was to place another "ref" tag to the source immediately after the quote.
      • I have added [,] in two places.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:47, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • I changed them to regular commas. It's okay. Our style guide states we are allowed to do that (link above), and I found more than one online example of others doing it. [10] I also added the footnote I asked for; please ensure I did it correctly ("ref name=LaF"). Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "Hibbs alleviated Rockwell's thematic concern. He noted ..." Perhaps combine the two sentences, which are on the same topic, with a semicolon. "Noted" could be changed to a more accurate verb, such as "explained" or "reasoned".

• • Merged with a slight change.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:04, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I see, and I'm so sorry, but I don't think that it was an improvement; it's a bit muddled now; it was actually better before, but just needed to be a single sentence. Prhartcom (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • How is it now?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • That's perfect. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "pressured Rockwell into completing his work soon after warning him that the magazine was soon ..." I think you see the problem, right? A comma is needed in a strategic location (either between "work" and "soon" or between "soon" and "after"; I can't tell if you are using the phrase "soon after ..."). Consider another word for the second "soon" to avoid the redundancy; e.g. instead of "soon going to be", perhaps "about to be".

• • I have tried something else.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:09, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • That is much better. Prhartcom (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "relied on neighbors for advice, critical commentary and their service as his models." Oh dang, you prefer not to use the Oxford comma in a list (which would be: "1, 2, and 3" instead of "1, 2 and 3"). Your choice, but I always use it (because I don't want to imply a relationship between list items "2" and "3").

• • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:13, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks for that. I fixed four other lists in the article that needed it. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "Jim Martin appears in each painting in the series." Really, why? Does the source say? It's obviously an interesting bit of trivia but it leaves us wanting an explanation.

• • No reason given.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:15, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "Rockwell lived in Stockbridge, Massachusetts ..." Nice to know, but we shouldn't say it; it's just stuck in there next to a detailed examination of the painting's production. We go from the painting directly to the related topic of its eventual home to that topic's related topic of Rockwell's home; of the three, the third is in no way related to the first, which was the main topic of the paragraph. Perhaps there is another, better place for this third fact. The last sentence of a section should should be a nice finish, ideally with some emotional impact (especially in a FA).

• • I have split off the last two sentences into a separate paragraph. The two new paragraphs are relatively stubby, but that is probably the best solution.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:24, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • It is better as a separate paragraph, I agree. The new wording could be better, but I won't dwell on this. Prhartcom (talk) 04:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have reworded the sentence. Feel free to revert or make further changes. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* Another complement: The entire first two paragraphs and the last three paragraphs of Reactions is wonderfully well-written. I got chills reading how well the painting was received. No issues here.

• • Those were re-written by Ewulp. See above.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "Richard Halpern says ..." since what he says is in contrast to what those dreary, starving Europeans said, perhaps a more accurate verb is needed here (or a "However") to signal to the reader that they are about to read a contrasting position.

• • However.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:43, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "empty plates and white dishes on white linen ... Rockwell may have been invoking the Puritan origins of the Thanksgiving holiday." There it is again. We just said all this earlier, and not in the summarizing lead. Do you reconcile a good reason for mentioning the same thing in two different paragraphs? It seems odd to me, and until I hear your reason, I'm suggesting that you shouldn't.

• • I have removed it from the earlier section. However, in the reactions section it is natural to have different critics pointing out the same theme.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:49, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I like your improvement. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "no one appears to be giving thanks in a traditional manner at the Thanksgiving dinner." That is super-important; majorly, incredibly important. Are you American or Canadian, Tony? Even atheists feel the need to give traditional thanks at Thanksgiving over here. If no one is giving thanks at a Thanksgiving meal in a Norman Rockwell painting, that deserves to be highlighted, not mentioned in passing while discussing that guy Jim Martin. Thankfully, you write more about it and you place it at the end of a section, where it gives that strong finish and emotional impact I mentioned above. I just wanted to make sure you knew how important this fact was and to encourage you to emphasize its importance if you can. Thankfully it is a direct quote. Maybe you can even put it in a quotebox.

