Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

For the criteria to become a featured article, see Wikipedia:Featured article criteria.

For the similar process page for good articles, see Wikipedia:Good article nominations.

Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page.

This star, with one point broken, indicates that an article is a candidate on this page. Here, we determine which articles are to be featured articles (FAs). FAs exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FA criteria. All editors are welcome to review nominations; please see the review FAQ. Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review and adding the review to the FAC peer review sidebar. Editors considering their first nomination, and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion, are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor, to assist in the preparation and processing of the nomination. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured article candidates (FAC) process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make efforts to address objections promptly. An article should not be on Featured article candidates and Peer review or Good article nominations at the same time. The FAC coordinators—Ian Rose, Gog the Mild, Buidhe and Hog Farm—determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FA status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the coordinators determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the coordinators: actionable objections have not been resolved; consensus for promotion has not been reached; insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met; or a nomination is unprepared, after at least one reviewer has suggested it be withdrawn. It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support. Do not use graphics or complex templates on FAC nomination pages. Graphics such as  Done and  Not done slow down the page load time, and complex templates can lead to errors in the FAC archives. For technical reasons, templates that are acceptable are {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}}, used to hide offtopic discussions, and templates such as {{green}} that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples without altering fonts. Other templates such as {{done}}, {{not done}}, {{tq}}, {{tq2}}, and {{xt}}, may be removed. An editor is allowed to be the sole nominator of only one article at a time, but two nominations may be allowed if the editor is a co-nominator on at least one of them. If a nomination is archived, the nominator(s) should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating. None of the nominators may nominate or co-nominate any article for two weeks unless given leave to do so by a coordinator; if such an article is nominated without asking for leave, a coordinator will decide whether to remove it. A coordinator may exempt from this restriction an archived nomination that attracted no (or minimal) feedback. Nominations in urgent need of review are listed here. To contact the FAC coordinators, please leave a message on the FAC talk page, or use the {{@FAC}} notification template elsewhere. A bot will update the article talk page after the article is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FAC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates {{Article history}}. Table of Contents – This page:

Featured content: Featured articles ← Featured lists Featured pictures Featured topics Featured article candidates (FAC) Featured article criteria Featured article log Featured article statistics Featured article review (FAR) Former featured articles Unreviewed featured articles/2020 Today's featured article (TFA): This month's queue About Today's featured article Recent TFAs and statistics Current TFA requests Potential TFA requests TFA oddities Most viewed TFAs Featured articles yet to appear as TFA Script to track TFA recent changes Featured article tools: Mentoring for FAC Nominators of featured articles promoted Recent changes to featured articles Random featured article

Nominating How to nominate an article Nomination procedure Before nominating an article, ensure that it meets all of the FA criteria and that peer reviews are closed and archived. The featured article toolbox (at right) can help you check some of the criteria. Place {{subst:FAC}} at the top of the talk page of the nominated article and save the page. From the FAC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link or the blue "leave comments" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the FAC talk page for assistance. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~, and save the page. Copy this text: {{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}} (substituting Number), and edit this page (i.e., the page you are reading at the moment), pasting the template at the top of the list of candidates. Replace "name of ..." with the name of your nomination. This will transclude the nomination into this page. In the event that the title of the nomination page differs from this format, use the page's title instead. Commenting, etc Commenting, supporting and opposing Supporting and opposing To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the article nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FAC page). All editors are welcome to review nominations; see the review FAQ for an overview of the review process. To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s), which should be based on a full reading of the text. If you have been a significant contributor to the article before its nomination, please indicate this. A reviewer who specializes in certain areas of the FA criteria should indicate whether the support is applicable to all of the criteria. To oppose a nomination, write *'''Object''' or *'''Oppose''', followed by your reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, a coordinator may disregard it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternatively, reviewers may transfer lengthy, resolved commentary to the FAC archive talk page, leaving a link in a note on the FAC archive. To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice. For ease of editing, a reviewer who enters lengthy commentary may create a neutral fourth-level subsection, named either ==== Review by EditorX ==== or ==== Comments by EditorX ==== (do not use third-level or higher section headers). Please do not create subsections for short statements of support or opposition—for these a simple *'''Support''',*'''Oppose''', or *'''Comment''' followed by your statement of opinion, is sufficient. Please do not use a semicolon to bold a subheading; this creates accessibility problems. If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so, either after the reviewer's signature, or by interspersing their responses in the list provided by the reviewer. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, or add graphics to comments from other editors. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.

Nominations

Mountain pigeon

Nominator(s): AryKun (talk) 16:45, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Been a while since I've nominated anything here, so thought I might as well put some of my older articles through here. This is about a genus of pigeons from Indonesia and it's pretty short, so have fun! AryKun (talk) 16:45, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

All the Light We Cannot See

Nominator(s): Lazman321 (talk) 05:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

All the Light We Cannot See is a 2014 novel written by Anthony Doerr, released to critical acclaim and commercial success. A Netflix adaptation will be released on November 2, 2023. This is my second nomination. I withdrew my previous nomination because of an academic summer program that prevented me from finding time to address the critiques raised. Since then, I have found time to address some points brought up in the previous candidacy. I hope to finish this candidacy in time for nominating it as the TFA on the date of, if not the release of the adaptation, the novel's tenth anniversary. I would prefer suggestions to be specific rather than overly general; telling me there are still prose issues is not good enough unless you tell me what those issues are. Lazman321 (talk) 05:44, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

WWJ-TV

Nominator(s): Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC), User:Nathan Obral

Ask either of us about the most culturally significant TV station we've written and this will be our unequivocal answer. Channel 62 in Detroit started life in September 1975, after a years-long struggle to secure financing, as WGPR-TV, the first Black-owned TV station in the United States. Owned by a Black Masonic group, it was a high-visibility station at its launch with very ambitious programming plans, key portions of which never materialized. However, some of its local shows stuck, and it produced a string of notable local and national Black broadcast professionals. In 1994, a major TV station affiliation switch swept the nation and left CBS looking for a new affiliate in Detroit. CBS failed to secure a better station, and the desperate network bought WGPR-TV from the International Free and Accepted Modern Masons, in the process removing the Black- and community-oriented programming channel 62 had long carried (and raising some community outcry). Today, the former WGPR studios are on the National Register of Historic Places, and in the old TV studio is a museum devoted to its history.

CBS renamed the station WWJ-TV, for the radio station it owned there. For many years, it never thoroughly invested in this high-number station. It floated but quickly abandoned an attempt to start a news department in 1995; upon merging with WKBD-TV, that station's ailing news department briefly extended to channel 62 before dying; and there was a morning weather-and-news program for a few years. That changed in a big way in February, when a full online streaming service and news department known as CBS News Detroit debuted.

This is a big dog of a project, and it's one that we have found quite fulfilling. It is also Nathan's first time at FAC. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 17:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

• Don't use fixed px size
  • Fixed by script.
• File:William_V._Banks.jpg needs a stronger FUR. Why is it necessary to visually identify the individual here, when he has his own article?
  • Also leaving room for Nathan to chime in. The association with WGPR-TV and Banks is incredibly strong—the museum in the former WGPR studio is named for him. I can understand the concern and that typically images like this are restricted to the subject's biography. It'd make sense to beef up the FUR, but Nikkimaria, do you think it should just be removed at this point?
  • Nathan here! For some context, Dr. Banks founded the Modern Masons in 1950, led the organization when it purchased WGPR radio and was instrumental in WGPR-TV even taking to the air. It even became a family affair of sorts; his daughter gave up a career as a college instructor to manage the station's day-to-day affairs. Station personnel have credited Dr. Banks for making them look beyond a show's budget to focus on the substance. That was largely why I had chosen to include his picture here, as he was almost inextricable. Nathan Obral • he/him • t • c • 05:54, 25 September 2023 (UTC)
• File:WGPR_TV.png has an incomplete FUR
  • Fixed by switching to {{Non-free use rationale logo}}.
• File:WWJTV_CBS_Detroit.png: if this is non-free it will need a stronger FUR, but why is it believed this is non-free and the lead logo is too simple to warrant copyright protection? They are of similar design so it seems logical either they are both free or they are both non-free.
  • Frankly, an editor in 2009 who probably didn't know about PD-textlogo. That's the correct designation, imo, and I've retagged it appropriately. Comments to here: Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 05:38, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Nikkimaria (talk) 04:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Duffield Memorial

Nominator(s): Usernameunique (talk) 06:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Relatively inconspicuous, somewhat overgrown, and more than a hundred years old, the Duffield Memorial sits in the yard of a church nearly a millennium older. Overshadowed as it is, however, the memorial tells an interesting story. An early work by Herbert Maryon, it commemorates members of a prominent local family. At the time, it was considered "quite unique, at any rate in this neighbourhood", and even now, it is an "unusual example of Art Nouveau design in metal work".

This article gives a thorough overview of the memorial and the surrounding context. It was thoroughly reviewed in March by KJP1; since then, TheShinji69 was able to take photos, and I've given the article another review. The article is at, or close to, the best possible version of itself, and so is ready to be nominated here. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:09, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

• "roles as director and chairman of a range of businesses, including the Reliance Life Assurance Company, the London Board of the Norwich Union, the Chelmsford and Braintree Gas Companies, and the Chelmsford and Blackwater Navigation Company" He was director AND chairman of each of this, or should it be "or"?

• Both, except for the second position where the source notes him as chairman but doesn't mention director. I've reworded it accordingly. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:07, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• 1918[footnotes]) Don't footnotes usually follow punctuation except in the case of a long dash?

• Normally yes. In sentences like this, however, with parenthetical about individual people, I tend to keep the citations in each parenthetical, so it is clear which are about whom. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:02, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Where is William Bartleet Duffield buried? France? Here? Do we know who ordered the monument and also had the second plaque affixed? Someone presumably paid. Do we know how much?

• It's unclear. Another look at newspaper articles from the time, however, found an article about his probate that discusses leaving some of his estate to his niece, along with £100 for "a memento". That probably answers the question of who paid for it, and gives an idea of cost. (Although according to the Bank of England, that £100 is worth some £4,700 today—presumably there was some left over after the plaque.) I’ve added this to the article (in a footnote, since it's not definitive). Meanwhile, even a turn through the primary sources doesn't address where he was buried. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:27, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• Is there anything that can be said about the drive to list the memorial?

