Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Red River Trails

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

The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 16:04, 4 November 2008 [1].

Red River Trails

edit
Nominator(s): Kablammo (talk)

This article describes 19th century trails important in the development and history of the Canadian Northwest and the US Upper Midwest. Principally authored by the undersigned, it was critically reviewed and ably copyedited by Bwark, and since has been further expanded. Elcobbola has reviewed the images. Kablammo (talk) 00:57, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Otherwise sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:15, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Hudson’s Bay Company has a unique role in the history of British North America and Canada, and acted in a quasi-governmental role from the seventeenth into the nineteenth century. It has been an irreplaceable contributor to scholarly studies of the history of Canada. [2],[3] The page linked in the candidate article deals with events two centuries ago and serves no contemporary commercial purpose, and is not suspect on that account.
Having said that, the source is used only for one textual footnote supporting undisputed facts. That footnote also cites the Eric Morse book, which is not online. I included the HBC source as it is a good accessible short history of the events in question. Kablammo (talk) 14:53, 25 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's enough then! It's more to back up other reviewers, and for when the article appears on th main page, so that folks can see that the sources are reliable.
  • Comments I'll try to review the entire article in time. Some examples from the lead and part of the first section:
  • The trails went from what is now Winnipeg in the Canadian province of Manitoba across the international border and by a variety of routes across what is now the eastern part of North Dakota and western and central Minnesota to Mendota and Saint Paul on the Mississippi. - "Went" → "traveled".
  • Until then, these cartways provided the principal and most efficient means of transportation between the Red River Colony and the outside world. - What does "outside world" refer to, in this context?
  • That corridor has now seen a resurgence of traffic, carried by more modern means of transport than the crude oxcarts that once travelled the Red River Trails." - Is "oxcart" two words, or one word? In the first sentence of the lead, it's one.
  • Although fur posts were scattered throughout the Canadian northwest and settlements of Métis fur traders and bison hunters were located in the vicinity of Selkirk’s establishment - Add a comma somewhere.
  • Isolated by geology behind the rugged Canadian Shield and many hundreds of miles of wilderness, settlers and their Métis neighbours had access to outside markets and sources of supply only by two laborious water routes. - "Many hundreds of miles" is vague. How many miles, exactly?

–Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 13:57, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comments. Replies:
  • "Travel" and variants are used a number of times in the article, and I don't think it is best to usage to say that trails "travel"-- it implies they are mobile.
  • Probably; I'll try to come up with one (and suggestions are welcome). Kablammo (talk) 15:32, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The trails ran? Although it is an active verb it probably is better than "went" (and is commonly used for roads, etc.). Kablammo (talk) 15:50, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 20:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Outside world"-- everywhere else. The colony was truly isolated, as expanded on in the next section. I've added that qualifier to "Red River Colony".
  • "Oxcart" vice "ox cart". I've seen both; cf. Red River ox cart with oxcart.
  • Comma has been added.
  • Necessarily so; exactitude is not possible. Where (and when) was the transition between civilisation and wilderness? (There is no bright line.) And by which route? In any event, the very next paragraph gives approximate distances to the two main transshipment points.
Regards, Kablammo (talk) 14:31, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image review (thank goodness for the Minnesota Historical Society, eh?)

  • Image:MN1949stamp.jpg - Is there any way to add the source of this image to the image description page? When the bot moved it to commons, it just listed "Wikipedia" as the source. :)

The rest of the images look good and I'm reviewing the rest of the article now. Awadewit (talk) 14:52, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • That's the one image I didn't add. I'll ask Jonathunder.
  • Question-- would it be best practice to credit Minnesota Historical Society for images? Use of the images is not founded on permission from MHS, but rather on their PD status. Kablammo (talk) 14:56, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is totally up to you if you want to place a little "From Minnesota Historical Society" under the images. I was just struck with how many of the images came from their archives and thought to myself "thank goodness for their archives". If you intend on working on more Minnesota-themed articles and think you might need a good working relationship with them, you might think about adding the detail. Then, when you ask for a favor, you can say "see, there is an advertisement for you on the seventh most popular website in the world". :) Awadewit (talk) 15:04, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I uploaded the stamp image three years ago. I can't remember now where I originally located it, but it was probably an online repository of old stamp images. I do know United States stamps from that time are in the public domain. Jonathunder (talk) 15:25, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look around and see if I can find it. Awadewit (talk) 16:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I found a version and added the source. Awadewit (talk) 16:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign words--

  • Should the foreign words which appear in quotes (shaganappi, traverse) instead be italicized? And, if so, at each repetition?
  • For accessibility, when should the {{lang|fr|word}} be used in reference to place names (e.g., Traverse des Sioux; there are others)?