• • Quotebox added.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:59, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • It looks good; I hope you like it. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* "He was sympathetic to the fact that the painting was produced in 1943 ..." The "was produced" indicates passive voice (note the missing subject: Mr. Rockwell) and isn't worth it (since Mr. Rockwell is the pronoun at the beginning of the sentence). (Note: There is plenty of passive voice in this article, but I'm not bringing most of it up because I must admit it is almost all worth it: In each case, it avoids mentioning a less-important subject over a more important object.) How about, "He was sympathetic to the fact that he produced the painting in 1943 ..."

• • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:42, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • I suppose you must have entirely cut the sentence as I can no longer find it; that's okay. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* Oh dear, is the abbreviation The Post or the Post? Now this article has both. Please find out which one is correct and correct the other one. (I'm guessing The Post because "the" is in the actual title, but I'll let you make the call.

• • Thanks.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 00:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* I was expecting to read more about "not a commonly understood or accepted universal freedom" that I enjoyed reading in the lead. Shouldn't the article proper mention it, with in more detail and explanation?

• • I don't have books on Roosevelt checked out from the library right now, but I added what I could.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:41, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • From Murray and McCabe? I see it referred to in the article; looks good. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* The Essay section is in perfect shape! And is a fascinating read!

• So is the Pop Culture section. It's in great shape.

* Tony, it doesn't appear that you have run the bots from the toolbox to the right; such a basic step; please do so. For example, no image is using the "alt" parameter, which our blind readers depend upon; a comma needed after "Additionally" in "Additionally the OWI ..." and needed after "In addition" in "In addition there is a covered silver serving dish", "All of the people in the picture ..." change to "All the people in the picture ...", redirects include "Thanksgiving Picture" and "The Thanksgiving Picture" but not "A Hallmark Christmas".

• • Technically, alt text is not a requirement for FA---though it's good to recommend, of course. Curly Turkey ⚞¡gobble!⚟ 23:56, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK, thanks for keeping me in line; how about just the external reference checking script? It shows several external links have changed and one has rotted; in my humble opinion even a Good article should have all links working at 200 or 0, and should have them all archived too.
      • I only see one bad link and I have fixed it.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:29, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
        • There were two. The link to animationarchive.net was bogus (it was displayed in blue right there on the checklinks output); with no source to reference at all, I'm afraid I have entirely cut its mention in the article (Lilo & Stitch). The checklinks script tells us another URL ("Inside America’s Great Romance With Norman Rockwell") has changed; I replaced the redirected URL with its new one.
        • I wish you would add the "alt" text to the images. Prhartcom (talk) 17:57, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
          • Alt done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:55, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

* I should check the sources. Is anyone doing that? I'm looking over the References and it you appear to be doing a good job on it. Maybe I can take a look at the online sources later. Very well-done article! I would say good-luck, but you've done pretty well up to this point earning FAs without me wishing you luck! What an honor it was for me to review your work Tony, as well as the article about Norman Rockwell's most famous painting! Cheers. Prhartcom (talk) 14:52, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• As always, feel free to revert my copyediting.
• Back in the morning. - Dank (push to talk) 03:45, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Dank I think you chimed in on the wrong discussion page.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 12:46, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dank, I think you mean these were your edits. Since you have indicated you are done, I have removed {{inuse}}.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:04, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks. I left a note this morning about that broken tool on two talk pages ... if the tool is going to stay broken, I'll start giving the link to the diff when I copyedit, as you just did. - Dank (push to talk) 15:08, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
      • The tool seems to be working now. - Dank (push to talk) 20:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Be consistent with accessdates for books (example: it's given for Ref 10, but not for Ref 3).
  • Fixed (5 added).--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:01, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 5 author?
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:09, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 16's archive date format needs unifying
  • Thx.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:12, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• For Ref 2, 23 and 42 should that be McCabe, James?
  • Stylistically, I have always only reversed names for the first of several authors. This is true for all of my FAs that I can remember.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:17, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    • Understand
• What's the page number for Ref 39?
  • Fixed ref.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Ref 46 falls foul of WP:ALLCAPS. The date format is also different to the other sources. Lemonade51 (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 20:22, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
• Lemonade51 How does it look now?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 21:13, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Happy with corrections. Lemonade51 (talk) 22:58, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on promotion, TonyTheTiger! Prhartcom (talk) 02:12, 23 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, 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. Ian Rose (talk) 00:44, 23 August 2014 (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 promoted by Graham Colm (talk) 22:20, 22 August 2014 [11].