• Unfortunately no. I sent emails to both Historic England and the church when writing the email, but did't get a reply from either. I'll follow up, but am not optimistic. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:33, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Wehwalt. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:32, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments by RoySmith

Lead section

• William Ward Duffield is a red link to W. W. Duffield, but other members of the family who are mentioned are left unlinked. Is there some reason to believe William Ward in particular is notable enough that he might merit an article in the future?

• There are a number of articles on him and A. S. Duffield—the two red links in the article—that indicate that they clear the notability threshold. That might be true for others also, but those ones seemed clear when looking up the people mentioned in the article. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• The memorial covers the grave. Is this a single grave in which Marianne, William Ward, and William Bartleet are all buried?

• Yes, at least as to the first two. Per a newspaper article on W. W. Duffield's burial, "the interment [was] in the grave where the remains already rested of the late Mrs. Duffield", and per a 1912 article on the memorial, it was "erected … over the grave of Mr. and Mrs. Duffield". As noted above, however, it's unclear whether William Bartleet Duffield was also buried there, or simply commemorated there. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:00, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• Starting with The memorial covers the grave... There's three sentences in a row of the form "fact 1 and fact 2", which sounds stilted. Maybe something like "The Art Nouveau memorial, comprised of edging and a vertical cross, covers the grave. The edging consists of riveted sections of copper alloy sheet metal which follow the rectangular perimeter of the plot, connected by short pillars at each corner. The cross is of the celtic wheel variety, decorated in relief with a leaflike motif." Well, you get the idea. Longer sentences will flow better, and try not to repeat the same sentence structure over and over. Also try to avoid repeated words, such as in "The cross is a Celtic wheel cross".

• Reworded, how does it read now? --Usernameunique (talk) 03:34, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Works of Herbert Maryon says the memorial is "Bronze", this article says it's a copper alloy. Bronze is indeed a copper alloy, but why not just call it bronze here?

Just to clarify, I see that the source used calls it "copper alloy", but it's worth exploring why Works of Herbert Maryon calls it "bronze" and reconcile the differences.

• Changed to bronze. The reason for the discrepancy is that the 1912 articles say bronze, whereas Historic England says copper alloy. I think we're safe relying on the latter. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:06, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• Newspapers at the time termed the memorial "very fine" and "quite unique" for the area,[1][2] and in 2022 it was designated a Grade II listed building. this is an odd juxtaposition of things that happened 100 years ago and something that happened recently. For the lead, I'd mention the Grade II listing and leave out the minor newspaper quotes.

• The article is quite short (DYK check says 5979 readable prose). MOS:LEADLENGTH suggests one or two paragraphs for under 15k. and this is 1/3 of that, so I'd say trim the lead to about half its current length, covering the most important facts from the main body. For example, I'd note that it's Grade II listed, but leave all the details for later.

The Duffields

• William Ward Duffield was born on 25 November 1820 to James Duffield, I assume James had the assistance of his wife in this. Do we know her name or anything about her?

• Somewhat surprisingly, there's very little information on either James Duffield or his presumed wife. The father is likely the Mr. James Duffield who died in 1830, leaving "a widow and large family to bewail", but it's not definitive, and articles about the family don't seem to mention the mother. There are also mentions of a James Duffield and Joanna Ward Duffield (buried in the same churchyard as the Duffield Memorial) but, again, it's supposition based on primary sources. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• He went on to become a successful solicitor, who is "He"? William Ward or James?

• William, clarified. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• including as clerk Drop the "as".

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:33, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• His private positions included a number of roles, drop the "a number of roles", just tell us what they were. As before, in and as chairman, no need for "as". You can "Be X" or "Serve as X", but don't mix the idioms.

• Done, and generally tightened up that sentence. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:35, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Duffield married Marianne Bartleet, there's a lot of Duffields being discussed; be explicit about which one you're talking about in this sentence.

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:36, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• three surviving children: William Bartleet Duffield (1861–1918[8][9][10]), Arthur Stewart Duffield (1867–1930[11][12]), and Florence Marion Duffield No need to keep saying "Duffield". I'd write this as "three surviving children: William Bartleet (1861–1918[8][9][10]), Arthur Stewart (1867–1930[11][12]), and Florence Marion". I suppose we can infer gender from their first names, but that can sometimes be tricky, so perhaps " sons William Bartleet (...) and Arthur Stewart (...), and daughter Florence Marion"?

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:39, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Herbert Maryon

• It's good to give some explanation of who this guy is beyond "he designed the thing", but this level of detail into Maryon's resume seems excessive. Are there some parts of his prior experience which would be particularly relevant to gaining the skills needed for this design?

Description

• 75 metres (246 ft) per MOS:UNCERTAINTY, you can't convert a measurement with two significant figures into one with three. It should be "75 metres (250 ft). I believe {{convert}} has a parameter to control that.

• Good point, done. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• As above, saying "bronze" rather than "copper alloy" would seem to make more sense, unless there's some good reason not to do so. In which case, maybe Works of Herbert Maryon needs fixing :-)

• Fixed as per above. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:53, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• The cross ... features a Celtic wheel cross avoid repetition of "cross".

• Reworded. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:50, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• a medallion, now removed... Do we know why or when it was removed?

• No, unfortunately, nor have I been able to find any photos of the memorial from before the removal. There was some discussion of this at the GAN review. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:55, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Two copper plaques are riveted ... The west-facing plaque Avoid repeating "plaque". Perhaps "... the west-facing one"?

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:57, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

History

• The organisation cited historic interest, architectural interest avoid repetition of "interest".

• Reworded. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:55, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• Historic England termed the memorial "an unusual example of churchyard memorial design that is also memorial to prominent local citizen William Ward Duffield and his son you can't do anything about HE's repetition of "memorial", but at least don't compound it with another one of your own :-)

• Reworded. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:56, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Gallery

I'm not sure this section adds anything. The first image ("Plaque on the front of the Duffield Memorial's pedestal") could be incorporated into the main body, and "St. Mary's churchyard (Duffield Memorial not visible)" doesn't add anything to the reader's understanding of the memorial, since it's not visible in the photo.

Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:53, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

General organization

I'm a little concerned that as much space is given to peripheral topics (the entire Background section) as is to the main topic. In particular (as I noted above), I think the Herbert Maryon section could be trimmed considerably. I'd also move the Description section up closer to the top of the article, since that's the main topic.

GWL

Interesting article. I'll take a look at what I see so far, then take other editors' comments for consideration after my comments are resolved. I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections. GeraldWL 08:56, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

• Would be great if infobox img caption states when the img is taken "(pictured XXXX)"

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:59, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Is there any way in which the gallery imgs are placable at the body?

• Done. Placed one of the two in the body, and removed the other per an above comment. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:59, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Images need alt text. Per W3C, "Note that it does not necessarily describe the visual characteristics of the image itself but must convey the same meaning as the image."

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Are there no columns for the Times ref?

• I'm not sure what you mean here. There are two Times refs, both obituaries, which are both noted as being in the "Obituary" column for that day. Did you mean something else? --Usernameunique (talk) 04:56, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Ah, I didn't know the Obituary was the column name. AFAIK Times refs always have an alphabetical column, like p. 27 col. E, or something like that. It's alright, though. GeraldWL 07:14, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Interesting. I don't see those for these ones; the full page for the Maryon obit is here, if you'd like a look. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Would be great if all Newspaper.com refs have a "via Newspapers.com" using the via parameter

• Thanks for catching that; I normally do that, but evidently forgot to here. --Usernameunique (talk) 04:52, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Link to whatever edging means here, it could mean several things

• I took a look at both edge and edging but neither seem to have anything on point—and, as your invisible comment goes to show, some that are very much not on point. We could perhaps include a link to edging on Wiktionary, but that suffers from the same problem, i.e., there are a number of definitions, only one of which is what is meant here. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:18, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• I guess I was being too overanalytical here lmao. GeraldWL 07:14, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• If sheet metal is linked here, should be too in infobox

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:20, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• "The cross is a Celtic wheel cross"-- repetition of cross --> "The cross is in the Celtic wheel style"

• Reworded. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:23, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Why not paraphrase the third para? If it's too short then it can be merged with para 2.

• Done, and generally shortened. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:32, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• "Chelmsford-based", "London-based"

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:26, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• "included [...], including [...], including"-- repetition. first "including" could be changed to "such as", second "including" to "like"

• Reworded. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:27, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Why are some names redlinked, some not?

• As noted above, the two that are red linked are the two that I thought clearly met the notability guideline. Others might also, but there was enough coverage on those two in particular that red links seemed worthwhile. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:31, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Link Reading, Berkshire

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:29, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Dup link for Uni of Reading

• The second actually links to the University of Reading War Memorial. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:33, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• My bad!

• "After the Second World War"-- comma

• Done. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:34, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• "Sutton Hoo ship-burial led to his appointment"-- WP:SEAOFBLUE

• It's now "Sutton Hoo ship-burial led to his appointment". Still a decent amount of blue, but at least it's now broken up. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:36, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Link Church of St Mary

• It's already linked in the background section; are you suggesting a second link? --Usernameunique (talk) 05:38, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Duplicate refs of [1][2][3]

• Responded to two comments below. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:01, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Would love to have a footnote for LUX PERPETUA LUCEAT EIS (translation), and link AIX LES BAINS

• For the time being, I've linked the Latin to Eternal Rest, which gives the translation and background. I also put in a request for what appears to be a reliable source that discusses the topic, and (once in hand) will update accordingly, probably with a footnote. For Aix-les-Bains, I've now added that it was W. B. Duffield's place of death, with accompanying link. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:41, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• I found this by Oxford that contains a translation, though I don't think you need to delve deep into the phrase, worrying it might go offtopic.

• That would work, but I'd like to add a one-sentence footnote saying something like "'May perpetual light shine upon them', a line from the Requiem æternam prayer." I'm looking for a reliable source for the second clause, and I think the chapter in question may work. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:12, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• How about this? It does state the Requiem name. GeraldWL 07:16, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Dup refs of [3] in paras 2, 3, 4

• Preferences vary, but I strongly prefer citing every sentence. It's more precise, and there's less risk that later edits make it unclear what is cited to what. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:45, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Dup refs [1][2]

• Ditto the above. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:45, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• I would love for a brief descriptor of what a Grade II listed building means.

