Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Elliott Fitch Shepard/archive1

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

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 13:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Elliott Fitch Shepard edit

Nominator(s): ɱ (talk · vbm) 19:31, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote this article merely to fill a gap in Wikipedia's biography collection. For someone who I couldn't find a photograph of or very many sources about at first, I was surprised that as I researched, I found that Elliott Fitch Shepard was very well documented. I found numerous photographs and accounts, and this article should now be one of the most useful and comprehensive accounts of his life. After reaching Good Article status, I feel that it's comprehensive and ready for Featured Article status. This is my third FA nomination, the first two were for the October 19 TFA Briarcliff Manor, New York. ɱ (talk · vbm) 19:31, 27 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Driveby comments by Curly Turkey edit

  • You've got nearly a dozen cases of "$<dollar value> today"—that "today" will date quickly (even 2014 is nearly kaput), so you'll want at least an "as of". You may want to take a look at {{inflation}}. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 01:58, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm confused; I looked at every usage of "$<dollar value> today", and I've been using {{inflation}} in every one since the beginning. Am I missing something?--ɱ (talk · vbm) 04:34, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, you're right. I guess it doesn't inspire confidence that it actually is up to date when I see "today". The documentation for the template has an example using {{currentyear}}—I think it would be a good idea to use it. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:50, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I think that the currentyear template wouldn't be much better, especially (as you pointed out) because 2014 is almost over. Neither way appears very capable of inspiring confidence.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 15:12, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I meant inspiring confidence that "today" means "today", and not the "today" of however many years ago that it was added. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:23, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, wait, I see what you mean—the two templates may get out of sync. It's too bad the inflation template doesn't output its own "as of" date. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 23:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

  • Painting titles are generally italicized, not put in quotation marks
done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 00:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:ElliottFitchShepard.PNG is a bit confusing - the description suggests it was created c. 1875, but then the source indicates 1890 original. Can you clarify the timeline? Also, the creator may be unknown, but there is one - "N/A" is not appropriate for that parameter. Finally, should use creation or publication date rather than date of upload for the "date" parameter
picturehistory.com said c. 1875 and thus I added that. I later found the original photo on the MCNY site, which states 1890. I'm removing the 1890 bit, and I'll add the Unknown template, not sure why I wrote N/A. All done now.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 00:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This one is better, but there's another image with date confusion: File:640_%26_642_5th_Avenue_and_2_West_52nd_Street,_New_York,_NY.jpg. The Flickr page given has "Photograph date: ca. 1883-ca. 1895 . Building Date: 1881-1883". Neither number is consistent with what is given on the image description page. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Nikkimaria: Good catch, fixed.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 23:55, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:FitchShepard.png: how do we know that the book author and the image creator are one and the same?
We don't, sorry. Fixed; good catch.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 00:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:ElliottFitchShepardSignature.svg: page? Original date?
Added, detailed as unknown.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 00:28, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:ElliottFitchShepardCivilWar.tif: original date? Creator? Source gives suggestions for both
They weren't very helpful so I might've omitted them at first; added now.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 00:50, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Vanderbilt_Mausoleum.jpg: where are you getting that date from? The original source doesn't include any date indication as far as I can see. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I never looked into this because the photo existed on Commons well before I started the article. Apparently the unedited Commons photo (File:Vanderbilt Mausoleum.jpg) reveals its publication by W.J. Grimshaw, who I found lived from 1854 to 1931. So I suppose the image and its edited copy should be deleted for being eight years shy, no?--ɱ (talk · vbm) 00:50, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Digging around, I found this image must be PD, published in 1885. Will upload.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 00:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Coemgenus edit