Nominator(s): Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC) & S△M ^talk 19:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Here is Katheryn Elizabeth "Katy" Hudson aka Katy Perry. She's the California Gurl who kissed another girl and very much liked it. When I first started working on this article slightly over one year ago back in July 2013, it was a delisted GA. Ever since, I've done intricate work on this article and have made over 1,000 edits to the page. I now believe she's finally ready for that gold star. In March 2009, she went through a premature GAN and failed for prose, but was successfully brought to GA three weeks later. However, she was delisted in October 2012 for prose and reference issues. After a detailed peer review from JennKR this past January, the article went through more expansion and fine-tuning before a successful GAN last month. Thank you again, Petergriffin9901, for all your input during the GAN. Looking back, the article was in better state this past May (when I nominated this for GA) than it ever was before October 2012. Shortly afterwards, I took this to peer review for further improvement. Within the last couple weeks, I've done some more polishing before this FAC. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:50, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support – see below. –Chase (talk / contribs) 01:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, this is a very well-written and well-structured article that includes an abundance of info without being obscenely large. I will be more than happy to lend my support once these concerns are addressed. –Chase (talk / contribs) 02:04, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you Chasewc91 :D! Snuggums (talk / edits) 05:02, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Remaining concerns are dated 23:48, 27 July 2014 (UTC). (CTRL+F the timestamp) Just thought I'd add this at the bottom for convenience. –Chase (talk / contribs) 23:48, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Chase how does she look now? Also, do you think perhaps there's enough material to warrant a "legacy" section for this article or is it too soon in her career?? Snuggums (talk / edits) 00:34, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Way too soon. But a lot of great improvements have been made and I now gladly support this nomination. Kudos to your very hard work, Snuggums and Sam, and best of luck. –Chase (talk / contribs) 01:22, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you very much sir :3 Snuggums (talk / edits) 01:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Support, I am very happy to see all of the hard work you put into this article has paid off! Great job! WikiRedactor (talk) 18:41, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you- I have indeed put my blood, sweat, and tears into this page! Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Conditional Support pending comments elsewhere and referencing problems listed below - I was involved in the peer review, and thought there would be some more minor prose issues that FAC would throw up, but Snuggums seems to be on top of them all, so I'm happy to think this will not be hard to reach the FA criteria. It's a well written and informative article about an increasingly important figure in modern entertainment. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 18:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks Ritchie333 :D! Snuggums (talk / edits) 18:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Just a minor point, but why isn't—at least—Sam listed as a nominator? He really contributed to the development of the article and should get some recognition, in my opinion. My comments on prose/files/etc will be here soon. (I'm excited to see that this already has two supports!) pedro | talk 20:06, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Prism the reason is because when I launched this FAC, it automatically just listed my own username. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:24, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• I think you should add him, though. pedro | talk 23:29, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Now added, Prism. Snuggums (talk / edits) 23:43, 27 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, I saw. I'll be back tomorrow. pedro | talk 00:42, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

pedro | talk 14:53, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How is she now, Prism? Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:12, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Better than ever, 'resulting in me giving you another Support' (that's me trying to make a joke). I know you—Snuggums—since last year, when we started edit-wars over what images to include on Prism's composition section. You've come a long way since then, in terms of writing and being nice to others. This is truly your finest work, as well as Sam's, and I can't congratulate you enough! pedro | talk 15:29, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Prism! I do agree this is easily my best work yet, and is unquestionably the article I'm most proud of so far. Snuggums (talk / edits) 15:46, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Support, Your tireless work on this article has really made it meet the requirements for FA based on its layout and look. This would definitely be the right time for its nomination to FA instead of doing so at the last minute. The article's sources also seem to be in very good shape. Keep up the good work! IPadPerson (talk) 08:10, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you IPadPerson :3 Snuggums (talk / edits) 13:39, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]