• Done (and for Grade I, for the church). --Usernameunique (talk) 06:59, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• Dup refs [3]

• As per above. --Usernameunique (talk) 06:59, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• In the listed building article, Grade II is given asterisk but why not here?

• Grade II and Grade II* are different things. Grade II signifies "buildings that are of special interest", and the asterisk indicates "particularly important buildings of more than special interest". Why they couldn't simplify things by just doing Grades I/II/III is beyond me. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:15, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your comments, Gerald Waldo Luis. I believe I've addressed everything above, with a single exception—for the Latin, let's give it a day or two to see if I can get the source, otherwise I'll use the website you found. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:38, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to New York (song)

Nominator(s): Ippantekina (talk) 06:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

As if Taylor Swift was not popular enough, she made a NYC tribute song to keep up with Jay-Z or Frank Sinatra. In my honest opinion, this song will never be considered a NYC tribute classic. But hey, at least the synths are fun to listen to! I believe this article is well-written, well-researched and neutral, and I would appreciate any and all comments. Cheers, Ippantekina (talk) 06:59, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from MusicforthePeople

I don't have too many comments; feel free to ignore those you think are more trivial.

• For the audio link at the bottom of the Infobox, the song title is capitalised as "Welcome To New York" as opposed to "Welcome to New York" as per the rest of the article.

• I adhered to MOS:TITLECAPS. Although the title in the link capitalizes "To" in prose it should not. Ippantekina (talk) 07:44, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• in support of her fourth album, Red, – needs the year of its release in brackets since that hasn't been established.
• landmark of her life – would "in her life" be better?
• 1980s artists Prince and Cyndi Lauper – I would have put these in alphabetical order.
• Dan Caffrey from Consequence said – pipe this as ''[[Consequence (publication)|Consequence of Sound]]'' as that's what the publication was called at the time. Pipe it in the reference as well.
• In Consequence, Sasha Geffen opined – change this in prose and in the reference to Consequence of Sound per above, but don't link it in prose because that'll be overlinking.
• The A.V. Club needs unlinking in the critical reception section as it is already linked in the previous section.
• For ref #22 (Boston Herald), author should be Jed Gottlieb (per archived ref).
• For ref #67 (Clash), author should be Mat Smith (per archived ref).
• For ref #68 (Billboard), author should Glenn Rowley (per archived ref).

• For Clash and Billboard because there are multiple authors from the editorial board, I wouldn't cite these two specifically as authors of the refs. Hopefully this is understandable. Ippantekina (talk) 07:44, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

That's all I've got. MusicforthePeople (talk) 19:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your review! I've addressed all comments except where I left my remarks. Best, Ippantekina (talk) 07:44, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

I Am the Best

Nominator(s): ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 14:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about a K-pop song called "I Am the Best" by 2NE1. It is often regarded as a classic in the K-pop world with it being one of the most popular songs that went against the "cute" or "sexy" female stereotypes that were common amongst Korean girl groups around that time. In addition, it was one of the first Korean-language songs (after Gangnam Style) to make waves in the western world upon being featured in a Microsoft commercial, with various critics noting "I Am the Best" as one of the works that helped spread the Korean wave. This is my first featured article nomination, and was also the first article rewritten by me to be upgraded to good article status back in December 2020. After a large amount of edits since then, I believe this article meets FA quality standards. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 14:03, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Temple of Apollo Palatinus

Nominator(s): UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:54, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about what was, at least in its day, one of Rome's grandest temples. Built by the not-quite-yet emperor Augustus on the Palatine Hill, the temple played a major role in Rome's religious life and political ideology. It was, by turns, a senate-house, war memorial, public library and distribution centre for sulphur. The article has to wrestle with the deeply complicated issue of the join between ancient text and modern archaeology: the reconstruction of the complex around the temple is deeply controversial and its excavations have not been brilliantly documented. The article has undergone a peer review from Golden, Modussiccandi and Caeciliusinhorto, to whom I am greatly obliged for points both stylistic and substantive, and a Good Article nomination by Simongraham. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:54, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Tim O'D

Claiming a spot now. Review soon-ish. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:56, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Ignorant on the subject matter, but having a bash:

• The Temple of Apollo Palatinus ('Palatine Apollo') - is this translated? From Latin, I presume. If so, could use a language template.

• 'Palatine Apollo' is a translation of Apollo Palatinus, but we use language templates for text in the non-English language, and the overall name given ("Temple of Apollo Palatinus") is English in the same way that "Cathedral of Notre Dame" is: we wouldn't put a French language template halfway through that name. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• sometimes called the Temple of Actian Apollo,[1] - as this is in Construction, does it need to be cited here too?
• Ditto It has been described by the archaeologist John Ward-Perkins as "one of the earliest and finest of the Augustan temples".[2]

• Quotations are one case where MOS:LEADCITE does want an inline citation: the first is perhaps on the side of caution, but my logic was that "has been called" implies that someone has called it that, and therefore we're effectively quoting them. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• According to his biographer Suetonius, he claimed to have "found Rome a city of brick, and left it a city of marble".[5] - very famous quote, but is it needed here? Bit of a cliche in my opinion.

• This came up at PR: this is what I put in response there:

It is a very famous quote, and I think there's value in indicating to the reader that Augustus claimed to be engaged in totally rebuilding the city; that claim both gives evidence for what precedes it and useful context for what follows it. John Ward-Perkins uses it in exactly the same way, so there's a secondary-source context for connecting the quotation with the building programme. We could rephrase to something like "Augustus claimed to have totally refounded the city of Rome and to have beautified it in the process", I suppose, but that would seem like a bad swap to me.

Did you have a particular change in mind? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Not if you're happy with it. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• senate-house or senate house?

• I opened up a recent academic book to see where they went (the Cambridge Companion to the Age of Nero), and they have one of each. Perhaps a little old-fashioned (certainly seems less common in phrases like charnel house in recent publications): hyphen removed. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• connection - British English article, so consider using "connexion" instead.

• Reads as very archaic to me, as a native BrE speaker. Wiktionary says it hasn't been common since the 1950s. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Bit of a shame that the original version is slowly receding into the rear mirror of history, but what can you do. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Cossutius, a brick-maker employed by Gaius Asinius Pollio, a politician and literary patron of the early Augustan era, was likely involved - try Cossutius, a brick-maker employed by Gaius Asinius Pollio—a politician and literary patron of the early Augustan era—was likely involved.

Good idea: done. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:26, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

More to come. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Funk

• Will have a look soon. FunkMonk (talk) 21:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• At first glance, Diana and Attica are WP:duplinked.
  • Much appreciated - thank you. Fixed those two duplinks: for some reason, the "highlight duplicate links" doesn't seem to be working for me. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• Not your fault, but it's unfortunate that this image[1] doesn't have an info template on Commons, looks like a mess.
• Shouldn't Rome be linked? And link Roman tradition and Greek world perhaps?
  • MOS:OVERLINK advises against linking current national capitals and countries. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "whose worship originated in the Greek world, was considered a 'foreign' deity" Isn't that the case for most Roman gods?
  • Afraid not. It's a long story, but in short, the two traditions descend from the same source, so while the Greeks and Romans both have the "same" god as Jupiter/Zeus, it isn't accurate to say that the Romans "got" Jupiter from the Greeks. However, Apollo doesn't seem to be part of that inherited tradition, but rather to have spread into Etruscan and Roman religion directly from contact with Greek cities. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "against Mark Antony, Octavian" Could specify what their occupations/ranks were to contextualise their roles?
  • Neither concept really works all that well in ancient Rome, particularly not at this time. We've already introduced Octavian as the controller of the Roman state, and Antony as his enemy in the civil war: I think that's enough for what's needed in this context. Adding that both were former consuls would be distracting and somewhat tangential to the point at hand: that status had very little to do with either of them being in the position they were. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "who reports having read it in the Greek author Asclepias of Mendes" How does someone read something in an author?
  • A classicist-ism ("I read it in Homer" = "I read it in the works of Homer"): changed. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• Link Augustus and Apollo in image caption, as well as other terms not linked in captions.
  • All relevant terms now linked on first use in captions. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "already considered particularly sacred" For what reason?
  • I don't think there was a particular reason: there isn't a sharp divide between sacred and non-sacred ground in Roman culture, which is where the adverb particularly came from. The whole Palatine was somewhat sacred in that it was the site of Rome's original foundation, ordained by the gods as the seat of Romulus's city; to a lesser extent, that was true of the whole city, and we get a very good sense from Aeneid 8 of the generally but non-specifically numinous feel of the place to the Romans of Augustus' time. The sources are clear that this specific site was more sacred than the rest, but don't go into detail as to why - I don't expect anyone in 36 BCE could have given you a clear answer. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• State what Apollo was the god of?
  • The "god of" concept doesn't work very well for classical religion: it's better to think of gods as being associated with or patrons of certain things (which may overlap with the purviews of other gods). Apollo is associated with a big bunch of vaguely-related things. From the Background section, Apollo was held in Roman culture to represent discipline, morality, purification and the punishment of excess: I think that's the best explanation (it's Zanker's) that gets the point across without going into the tiny minutiae. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "Greek art was held to have an "acknowledged moral superiority"" But why would the temple of a Greek god then be considered unfit for being within the city?
  • Those two things aren't the same: Greek art is very different to Greek gods, and the specific belief that only Roman gods should be enshrined within the pomerium never implied that nothing Greek should exist there. I strongly suspect that this "belief" only existed in retrospect (Juno, who was meant to have originally been a goddess of Veii, had temples within the city), but that would be OR to include: the sources all report it as fact. Remember that there's also a big time gap here: we're talking about the mid-fifth century BCE for the founding of Apollo Sosianus (and so the alleged prohibition on a temple within the pomerium), while Apollo Palatinus (and the "moral superiority of Greek art") is four centuries later, by which time building a temple to Apollo within the city clearly isn't a problem. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:26, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Elias

Already skimmed this very interesting article. I'll leave my comments shortly.el.ziade (talkallam) 07:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Consider linking first instances and image captions: tripod, Marcus Valerius Messalla Messallinus, Greek, Latin, Augustan poetry, laurel trees, antithetical, Romulus, foundation of Rome, Apollo Citharoedus, Danaus, Pediment, Celtic or Brennus (3rd century BC), candelabrum.