Kablammo (talk) 15:43, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • For foreign words, see WP:MOS#Foreign terms for guidance. I don't think place names are usually translated, but I can't find the MOS guideline on that. Does anyone know where it is? Awadewit (talk) 16:28, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Non-English words are in WP:ITALICS. I don't know where the guideline is, but we once discussed places at MOS talk. We don't italicize places that are the same in English and other languages (Paris, Buenos Aires, Caracas), we do italicize places that are translated differently to English (Firenze, Florence; Roma, Rome; Milano, Milan). I think. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:24, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is a very impressive article! (I love the notes on the talk page, too!) It is well-organized and well-written: I had never heard of these trails before reading this article and now I have an excellent idea of their development, use, and disintegration. A brief perusal of my university's card catalog suggests that the research for this article is good as well - my searches kept turning up books used in the article. Finally, the illustrations are useful and well-placed. I just have a few small nitpicks:

  • There seemed to be some overlinking to me - it was hard to determine which links, particularly geographical locations, would actually help me understand the article better. Also, there are a lot of links that repeat throughout the article - these are generally unnecessary. See WP:MOSLINK for advice on linking.
  • Ox cart is sometimes spelled "oxcart" and sometimes "ox cart". It should be standardized.
  • I found the last paragraph of "Significance" a bit fluffy after the rest of the article, which was much more detailed. I'm not entirely convinced of its necessity.
  • Christianson - Why is the volume subtitle in bold? It looks quite odd.
  • Holmquist - ISBN is not linked - something is amiss.
  • Any journal that is published in print as well as online should probably not be listed as a "website". Are the journals listed in the "website" section entirely online?
  • Was this originally published in Prairie Business Magazine by its editor, Rick Killion? The bottom of the webpage hints at that. If so, we need to include that information in the reference.
  • This was originally published in the CCHS Newletter, March/April 2000 according to the website. We need to include that information in the reference.

It was a pleasure to read this article - thank you! Awadewit (talk) 16:02, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your rigorous reveiw and kind comments. My response to your suggestions:
  • The article was, and perhaps remains, overlinked. My understanding of practice was that links were to be repeated if new to a section. I have no strong feelings, but have sliced a few.
  • I have standardized ox cart, but as mentioned above, even Wikipedia is inconsistent (which should come as no surprise). It seems that "oxcart" is more common as an adjective; Gilman's book itself used it in the title.
  • I have condensed the final paragraph, and prefer to keep it as a conclusion.
  • The discordant bolding in Governor Christianson's book is an artifact of the "Volume" call of the citation template. I've redone it to add the volume title to the title field, and blank the volume field.
  • Holmquist ISBN fixed.
  • Some of the online cites are published journals-- certainly the Manitoba Historical Society ones are, but until I get back to a library that has them I will not be able to add page numbers, etc. I have merged print and online references.
  • Web-republished print sources now cited to both.
Kablammo (talk) 02:20, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tiny thing: The access dates and ISBNs should all be in the same style. Awadewit (talk) 15:10, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Fixed, if I am reading you right. Thanks again. Kablammo (talk) 20:39, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Very nice work. Thank you for developing this article. I can hear the hooves, just above the noise of the screeching carts. Minor comments below. -SusanLesch (talk) 19:39, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Article is overlinked as someone else mentioned. Except for exceptions, only the first occurrence per article (not per section) needs a link, see Overlinking and underlinking.
  • Could all of the images be sized according to Images style? That would mean 300px for the lead image, and no px at all on the others except the map.
  • Two copyedit requests in the section for the East Plains Trail. What operates in, "the Mississippi, which operated to Saint Anthony Falls"? And "permanent settlement" by whom? I think the area was already inhabited and this means immigrants from the U.S. east coast.
  • Just curious, what kinds of furs were traded? Maybe the article could link to fur trade, animal trapping, trading post and trade route.
  • Also just curious, were any women on these trails?
  • Could the lead start with a general sentence or is this too high level? "The Red River Trails were trade routes between Canada and the United States during the nineteenth century."
Thank you for your comments and suggestions.
  • I’ve chopped some more links, but left some, more out of negligence than anything else. It has become a long article and parts are linked directly from others. (I will be adding more redirects from variants of the names; there are a few already.) Chop away, if you like; I have no strong preferences here.
  • Image sizes are not forced, except for the first one and the map. The top image was set at 255px to cascade with the NRHP infobox. I deleted that infobox as it gave undue weight to the MN, US aspect of an international trail, but did not change the px spec for the lead image. I’ve now increased it to 300px.
  • River craft operated from Saint Cloud to Saint Anthony Falls. I used “permanent settlement” as the area was clearly inhabited before, but by Plains Indians, who were nomadic. Not until the 1851 treaties was most of the land served by the trails opened to “white” settlement.
  • Furs: bison from the plains; likely beaver from further afield. I’ll see what the sources say.
  • Women: Yes. Some traders took their families.
  • Intro—It could start that way, but I don’t think “Canada” would be the correct term for this area in the early 19th century. No strong feelings either way.
Kablammo (talk) 20:09, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Everything on my list is accounted for. If I have time this week I might unlink a few wikilinks otherwise done. Twas my bad on the px, you done good. -SusanLesch (talk) 20:42, 26 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Susan, thank you for your help on this. Kablammo (talk) 16:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I added a wikilink and done a copyedit on a sentence. If there are any more of that particular type of sentence (a clause starting with wanting, being or a similar verb) that I overlooked, I suggest you change that too. - Mgm|(talk) 15:58, 1 November 2008 (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/Red_River_Trails&oldid=1078805341"