Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Billy Strachan/archive1

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

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 2 June 2023 [1].

---

Billy Strachan

Nominator(s): The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 14:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Back to the drawing board I suppose :(

The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 18:58, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Billy Strachan was a pioneer of Black civil rights in Britain, a leading anti-colonial activist, and the founder of one of Britain's first black newspapers. He is most famous for surviving 33 bombing missions for the Royal Air Force during WWII, when the average life expectancy was 7 missions.

This is my first ever time nominating a potential Featured Article. I have been editing Wikipedia for over three years and I believe this constitutes an example of my highest quality work.

The peer review for this article was very recently completed and archived.

-The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 14:18, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Buidhe

• I think the prose needs editing for WP:IMPARTIAL
• Frosty's Ramblings (reprinted from the Morning Star and Caribbean Labour Solidarity what makes these high quality WP:RS?
• There are image licensing issues. All images need {{PD-US}} rationale (t · c) buidhe 14:26, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  • Could you give me an example of how the prose could be changed?
  • The Morning Star in my opinion is one of the most reliable newspapers in Britain, especially when it comes to topics of mid-20th century British issues. However user 'Mujinga' in the peer review noted that Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources had downgraded the Morning Star as a source in 2019. I had meant to phase it its use, which I have done so through an edit on the Billy Strachan wiki I made a few minutes ago. Caribbean Labour Solidarity on the other hand are the publishers of Billy Strachan's biography by David Horsely. Every citation in the article was added by myself and I can attest that the biography published by Caribbean Labour Solidarity is the highest quality and most detailed piece of research ever written on Billy Strachan's life.
  • That could be an issue, nobody ever brought this to my attention before. I was not aware that {{PD-US}} rationale was necessary for FA status. ~~~~

  The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 16:02, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  There's a couple things that I noticed right away: "leading communist" does not appear to be sourced, "the average life expectancy for an RAF crew was seven operations"—the survival rate depends a lot on what aircraft type they are flying and in what theater they are in. I don't know exactly what the source says, but a lot of these figures are based on questionable statistical assumptions for a constant loss rate. In the body this is called "an impressive achievement", which is not for Wikipedia to decide.

  Parts of the article seem excessively based on Strachan's own recollections, it might be a better approach to stick more closely to facts that it is possible to verify and cross reference.

  All images are required to be PD-US and should have a license tag indicating so. (t · c) buidhe 01:43, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

  That's a shame, if I had known PD-US was necessary then I would never have nominated the article. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 18:16, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

  It's a requirement for all articles and images on Commons. Our servers are based in the US so following US copyright law is essential. See wp:public domain (t · c) buidhe 21:37, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Ling

• I'm tempted to say that the refs are in a really muddled state, but maybe this is a style I'm unfamiliar with? I dunno. This is not a style I personally would go along with, even if I make some leeway to accept styles that are not necessarily to my liking... what I mean is... I certainly can accept styles I don't necessarily like, but this one seems to be a bit of an outlier (?) I'm willing to admit that I may be wrong. § Lingzhi (talk|check refs) 15:06, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

  During the peer review process another editor added shortened versions of the citations when a source is used more than once. It is especially noticeable for Horsley, David Horsley's book Billy Strachan 1921–1988. I do not know if there is a name for this style but the other editors who read through my work appeared to like it so I left it as is. The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 16:16, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

• Huh? What? Kidnapped by the USA??? I'm not saying it's not possible; every government in the world is tinged with some degree of evil (and the more righteous they claim to be, the more you should look askance at them)... but I would need a string of four or five very extremely high-quality sources for an assertion that bold. § Lingzhi (talk|check refs) 12:38, 1 June 2023 (UTC)
• Horsley, David (2019) is Pamphlet published by Caribbean Labour Solidarity. It is cited more than 120 times in this article... What makes this WP:RS? § Lingzhi (talk|check refs) 15:24, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Graham Beards

I have made a few small edits [2]. You need to check the figure legends. Those containing a finite verb should end with a period. I am concerned about the short paragraphs; some of which are only one sentence long. This spoils the flow of the prose, which is generally of a high standard. Graham Beards (talk) 15:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Thankyou, I noticed the recent edits you made and I am very grateful :) The History Wizard of Cambridge (talk) 16:13, 31 May 2023 (UTC)

Oppose on sourcing grounds

• I see no reason to beleive that anything published by Caribbean Labour Solidarity is a high quality RS per our standards. The passages cited to Horsley 2019 make it sound like a hagiography with a severe POV issue
• Same with Manifesto Press Cooperative Limited
• African Stories in Hull and East Yorkshire looks like a SPS to me
• https://www.history.co.uk/ is not an RS
• Sourcing style is inconsistent
• 11 and 17 go to the same place
• Is the Morning Star an RS?
• The Frosty's Ramblings reprint looks like an ELNEVER issue
• Ramharack 2023 is missing important items
• Why is a blog at the University of London an RS?
• Marx Memorial Library seems like a suspect publisher
• Billy Strachan#Historical archives does not read an encyclopedic

--In actu (Guerillero) ^{Parlez Moi} 16:43, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Coord note -- the nominator did the right thing going to Peer Review before coming here but I think the above indicates that there is still quite a way to go before the article is ready; I'm going to archive the nom so improvements can take place outside the pressures of the FAC process. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:49, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 08:47, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.