• Mostly done, except for languages per (e.g. MOS:LINKEXAMPLES and MOS:OVERLINK and antithesis on similar grounds (the article shares a name but is a more specific concept). Thank you for these; some good spots in there. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Location section: Excavations from the early twenty-first century indicate that the house was largely destroyed... are you referring to Zink's excavations?
  • I think so: will check later on. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

  Unfortunately, it's not clear, and I was a little more specific about the date than Wiseman allows (now changed). He cites a paper which I can't get hold of from 2006. The excavations in question are of the house, not the temple, so it's likely that they cover projects outside the scope of this article. I've amended to be as specific as I think we can be. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:31, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

• Same section: Roma Quadrata without italics, link it please.
  • The italics fit the MoS (it's Latin and not, like Circus Maximus, a naturalised expression in English: indeed, they come from the Latin language template used for it) - now linked on first use. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• The passage The temple's cult statue of Apollo was depicted on the Sorrento Base, a late-Augustan or early-Tiberian (that is, c. 14 CE) statue plinth first identified as a depiction of it by the German architectural historian Christian Hülsen in 1894. seems out of place, maybe insert in the description section?
  • It needs to be in Reception, as the Sorrento Base was made about half a century after the temple was opened, and wasn't ever part of it. It does make for an awkwardly short paragraph, but only because it's the temple's only real footprint in the visual arts. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• Other scenes show human beings worshipping sacred objects, do we really want to use "human beings"?
  • I think so, because we're contrasting them with gods, (semi-divine) heroes, and monsters like Medusa. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• In Excavation section: Arcus Octavi --> Arcus Octavii? Also link first instance to Arch of Octavius in the Architecture section.
  • Good spot; both done. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• Lead, location, and Excavation section: capitalize Domus in domus Augusti.
  • I don't think that would be correct: it's a description ("the house of Augustus"), not a name. Capitalisation here would be inconsistent with how the cited HQRS do it. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• Italicize "pronaos" consistently.
  • Done (italicised throughout) UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• May have more later. el.ziade (talkallam) 09:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Nonmetal

Nominator(s): Sandbh (talk) 12:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

While the idea of what a "metal" is has been around since BCE times it was not until over two millenia later that the term "nonmetal" appeared. It was an unfortunate term since explaining what something is not, is difficult.

The structure of the main body of the article has only six sections: Definition—Properties—Types—Prevalence—Uses—History.

There is a table at the end comparing the properties of metals and the different types of nonmetals.

The gist of the nonmetal article should be able to be got by reading only the topic sentence of each paragraph. The technical subject matter means there is some jargon, which I've attempted to minimise.

Since the article was last at FAC, in May-June 2023, it’s been further copy edited, checked for compliance with MOS, the title simplified, the scope honed, and the lede table streamlined. Sandbh (talk) 12:30, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Graham Beards

Sorry but I think many of the later additions are not improvements. The prose suffers badly from padding, redundancy, editorializing, and verbosity. Here are examples:

.* Within the realm of elemental composition,

• underscoring their pivotal role in the composition of the planet.
• Vital to the composition of living organisms are the nonmetals hydrogen, oxygen, carbon, and nitrogen, which constitute a significant portion of their structural makeup.
• More broadly speaking,
• A degree of ambiguity surrounds
• Further contributing to the evolving landscape of elemental classification
• Approximately half of nonmetallic elements exist in gaseous states, (= are gases)
• with the majority of the remainder being lustrous solids (= most are)
• bromine stands as the singular nonmetal that manifests as a liquid (= the only)
• invariably manifest as solids (= are usually a solid)
• Noteworthy
• Notable
• It is noteworthy
• As to their chemical behavior
• Physically, the unclassified nonmetals appear to lack rhyme or reason.
• In the context of the periodic table
• are recognized as (= are)
• An impressive facet
• A few noteworthy examples
• The majority of (= most)
• Curiously (really?)
• The showcase moment
• "Sodium and potassium, in contrast, exhibited a remarkable behavior—they floated on water." !! Aluminium foil, gold foil, iron ships etc float on water.

Yes, for over two millenia, metals were distinguished from other substances by the fact that (in bulk) they were heavier than water. When Davy, in 1807, isolated sodium and potassium their low densities challenged the conventional wisdom that metals were ponderous substances. Many chemists did not regard them as proper metals. In 1808, Erman and Simon suggested using the term metalloid to refer to the newly discovered elements sodium and potassium. Their suggestion was ignored by the chemical community. The two new elements were eventually admitted into the metal club on the basis of their chemical properties. On the other hand, Davy's discovery "annihilated" the line of demarcation between metals and nonmetals—Hare RA & Bache F 1836, Compendium of the Course of Chemical Instruction in the Medical Department of the University of Pennsylvania, p. 310.

Aluminium was not discovered until 1824, quite a few years later.

I will add have added a footnote about this. Sandbh (talk) 06:09, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Ref Wiberg 2001, pp. 257–258, 261–262 is a red linked

Fixed. Sandbh (talk) 06:09, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

I still think the "Some cross-type properties" is way too noisy.

After so many FACS, we shouldn't be seeing these issues. Graham Beards (talk) 13:49, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Graham Beards.

Re prose, FAC #6 was an austere version without (as you put it) "padding, redundancy, editorializing, and verbosity". I'm happy to revert to the more austere version of prose.

I am sorry that you find the "Some cross-type properties" table at the end of the article to be "way too noisy". It has only five physical properties and five chemistry-based properties. What is it that you find to be way too noisy?

I am sorry that you feel that after so many FACs, we shouldn't be seeing those issues. Before FAC #7 the article had been to peer-review twice and was copy-edited by an editor from the Guild of Copy Editors. Sandbh (talk) 04:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Since then there have been numerous changes. For example:

• "About half of nonmetallic elements are gases; most of the rest are shiny solids." (April 30)
• "Approximately half of nonmetallic elements exist in gaseous states, with the majority of the remainder being lustrous solids." (Current)

Which is not an improvement in my view. Graham Beards (talk) 05:47, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

I agree and will change this to back to the April 30 version. Sandbh (talk) 23:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Graham Beards: I copyedited the whole of the article, offline, to address the prose issues you raised including the examples (which were helpful, thank you). I've posted the revised article. Sandbh (talk) 13:37, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

That's infinitely better and I am close to supporting. There was one fused participle, but I couldn't think of a better wording. How attached are you to the table "Some cross-type properties". I don't think it is needed and it is difficult to understand. Graham Beards (talk) 15:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Graham. I will take a closer look at the table, see what can be done about it, and report back here. Sandbh (talk) 00:26, 23 September 2023 (UTC)

Graham Beards: That table was not my best work. I have divided the table into two smaller tables and undertook some decluttering and tidying. The introduction to the tables has been rewritten to provide a better explanation and rationale. I feel that this subsection now brings things together in a pleasing way, given its location at the end of the article. Sandbh (talk) 05:52, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Mike Turnbull

At present the lead includes the statement In contrast, metals are good conductors and most can easily be flattened into sheets and drawn into wires because of the free movement of their electrons. The part "because of the free movement of their electrons" seems unnecessary, because while it may explain the conductivity I don't think it explains the malleability and ductility and is in any case not needed in the lead of an article about nonmetals. The article ductility is the target for all the terms "flattened into sheets", "drawn into wires" and (in the first main section) "malleability" and "ductility", which suggests that fewer links are needed or some of the text could be removed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:51, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Mike. I agree the text about free or unfree electrons doesn't need to be included in the lede, and have trimmed it. Per your suggestion I've replaced malleable and ductile with "pliable". Sandbh (talk) 05:13, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Piri

Nominator(s): Launchballer 11:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

The OnlyFans model Piri began releasing music in 2021 after entering into a relationship with Tommy Villiers of the Villiers family. Their single "Soft Spot" went viral on TikTok and Spotify, prompting EMI to sign them, re-release "Soft Spot" and release "Beachin" and "Words", and for Polydor to release "On & On", Froge.mp3, a cover of "Unlock It", and "Updown" and "Nice 2 Me". Thanks to Pseud 14 for taking a look before nomination (see the article's talk page); any further comments will be appreciated.--Launchballer 11:41, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

550 Madison Avenue

Nominator(s): Epicgenius (talk) 14:37, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about the old AT&T Building, later the Sony Tower, in New York City. Built in 1984, the skyscraper has a distinctive marble exterior with a huge entrance arch at the base and a Chippendale-like notch on its roof. A bold architectural statement for its time, 550 Madison Ave. was seen as a panacea to New York City's mid-1970s fiscal crisis. It went through two owners in two decades and became an official NYC landmark in 2018 following a controversial plan to significantly modify the building's exterior and lobby.

This page became a Good Article two years ago after a Good Article review by A person in Georgia, for which I am very grateful. I think it's up to FA quality now, and I look forward to all comments and feedback. While the previous nomination was archived due to lack of commentary, I hope that isn't the case this time around. Epicgenius (talk) 14:37, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from HAL

I really enjoy these NYC architecture entries. Comments soon. ~ HAL333 03:51, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

I'm not sure all architectural terms with which the reader may be unfamiliar have been linked, such as "spandrels" "shear walls/tubes" "mullions" "capitals".

Also cladding.

"There was initially no retail space on the Madison Avenue front because, according to critic Nory Miller, "AT&T didn't want a front door sandwiched between a drug store and a lingerie shop."[44]" Did this change? "Initially" implies a change.

"repudiated claims" Is anything stronger than "denied" really needed?