  • Is the American Bank Note Company the descendant of those bank note companies mentioned before it? It's not clear from the prose.
I only thought that marginally relevant. I just wanted to state that EFS's brother and father were presidents as background. I wouldn't say this is the place to elaborate on the companies' relation.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:11, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
All the different companies' names are confusing. I'd say either clear them up or leave them out.
While I appreciate all of your help reviewing this, here I disagree completely.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...admitted to the bar in the city of Brooklyn in 1858." It sounds from the way this is written that he was admitted to the Brooklyn Bar, which doesn't exist, rather than being admitted to the New York bar while he was living in Brooklyn. You ought to make that more clear. You should also link bar.
He wasn't living in Brooklyn, he was admitted there; I don't really know how better/more clearly I can word this without it sounding awkward.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what you mean. Did Brooklyn have a separate bar from the rest of the state? Typically, lawyers are admitted to the bar in a state as a whole. Was it different then? I didn't think so, but I'm not an expert.
I tried to word it better, and I'm stuck on how I can be clearer; yes, he was admitted to the NY bar, and he was admitted in the city of Brooklyn in 1858.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At the advent of the American Civil War..." is a little flowery. Maybe "When the American Civil War began..."?
'Tis a biography, but OK.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Shepard informed George of his promotion, and may have influenced his subsequent promotion to the rank of major in 1865." I think you mean George's promotion here, but it's not clear.
Really? The word 'subsequent' should make it very clear.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would not have raised it if it were clear.
Here I disagree again; I never state that Shepard became a major, and thus would never reference George as influencing that; as well I say that Shepard influenced George's promotion, and maybe his subsequent promotion. That's really very clear.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "due to his awareness of officers who had seen field service." Not sure what you're trying to say here. Do you mean he declined the promotion because he felt it was undeserved, since he had never been in combat?
Field service can sometimes differ from combat, but yes. And not necessarily undeserved, just likely less deserved than those others. I don't know how to word any of it less confusingly without adding in unverifiable information.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe "in deference to officers who had seen field service..."?
fixed, thanks.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the comments/critique, much appreciated.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:10, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The paragraph beginning "After his marriage, Shepard..." feels jumbled. There's not really a theme here, just a bunch of things he did. Maybe his church work should be separated from his legal and business career?
Shepard's entire life was a jumble of activities. Once he married, his true career became more of a hobby; he already had enough money to support him through retirement, and thus from 1868 onward he just toyed around in law and business.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "continued in law practices" should probably be "continued to practice law"
done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he later served as a founder of the New York State Bar Association" It might be better to say "he was among the founders of the New York State Bar Association".
done.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Coemgenus: Thanks again.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 03:08, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

comments from karanacs edit

  • Fitch Shephard was also descended from the Dennis family? So he and his wife were distant cousins?
I found a few more sources related to his ancestry, I'll be able to clear this up pretty soon.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
fixed.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:21, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The second paragraph in Civil War service bothers me. The first sentence repeats the structure of the last sentence of the paragraph before. The second sentence didn't make sense for me - what does "due to his awareness of officers who had seen field service" mean?
I just reuse 'was also', so now that's somewhat fixed. The field service thing was addressed above by Coemgenus.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • were there other obstacles to his marriage beyond his father in law's disapproval? Why did he disapprove?
Your guess is as good as mine; I couldn't find any more specific information in any material I've found.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • "today" needs to be changed to a year value (for example, $315 million in 2014 dollars)
I don't see how "in {{currentyear}}" is much better than "today"; in fact I prefer "today" because the inflation template is manually updated and may not be technically accurate to whatever the current year is, although it would be accurate enough to "today". It's been brought up before by other editors, most recently around the end of 2014, where "{{currentyear}}" would say 2015 but the inflation template would be accurate to 2014 figures.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Edit: Actually, see #Driveby comments by Curly Turkey, where he had the same issue and then considered it okay.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:34, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a chronology issue with the Career section. It talks about events in 1868, then moves to the homes they lived in circa 1880s, then goes back to his career of the 1860s - 1880s. Perhaps move the paragraph about the Triple Palace down to the second-to-last or last paragraph of this section? Or would it make more sense when added in with the Briarcliff Manor section and the nws that she was selling property?
The chronology is somewhat skewed; I found it more important to detail the houses in that single paragraph, rather than throwing that information all around the article. They're just minor details, and if they're glossed over, the chronology is perfect otherwise.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Were his law degrees honorary? Make that more explicit
Again, I haven't found anything to indicate they were or weren't, so it'll have to stay ambiguous.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Karanacs (talk) 16:35, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Karanacs: @Coemgenus: replied to all.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 21:21, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
What about moving the triple Palace information down to open the Later life, ... section? I think it would fit better there. Karanacs (talk) 14:54, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
He lived in the Triple Palace before any of his Briarcliff Manor developments, so I'd think that would be out of place.--ɱ (talk · vbm) 04:25, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment -- I realise Coemgenus and Karen may still have comments to come but even then I'd expect to see at least another pair of eyes on the article, and with no support for promotion after being open close to a month I don't think we can expect consensus to promote any time soon. I hope some further work can be done away from the pressure of FAC, followed by a re-nomination after the usual two-week break. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Elliott_Fitch_Shepard/archive1&oldid=1136097992"