More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:13, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Wehwalt. I've addressed all three of these points now - I added some links, removed "initially", and changed "repudiated" to "denied". – Epicgenius (talk) 13:21, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• "The presence of the atrium not only allowed additional floor area but also was aligned with the atrium in the IBM Building at 590 Madison Avenue" What was the practical effect of this? Did it form a continuous public space?
  • Yep. I've reworded the sentence now to clarify this. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• "of a rebuilt annex to the west." If this is the one rebuilt in the early 2020s, then you've referred to it previously and it should be "the" rebuilt annex etc.
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• "inscriptions on the pavers" What kind? Is this the sort where you spend to have your name inscribed on a brick?
  • Kind of, but the pavers have poetry instead of names inscribed on them. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• You refer to the amenity space created on the 7th floor twice, with slightly varying description, and once is "by 2020", the conversion is taking place, and the other mentions the renovation in the early 2020s. I'd check for consistency, plus be sure you need to mention it twice.
  • Thanks for the catch - I didn't even notice that the amenity space was mentioned twice. I've reworded this now. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• " Johnson/Burgee recalled that" reads a bit oddly.
  • I changed this to "Johnson and Burgee", as the men, not their eponymous firm, set aside the questionnaire. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• "swap some of the expensive materials with cheaper materials" I might simplify "substitute cheaper materials"
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• "from the cash-strapped AT&T" I might delete the "the"
  • This proposed modification feels awkward, since it would change the sentence to "purchase the building from [adjective] AT&T". If the adjective were something like "defunct", it would sound even more strange ("from defunct AT&T" would sound like it's missing a word). Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• " in comparison to" maybe substitute "given"?
  • Done. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• " regarded the changes as akin to a television commercial in exchange for a public benefit." I'm not sure what's being said here.
  • It was worded awkwardly. The visitor said, "my impression is that it's like commercials on television. If Sony wants to maintain the space, they're using the commercials to pay for it." This seems to me like commercial sponsorship, so I've changed it accordingly. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

That's it.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for the review Wehwalt. I have now addressed all of these issues. Epicgenius (talk) 19:43, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

  Support Wehwalt (talk) 19:59, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Treat Myself

Nominator(s): NØ 14:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about Meghan Trainor's third album, Treat Myself. Before she made us look again, there was this commercial disaster. Trainor's label delayed it several times, spanning over a year, and can probably write a book about what not to do when promoting an album. She has stated in interviews that it is her best work. And if you ask me, track 1 on this album is the best song she has released! Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.--NØ 14:48, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Media review (pass)

The images are licensed appropriately and have alt text (suggest including one for the alternative cover). The audio sample has an appropriate FUR and meets WP:SAMPLE. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:18, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

MyCatIsAChonk

• She conducted the first session - not sure if this is just a music industry term, but I (a classical musician) am reading this as she literally conducted the song; perhaps "ran" or "held" would be better

• This is a great point and I would have never realized this unless you raised it.

• She said it was "fun, dance-y stuff with a little funk" and had an '80s and '90s feel" - missing quotation mark before '80s?
• Dani Blum of Pitchfork described Treat Myself as a combination of several ballads, funk, and "garish shudders of EDM" and wrote - using and in "and wrote" shortly after using and for "and 'Garish...'" is a bit confusing; I think it'd be better as "Dani Blum of Pitchfork described Treat Myself as a combination of several ballads, funk, and "garish shudders of EDM", writing..."
• Lyrically, it discusses - replace it with "the album" or just the album's name
• Wl Evil twin in on which Trainor blames her bad decisions during a night out on her "evil twin"
• Mike Nied of the same website, Lucy Mapstone of The Irish News, and Lauren Alvarez of Forbes thought the album was "worth the wait" - did all three say those exact words? If not, attribute the quote, and abridge the other two to just "critics" or "reviewers"

• I was surprised too but they did, indeed, all use those words!

MaranoFan, all done, great work as always! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:10, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the swift review, MyCatIsAChonk. Very helpful and all done I think.--NØ 06:50, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Support - if you get any time, I have an open FAC and two open FLCs that I'd appreciate comments at- thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:01, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Nevermind, I didn't see your comments at season 3 until just now- thank you so much! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments

• "Meghan Trainor was placed...." - re-introduce her in the body as "American singer-songwriter Meghan Trainor"
• "Nied opined Trainor successfully" => "Nied opined that Trainor successfully"
• That's it, I think - great work as ever!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:17, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Appalachian Spring

Nominator(s): MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Martha Graham's ballet technique was one of the first American styles of dance, and it was beautifully executed in Appalachian Spring, a ballet commissioned for Graham and the composer Aaron Copland. Graham's unique choreography and the suites created from Copland's serene score remain essential in the American repertoire. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:48, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Mirokado

One of my favourites. First impression is: a well-written article.

• §Background: last para: "bizarre scenes" (or whatever phrase is used in the source) should be quoted so it is not in Wikipedia's voice.
• §Commission and composition
  • is "composing on the music" American usage? It seems incorrect to this British reader, I would expect "composing the music".
  • "and the rest of the community attends a revival meeting": perhaps American usage again? I would expect "the rest ... attend ...".
  • "Despite a new December deadline": It would be clearer to say "December 1943 deadline" here, since presumably "fall 1944" is meant after "spring of 1944" in the previous sentence.

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

All fixed- no, those aren't AmE spellings, just typos on my part, thanks for catching them! Clarified everything else MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:42, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

• §Commission and composition: "The original scenario...": I'm familiar with the music but not the ballet, so it was a bit confusing that the main characters first mentioned in the content are not those mentioned in the lead. This is clarified later, but an extra clue here would be helpful. The shortest way of doing this would be to say "... used characters (later changed) based on..." or similar.
• §Production:
  • Perhaps "collaborator with" is better than "collaborator of".
  • Quote "Fear of the Night" and any other references to episodes.
• §Premiere and reception: "Copland himself took a modest opinion...": "had a modest opinion", we have an opinion but take a stance or position.
• §Later performances: "Lynn Garafola compared Copland and Graham's collaborations to that of Stravinsky and Diaghilev": should be "... collaboration to that of ...". (I have verified that the reference provided supports this content).
• Referencing: multiple-page ranges need the |pp= param in sfn.

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

All fixed, added an efn for the first comment instead of parentheses- many thanks again! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 15:05, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

• §Later performances: have there been any notable performances of the ballet outside the U.S that we can mention? The current para has only U.S. performances.
• §Themes: "Crist describes this as an embodiment of the link between wars among generations: as World War II was linked to the Civil War, the Bride brings together the life on the homefront in the 19th and 20th centuries." I'm not at all sure what is meant by "World War II was linked to the Civil War". Unless there is a causal link I am unaware of, I think we should rephrase this sentence to reflect similarity of circumstance and experience rather than any direct link. (I have verified that the reference provided supports this content, so I am also disagreeing with how Crist has made her point).
• §Instrumentation: the layout of the columns is weird (on my system using Chrome on linux with a largish monitor): the columns in the first group are widely spaced and in the second group, the first column is wide and the second and third are narrower but seem to start where the second column of the first group ended. I don't see anything obviously wrong with the source, so some investigation is needed.

  Thanks. I have tweaked further so that both first columns are 38% wide and the final column takes the remaining space. The columns line up and the total specified width does not exceeed 100%. -- Mirokado (talk) 10:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:59, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Reworded the themes issue, and I think I got the columns thing fixed, let me know if it's still displaying wrong on your end. For the foreign performances: I can find very little info about performances. Most of the info I did get about performances was, as you noticed, from US newspapers. I can't find anything about a European or Asian premiere; I did find this 1946 article about a London performance of the suite, but it doesn't explicitly state that it's the European premiere. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Not much we can add about performances without sources. This section would need to be updated if more information becomes available. -- Mirokado (talk) 10:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• §Prologue: the description moves from present tense to past tense. I think it needs to stay in the present tense apart from "The four Followers join the Revivalist, who has observed the land with the Pioneer Woman." which is correct so.
• §Eden Valley:
  • "Halfway, the music calms down...": "Half way through, ..." would I think read better.
  • "... cued by a short phrase by a woodwind.": "... cued by a short phrase from a woodwind." would avoid repetition of "by".
• §Wedding day:
  • "The music becomes heavier for and the jagged rhythms return ...": "The music becomes heavier for a while and ..."?
  • 'The second part of "Wedding Day" depicted the "old fashion charivari" mentioned in the scripts.' Is this referring to something which was later removed? If so we need to clarify, for example "Originally, the second part..." and perhaps say what replaced it. Otherwise, "depicts" should be in the present.
• §Interlude: present tense tweaks needed here too.

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 10:43, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Fixed all - the tense should be all good, and the charivari thing was supposed to be present tense, thanks for spotting that! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:13, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I have just checked with some other articles about musical works, and generally the present tense is used, so I think a few more tweaks may be needed. If it seems too complicated to describe the changes, I may make a few (more) copyedits and you are welcome to change further, discuss here or whatever. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• §Commission and composition: "old fashion charivari" needs some context here. We could wl Charivari#North America which says "In some communities the ritual served as a gentle spoof of the newlyweds, intended to disrupt for a while any sexual activities that might be under way." Since that is half way through the section, I suggest an efn as well as the wikilink.
• §Interlude:
  • "greatly connected": I think "strongly connected" would be better.
  • "..., the Followers following along.": well of course they are, it's their job! Can we rephrase, perhaps "..., accompanied by the Followers."?
• §Fear in the Night, ...:
  • "... he warns the couple of their love." The problem is presumably the impending separation, or whatever, not their love itself. Is it possible to rephrase this?
  • "His agonized, frenzied dance was informed by the experiences of Peter Sparling, a dancer in the company who would dance the role in later productions." What experiences – the linked article does not give any clues? The article says he danced with Graham from 1973–1987, so was he really involved with her in 1944 or thereabouts? If he influenced later productions, we could say "has been informed" rather than "was informed".

More later. -- Mirokado (talk) 21:22, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Fixed all- I just linked the charivari because I couldn't find a citation for an efn. I clarified the Sparling fact, but that may be dangerously OR-y, since the article uses rather vague language. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 23:33, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Your changes are often better than my suggestions. -- Mirokado (talk) 23:55, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I appreciate it; I'm impressed by the fine details you're catching. Still working on my encyclopedic tone! Also, I think I;ve fixed the past/present tense issue- details about the music/dance are present tense, and details about Copland's composition of it are in past tense- let me know if I missed any. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:00, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

• §Background: "consisted of" was correct as originally written: see for example Merriam Webster. (notifying user:ZKang123) -- Mirokado (talk) 09:26, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for catching that! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 10:59, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from ZKang123

I will take a look at this. I had studied the composition before in my A levels days, and I might have some understanding of the ballet.--ZKang123 (talk) 02:04, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Lead:

• "Appalachian Spring is a ballet and orchestral work by the American composer Aaron Copland and the choreographer Martha Graham."
  • From my understanding, Aaron Copland composed the music while Graham did the ballet choreography. This article talks about both the music and the ballet. The way its ordered at the moment seems to imply the choreographer was involved in composing.
  • I will rewrite to "Appalachian Spring is a ballet and orchestral work by American composer Aaron Copland, with the original choreography by Martha Graham."
    • I implemented this with a small change to phrasing; technically, both Graham and Copland devised the scenario, so I kept them together with "created" MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
• "It was composed for Graham upon a commission by Elizabeth Sprague Coolidge" – "Commissioned by Elizabeth Sprague Coolidge, Copland composed the ballet for Graham"
• "The work was very successful after its 1944 premiere, winning Copland the Pulitzer Prize for Music the following year." – "The music saw its success in the 1944 premiere, earning Aaron Copland the Pulitzer Prize for Music in the subsequent year."
• Wikilink Great Depression
• "Copland's political ideals began shifting further left" – "Copland's political ideals aligned towards the left"
  • Also wikilinke "left"
• Remove the semi-colon with a comma.
• "as a result, he had the idea to create ordinary music for the public, music that was easy and accessible enough for the general citizen to understand."
  • "As a result, he began composing ordinary music that were easy and accessible enough for the general citizen."
• "He used this idea" – "He incorporated this concept"
• ", and the final result drew from a number of the revisions." – I find this clause irrelevant after you mentioned of various revisions before

Background and commission:

• I have to admit you included a bit too much of Copland's backstory into this article. I would simplify further to focus more on his compositional tutelage and cut away stuff about his family (which I can read further in the composer's biography).
  • E.g. "The Copland family lived above their Brooklyn department store, which his parents spent much of their time managing; as a result, Copland was entrusted to the care of his older siblings." – this could be removed and skip over to him being close to his sister
  • "Exposed him" – "introduced him"
• "consisted of" – remove of
• "Copland wrote much of the composition on the West Coast" – I'm curious, why was he on the West Coast? If I recall he's from New York
  • Not stated in the sources. Franko says he was just in Hollywood, and Graham says he was "far" from her New York location MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
    • Might then say he was also working at Hollywood. Was also checking with Oxford Music Library (Grove Music) on his biography by Neil Lerner which stated "Dividing his time between East and West Coasts, Copland continued to score Hollywood films throughout the 1940s." --ZKang123 (talk) 01:40, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
• "an Indian girl to represent the land" – would clarify Native American instead of Indian. Also might wikilink Native American
  • Used "American Indian" instead, since it more closely aligns with the sources. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
    • I'd rather if you use "Native American", unless it's a country jargon (ex: Indian Reserve or statute Indian in Canada).--ZKang123 (talk) 02:10, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
• "contained an extra episode" – "included an extra episode"
• "the premiere was pushed to the fall." – I guess of 1944?

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 02:07, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

All have been implemented; I replied above if I didn't implement the comment in its full form. Thank you! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Production, reception:

• "the Daughter, now the Bride", "the Citizen, now the Husbandman" – would rather write "the Daughter to the Bride; the Citizen to the Husbandman" etc
• "Four Followers of the Revivalist were added to the cast for a total of nine dancers." – So there are nine dancers in total overall? Or 13?
• For the last two paragraphs of the production subsection, as it's more about the commentary and comments by critics, why is it in this section instead of the reception section? I will keep the parts of the intentions, then shift the actors' performances to the reception section.
• Wikilink "The New York Times critic". Also John Martin

More to come.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:24, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

All fixed! On point three: these sentences are supposed to describe the choreography. I had a hard time deciding what counted as a review and what was effectively describing the dance, so I've cut some things. Let me know what you think- thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:04, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Also fixed native american and added the west coast fact- thanks for finding that source! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:20, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Before I go on, may I know why the music and plot sections combined? I don't see as such for The Rite of Spring and The Firebird, though also for Petrushka (ballet).--ZKang123 (talk) 10:11, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

@ZKang123, there is no particular reason to divide the two sections. The story and the music are closely connected, and explaining them at the same time is intuitive and helpful. Philip 2018 explains the plot and music the same way (though, with less detail). MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:02, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Also, I tried modeling much of this article and The Firebird after The Rite's article, since The Rite is a FA. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:21, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright thanks for the above explanation. And yes, I can see the parallels made, though bear in mind they are slightly older FAs. Continuing.

Music and plot:

• "Suddenly, an energetic melody" – "A sudden energetic melody". Or just remove suddenly and write "burst forth" instead of "come forth"
• "Swing-like" – further elaborate how the melody is "swing-like". Like, is it the rhythm, or the intervals?
• Might also show an example of "jagged rhythms". Like, is it a dotted quaver - semiquaver?
  • The sources don't really elaborate on this. Pollack also describes the rhythms as "mov[ing] jaggedly"; based on my knowledge of the score, I can say that "jagged" is describing the 3/4, 2/4, to 5/8 metre change, but I can't find a source that reflects this; and, IMO, adding another musical excerpt would be a bit extensive, but if you think it's needed, I'm not vehemently opposed MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "caring melody" – "soothing melody"?
• You mention of a duet (Eden Valley). You didn't mention what instrument was playing the energetic opening of this movement. Further elaborate. Or is this duet referring more to the ballet than the music? If so, then duo
  • The energetic opening was played by the upper strings and piano, so mentioning an instrument is sort of a moot point since it's half the orchestra. Otherwise, I've clarified that it refers to the dance MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "this time with louder and more forceful strings" – "this time accompanied by louder and more forceful strings"
• "Copland achieves this by relating the music to American folk themes" – might further elaborate on other inspirations and folk elements incoporated
  • I can't find much other than the fiddling mentioned after and the relation to County Fairs mentioned before that sentence MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "such as the harmony or which instruments are playing" – "such as the harmony and the instrumentation."
• "The music of "Fear of the Night" jolts and twitches, similar to the "Gun Battle" in Billy the Kid." – Jolts and twitches... I guess in mode (angry, sad etc)?
  • Added nervously, which is the only emotion described in the source MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• "becomes rushing and agitated" – "becomes rushed and agitated"
• I might also note the slower tempo and harmonies (is it tonal and/or dissonant?) in "The Lord's Day" subsection
  • Can't find any sources for the music part. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• I recall in my American music studies about the "openness" of the ballet to reflect the "prairie" of the American countryside, with the wider range of notes and notably also illustrated through the longer-held notes for the slower sections. I'm not sure of the source, but I think you can relook into your sources. Optional if you can't find it.
  • I can find a good bit of information regarding the association of the prairie with Billy the Kid, but nothing about Appalachian Spring. There's certainly some level of association between Copland's Americana music and the idea of the Wild West, but the writings I found talked about Billy the Kid instead. Certainly a good point though- thanks for bringing it up! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
• No other prose problems in the suites and recordings section.

That's all for me.--ZKang123 (talk) 09:43, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

• ZKang123, thank you very much for your review- I've replied to some above, but I addressed them all! Many of the ones about expanding upon the description of the music or themes could not be implemented since I couldn't find any sources. That was one difficulty in rewriting this article- many sources talk about the history of it and the general idea of the plot, but few actually go in depth into the music or the themes (it's a miracle I was even able to have a themes section, you probably noticed it only uses four sources). Thank you for the review! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 13:20, 24 September 2023 (UTC)
  • You might want to refer to Aaron Copland's Appalachian Spring By Annegret Fauser, from page 39 onwards. If you can, try to dig up this article from The American Music Teacher. There are also doctoral dissertations on the music you can refer to, but I might urge caution given WP:PRIMARY. Tonal Coherence in Copland's Music of the 1940s (Kleppinger, Stanley V.), Copland and Stravinsky on the parallels between "APPALACHIAN SPRING" AND "APOLLON MUSAGETE", and Tonality and harmonic motion in Copland's "Appalachian Spring" (Rober, Russell Todd). I will hold off giving my support until more is elaborated on the music.--ZKang123 (talk) 14:05, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

• What's the copyright status of the music itself?
  • As a music student, as far as I'm aware this piece was composed in the 40s, and I doubt the copyright has expired.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:53, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
• File:Coolidge_Auditorium_under_construction.jpg: where is this believed to have been published in 1925?

• File:Pulitzer_Prizes_(medal).png is tagged as a 2D work, but medals are generally considered to be 3D. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria, I'm not sure what you mean by 2D tagged- can you clarify? The LOC website for the Coolidge Auditorium photo says it was published in 1925, and it was very likely published in the US since it was taken by a capitol architect. The music is under copyright internationally, but I believe the use is minimal, as in other FAs about copyrighted works like Short Symphony and Symphony No. 3 (Górecki). MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 12:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

PD-scan is based on mechanical reproduction of a 2D work - it can't be used for 3D works.

The LOC website says "published/created" - we don't know whether that means published and created, or just created, without more information.

Brief quotations from non-free works are allowed, but inline citation is required. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:39, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: for the pulitzer medal, I added PD-coin, because I can't find anything else that would fit it. If this isn't proper, please let me know what is needed to verify that it's PD.

Coolidge auditorium: I am having an extremely difficult time finding information about this photo's provenance. The LOC listing says its found in a published guide called "Washingtonia Photographs". The (thankfully public domain) guide can be found online, but the page that mentions this photograph doesn't actually display the photo (see LOT 4021). Though it mentions a name on the back, I cannot find any information about a "John Crane", so the death date is unknown too. PD-US-unpublished won't work, since anonymous works must be created over 120 years ago to be PD, but I also can't prove its publication. Does the mention in "Washingtonia Photographs" qualify?

Added citations for the musical quotations. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 16:16, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

A simple mention without the image doesn't qualify, no - have you found any publication of the actual image? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:58, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria, no, I have not. The only place I can find it is in the LOC exhibit linked under sources. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:16, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Okay. You've stated that it was taken by a capitol architect - is that certain? I see "probably secured from" at the given source. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:23, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: I didn't think "probably secured from" was sufficient- do you think it's enough to say it's PD since it's taken by a US gov't employee? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 00:26, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

No - unfortunately without more information I don't think we can use it. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:29, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria Cut MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 01:36, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

GWL

Hey there! As an appreciation for the plethora of comments you put on my PR, I thought perhaps this would be a fun little QPQ. I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections. GeraldWL 07:33, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• Shortdescs must be as brief as possible, with the majority of articles having 40 or less characters. I think here, "music" can be dropped since the music is part of the ballet.
• Trim some of the alt texts; per accessibility guidelines they must be brief enough for blind readers to get the gist of it. For example, photographic elements like B&W, sepia, chromolitograph, unless they are contextually important, can be dropped.
• Infobox: Should "Coolidge Auditorium" be in brackets?
  • I don't see a reason it shouldn't, since it's linked in the prose too; and, the premiere location is linked in The Rite of Spring too MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Pennsyl should be linked like the lead does.
  • The first occurrence of Pennsylvania outside the lead is already linked? MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
    • I was referring to the infobox, sorry for not being clear. GeraldWL 04:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
• For consistency the ref publishers should be linked: ref 19, 59, 87, 94, 121-124, 157. Also those in Sources.
• Aaron Copland (121-124, 157) fits better as pub than web
• Locations should be placed out of the ExLinks, e.g. "Aaron Copland Collection at the Library of Congress"
• Since Portal bar has a white background, putting it above the navboxes would make it less awkward.
  • All above without an individual response have been fixed MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:39, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
    • The portal bar placement should follow the advice at MOS:LAYOUT: below navboxes, above authority control. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 12:12, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

      Thanks for the clarification, it's been updated per MOS standards. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:19, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• I think there should be a repeat of "Appalachian Spring" replacing "the ballet" in "The ballet follows the Bride" and "The ballet features eight episodes".

• Shouldn't it be "in the United States"?
• Link ragtime
• "his left-wing political stances strengthened"-- Left-wing political stances, no need for pipe
• "This "ordinary music" idea is certainly present"-- certainly sounds pretty subjective and essayistic, I think it can be replaced by other words, but removing it doesn't really change the intended message.
• "about Medea" --> "about the Greek mythology figure Medea"
• "Graham's east-coast-based work"-- the article doesn't hyphenate and decapitalize east coast
• If my point on Medea was to be done, then Greek mythology in "drew from Greek mythology and French poetry" should be unlinked
  • I chose to not link Greek mythology beside Medea's name, since it's a passing mention; a link is more important here MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• There's a more specific Slavery during the American Civil War
• Just wanna say, I love these meta footnotes, it gives the article a specific touch!
  • Thank you! I tried including information in efns in this article, rather than putting them in parenthesis or the like; the use of efns on Mahler, Debussy, etc is excellent and I strive to achieve the quality of those articles MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• If you were to list all eight episodes with individual refs, I don't think ref 44 is needed in "The final scenario featured eight episodes".
• You start off number 1, 3, and 4 with the title, but then repeat it, e.g. "Prologue: Graham did not want "Prologue" to be long". It can be resolved with "Prologue: Graham did not want this chapter to be long".
• "spring of 1944 [...] fall of 1944." "Avoid the use of seasons [...] as such uses are ambiguous".
  • I have no choice, the cited sources say use that time frame, and saying "the later months" is (IMO) more vague. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
    • I think spring and fall is easily interpretable as early and late 1944. The later months is definitely ambiguous but so are seasons. GeraldWL 05:08, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
• "a Japanese-American sculptor"-- I don't think Jap-Am is needed, like how you don't state Copland is Lithuanian-American.
• "combined with Copland winning"
• If you linked Pennsyl, then Hawaii, Tennessee, Indiana, and Florida should also be linked.
  • Not linked per Michael's comment MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Link Tchaikovsky, Stravinsky.

• "a reference to the ongoing"-- civil rights movement is a "was", so ongoing can probably be dropped.
  • Ongoing was for racial inequality in the United States, but the order can be confusing; I switched it so that racial inequality comes after civil rights movement MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• "The idea of using Shaker themes" -- repetition of "Shaker" --> "This idea"
• Link variation (music) per lead

• "Throughout the "Prologue""-- chapter names shouldn't probably begin with "the"
  • Crist refers to the Prologue and Interlude with articles (see p176 and p169); so does Pollack. Because these are common musical terms, but should still be in quotes, the article is used MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Consonance and disonance should prob be linked in Backg rather than here, or link in both occassions
  • Linked in themes and music; the mention in Background is passing MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• "Halfway through"
  • Not done- this is how it used to be, but was changed per a comment by Mirokado above
• Link County fair

• "Its great success made the (then on-tour)"-- not sure what the brackets serve, I think we can assume that the shows have ended.
  • "Then on-tour" shows that the ballet was still showing in theatres when the suite debuted; this in turn made the ballet more popular, and it was likely seen more as a result (but I don't have a source for that last point) MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
• Instead of making a footnote J, the prose can be tweaked to: "exist as created by Copland; in chronological order:"
• Video recording or film? They're two really different stuff
• "there over" --> "there have been over"
  • Actually used are, that was a typo on my part- there are over 150 recordings available commercially MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

  I disagree that US states other than Pennsylvania, the setting of the ballet, should be linked; MOS:OVERLINK. -- Michael Bednarek (talk) 07:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

  Perhaps, yeah. MyCatIsAChonk, feel free to ignore that cmt. GeraldWL 07:54, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: I think I've gotten everything; if I didn't respond to a comment, I implemented/fixed it without question. Thank you so much for the thorough read-through! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Your welcome! I've responded to two comments, you can notice them by my signature. GeraldWL 04:41, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis Fixed both MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:27, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Adamson Tannehill

Nominator(s): TfhentzTfhentz (talk) 15:43, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about... Biography of Adamson Tannehill (1750-1820), military officer, politician, civic leader, and farmer. Tannehill had a significant role in the American Revolution as captain and commander of the longest serving rifle regiment of the war. He was an early leading citizen of Pittsburgh and a distinguished Pennsylvania politician who held several local, state, and national appointed and elected offices, notably including one term as a Democratic-Republican in the U.S. House of Representatives from 1813 to 1815 and president of the Pittsburgh branch of the Bank of the United States. He also served on the founding boards of civic and state organizations. He was active in the Pennsylvania state militia, eventually rising to the rank of major general in 1811. Moreover, Tannehill served as brigadier general of United States Volunteers in the War of 1812.Tfhentz (talk) 15:43, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Tannehill_1776_commission.tif is mistagged

• File:Fort_Pitt_in_1776.jpg: source link is dead, missing a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Corrected; both image files should be good to go now.Tfhentz (talk) 11:45, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

1912–13 Gillingham F.C. season

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

With 25 successful FAC nominations to date for seasons in the history of my favourite football club, and one looking like it's bearing down on goal with only the keeper to beat, here's number 27. This was technically the very first Gillingham F.C. season, as it was the first under that name, but like most of the seasons in the club's history up to this point it didn't produce much in the way of success. Feedback as ever will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt

• "Gillingham also competed in the FA Cup; after holding Barnsley, the previous season's winners of the competition, to a draw at home in the first round, Gillingham were defeated in a replay at Barnsley's ground." I might divide the sentence after "Cup". Also, should Oakwell be piped?
• "The name change would not be formally approved by the shareholders until the following summer but nonetheless the team played under the new name in the 1912–13 season.[6]" Perhaps rather than "but nonetheless", substitute a semicolon for "but"?
• "The team ended a six-match winless run by defeating Coventry City 2–1 away from home on 16 November" Do we need "from home"?

That's all I have.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:23, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

@Wehwalt: - many thanks for your review, all should be done now! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:00, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Support. Looks good.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:04, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments by Pseud 14

• and began October with two away games, losing 2–1 to Reading and winning 2–0 away to Bristol Rovers -- perhaps you can take out the second instance of "away" as it is preceded by a mention that these two are the away games in October.
• On Christmas Day -- might be worth linking for context that it happened December 25th
• That's all I got. As usual, another well-written work out of your Gillingham series. Pseud 14 (talk) 18:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
  • @Pseud 14: - thanks for your review - both done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
• Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 21:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Source review

Impressive prose as usual- don't seem to be issues there, so I'll do a source review. No spotcheck. MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:23, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

• Add Template:Use British English or otherwise appropriate
• Ref 3 needs author (look at bottom of webpage)
• It looks like most (if not all) of the newspapers.com citations are to clippings. Anyone can view these clippings, so the lock icon isn't needed. If it linked to the paper itself, it would require login, but viewing just the clippings is not exclusive

ChrisTheDude, I got nothing else, nice job! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:23, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

@MyCatIsAChonk: - thanks for your review, all done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:27, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Support - wow, impressively fast, I appreciate that! BTW, if you get extra time, I'd appreciate any comments at this FAC- thank you! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:29, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

@MyCatIsAChonk: - sure, I will do my best to take a look over the weekend. BTW, can you clarify if you are both supporting on prose and passing the source review? Thanks!! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:45, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for reminding me, you think I'd know to clarify by now... support on prose and pass source review MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:46, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments by NØ

• Dick Goffin is linked twice somewhat closely in the September-December section.
• I believe this sentence should not have a comma: "Gillingham began the season in poor form, and did not score a single goal in their first six home matches."
• "Two days later, two goals from Lee secured a 2–0 win away to Stoke, whom the reporter for The Western Times said were "lamentably weak" - Are you sure this should be "whom"? Unless I'm wrong, if it's referring to the goals it should be "which" and if it's referring to Lee or Stoke it should be "who"(?)

Great work and a fun read. If you fancy reviewing one of mine, I have nominated another Meghan Trainor album above.--NØ 17:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@MaranoFan: - thanks for your review. I fixed the first two. In the third instance, "whom" is correct, because Stoke is the object of the verb. See here, where it says "How can you tell when your pronoun is the object of a verb or preposition? Try substituting the subjective-case pronoun he, she, or they for who or whom And then try substituting the objective-case pronoun him, her, or them. If he, she, or they fits, you should use the subjective option: who. If him, her, or them fits, you should use the objective option: whom. Keep in mind that you may have to temporarily rearrange the sentence a bit while you test it." If you rearranged the sentence and replaced Stoke with a pronoun, it would be "the reporter described them as...." not "the reporter described they as....", so per the above, "whom" is correct. Anyway, thanks again for the review, and I definitely plan to take a look at your latest Meghan Trainor FAC quite soon (was intending to do it last night but got dragged to Ikea - fun fun fun!!) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:28, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

• Support--NØ 07:53, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

October 1 (film)

Nominator: voorts (talk/contributions) 21:54, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

October 1 is a Nigerian thriller film, directed by Nollywood veteran Kunle Afolayan, about a detective investigating a series of murders on the eve of Nigerian independence. The film was critically praised in Nigeria and received over a dozen awards. Following a thorough GA review from Daniel Case and a helpful peer review from TechnoSquirrel69, I feel that this is ready for FAC. I look forward to your comments. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:54, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

@WP:FAC coordinators: Given that my previous FAC was not promoted and a spot check was never done, I assume this will need one to pass, but I wanted to check. Thanks, voorts (talk/contributions) 16:17, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

yes. You need a successful / passed FAC to be exempt from that requirement. (t · c) buidhe 16:37, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@WP:FAC coordinators: Okay to list this in the image/source check requests? voorts (talk/contributions) 23:17, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Done. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:36, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! voorts (talk/contributions) 23:37, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

• Suggest adding alt text

• Done.

• File:Morris_minor_october_1_(cropped).jpg: has evidence of permission been forwarded to VRT? If so, suggest adding the ticket to the image description page. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:26, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

• It's on the page for the image that this is cropped from. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:14, 14 September 2023 (UTC) (belatedly signed)

• Ah, okay, thanks. I do think it would be worth repeating. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:34, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Do you know if there's a template for a derivative work? Technically the cropped version wasn't the photo reviewed by VRT, so it would be inaccurate to copy/paste the template there IMO. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:35, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

There's not a specific template AFAIK, but {{VRT info}} would work. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:40, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Done using the {{VRT info}} template. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:17, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

MyCatIsAChonk

• Why does the article use dmy dates if the title of the movie itself uses mdy? May be a very minor discrepancy, but the date bot isn't going to work in thr articles current format

• I used DMY because my understanding is that Nigerian English uses DMY, but I can change it if you think it's a major issue.

• Wl flashback

• Done

• The plot uses "Kill" or "Killer" too many times, IMO; use some other words (murderer, menace, etc)

• Done

• ...older audiences: "For the older generation, especially those who were part of independence, they will be able to see themselves in this film. For the younger generation it's a platform for many of them who don't know the story of Nigeria". - period can go inside quotes because of semicolon before

• Done

• Wl Toyota and Guinness

• Done

• Under "Themes", wl Nigeria's unification and independence

• Done

• Much of the content under "Themes" feels like it would be better under "Reception", since they're all reviews; also, many of these quotes could easily be paraphrased, and would be better that way

More soon MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

• I've paraphrased some of the quotes. Regarding your suggestion, I struggled with this in rewriting the article; which parts do you think should be in the "Reception" section?
  • Voorts, I should've clarified, sorry- the quotes can be cut entirely and just replaced with statements about the movie's themes. For example, Filmmaker Onyeka Nwelue described the film as "sharpen[ing] the veracity of a society torn apart by its tribalism".[18] Wilfred Okiche of YNaija linked the film's political and psychological themes, noting that the film was both a character study of psychological abuse and a "a metaphor for the big lumbering mess that Nigeria has become, tracing the origin of the pathology to the white man’s selfish logic of forcing a diverse group of people into a union that has proved mostly unproductive" can easily be distilled into "Critics noted that the psychological themes in the movie connected to political division of the time." Don't use that exact phrasing, since "psychological themes" is vague in my rewriting and in the prose as it stands- make sure to clarify that too MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 21:43, 14 September 2023 (UTC)
    • Done (mostly). I like this quote too much to cut it: "sharpen[ing] the veracity of a society torn apart by its tribalism". I also kept a couple of other quotes because I don't think there's a good way to paraphrase the language and fully capture the meaning. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:55, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

• In September, Golden Effects unveiled a set of character posters - what's golden effects?

• Changed to "the filmmakers".

• Critical reception: I think some of this can use a good pruning; cut repetitive quotes a paraphrase the rest

• Done.

@MyCatIsAChonk: I've addressed your suggestions and have a question RE your suggestion on the "Themes" section. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:30, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Responded above. One more thing- in the "Accolades" table, add a column with the header Ref. and put the reference there MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 21:45, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Done voorts (talk/contributions) 21:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Support - much better, very nice work! Also, if you get some time, I'd appreciate any comments at this FAC- thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:27, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! voorts (talk/contributions) 21:33, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

CommentsSupport from Tim O'Doherty

Claiming a ticket. Review coming tomorrow at the latest. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:38, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Read the full thing last night, and skimmed it again today to catch anything I'd missed yesterday. I'd suggest running a few of the shorter paragraphs in "Production" and "Release" together, as well as removed "2014 in film" from "See also"; already subcategorised a bit in List of Nigerian films of 2014, but I'm not going to withdraw support over trivial matters like that. Support based on prose: I haven't done a source or comprehensiveness review, but I trust voorts's judgement here. This is a short article, and I've not caught any major flaws. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 16:54, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Addressed your concerns. Thanks for the support! voorts (talk/contributions) 21:30, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from TechnoSquirrel69

Glad to see this article's made it to FAC! I'll be back for another review sometime later today. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 14:28, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Alright, here come the comments!

• The most important concern: a quick Google search brings up a few scholarly sources that have not been referenced in the article. There's this paper on the thematic motifs, this chapter analyzing the film through the lens of human rights, and this paper going over the film's use of sets and costumes. There might be more. Being unfamiliar with this topic, I'm unsure if these sources will add anything new to the article, but they should at least be scanned to make sure the article meets criterion 1c (comprehensiveness).

• Reviewing now.

• "...who was eventually hired to write the screenplay, originally titled Dust." I'd recommend moving the part about "Dust" into a new sentence, as the current phrasing is a bit confusing. Also, I'd put the WIP title in quotes.

• Done

• "...and had a particular 1960s 'look' " might be better quoted as " 'a look that is particular to that period' " or " 'a look that is particular to [the 1960s]' ".

• Done

• Perhaps change "Afolayan cast Sagoe" to "Afolayan cast Deola Sagoe" since it's the first time they're being mentioned outside the cast list. Similarly with other cast members mentioned later in the prose.

• Done

• "...consolidating several tribal groups in one nation. In The Nation..." might be better as "...consolidating several tribal groups in one country. In The Nation...".

• Done

• "...it is your country now'"." should use {{'"}}.

• Done

• "In March, Golden Effects said..." same issue brought up by MyCatIsAChonk earlier.

• Done

• Citation 4 repeats in consecutive sentences in § Release.
  • I'm not seeing it. Where?

  It's a small fix, so I just went ahead and did it. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:00, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Have to cut it short at the moment for an IRL obligation; I'll most likely come back for some more tomorrow. Let me know what you think so far, Voorts. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 01:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69: I've addressed most of your comments. For scholarly sources, I looked through Google Scholar, JSTOR, Project Muse, and ProQuest. There wasn't much in the way of sustained discussion of the film, and for what there was, some of the journals seemed kind of sketchy and some of the articles were poorly written or inadequately sourced. I avoided citing to those journals/articles because I'm not sure how reliable they are. voorts (talk/contributions) 03:16, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

That's understandable; I also excluded some papers from the list I gave you because they looked highly unreliable. These ones look okay, but I have no idea whether the journals they've been published in are reputable or not. I'll trust your judgment on that end — I mostly made the point to start a process to make sure the article is fairly representing the information available in reliable sources. Let me know if you find anything useful with the links I've sent or in other places. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:21, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

I added the first two articles you cited to the "Themes" section, as well as one other article. I also added an academic review to the "Critical reception" section. The third article on mise-en-place that you cited had no citations and didn't seem paritcularly scholarly; I also am not sure about the quality of that journal. The rest of the sources I found seemed a little sketchy: [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], and [7], [8] (published in Comic Sans; enough said).

Unrelated, but I added a couple of sentences on how the film was pirated to the "Release" section. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:02, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

I've also conducted searches of Taylor & Francis, SpringerLink, Sage, and Oxford Academic; nothing new turned up. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:12, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks very much for doing that! I just saw your edits and the added content looks pretty good on first glance. Like I said earlier, I'll trust your judgment on the reliability of the sources; they'll get another look during the source review anyways. More comments on their way tomorrow! (Also, they published in Comic Sans? Really?! XD) —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Note: You should change the {{xt}} and {{!xt}} templates to {{green}} and {{red}} per the guidelines at FAC. voorts (talk/contributions) 05:52, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the note — good to know for my first FAC review. I suppose that means I can't use {{font}} in my comment on Comic Sans either, what a tragedy! Ah well, changing them over now. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 05:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Another round of comments:

• The brackets inside brackets in multiple places in § Release look really awkward and probably go against MOS:BRACKET. I'd recommend you lose the {{To USD}} templates and just format the text manually.

• Done

• In a similar vein, some currency figures have dollars followed by naira in brackets, but others are the reverse. The article should stick to one for consistency.

• It's like that because the sources for the film's budget state the amount in USD, whereas the revenue sources state the revenue in Naira.

• It's pretty standard for review aggregator scores to be mentioned in reception sections for films. I see in § External links that the film has a page on Rotten Tomatoes — I'd add that to the prose, along with other relevant aggregate scores, if they exist.
  • The RT link only has audience score, which would be unworthy of inclusion. GeraldWL 05:27, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

    @Gerald Waldo Luis: Gotcha, thanks for checking that! Voorts, feel free to disregard this point. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 06:19, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

• Disregarded.

• I'd recommend a pass for formatting in the references. Among other things, the references have inconsistent italicization and use of quotation marks for the film's title. I'd change them all to italicized without quotes across the board. I just did a pass of the prose and corrected any MOS:CURLY and MOS:DASH issues I could find, but keep an eye out for any more in case they slipped by me.

• Fixed the italics issues. Good catch. I think the caps are consistent, as are the publication titles. I don't see any other issues.

• Optionally, I'd love to see a copyedit of § Reception so it's more in line with the suggestions laid out in the Wikipedia:Copyediting reception sections essay. I'll admit that the reviews seem to be suspicious in a similar way to the scholarly sources we were discussing earlier, but even so, I feel that boiling down an entire review to a single sentence or quote is not representative of the source's arguments.

• Done. RE sourcing, the reviews in § Reception are all legit.

And I think that's it from me! Thanks for your timely work implementing my suggestions so far, and good luck with the rest of this FAC! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 04:07, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

@TechnoSquirrel69: Done. voorts (talk/contributions) 13:56, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Really nice work, Voorts; this one's a well-earned support from me! —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 15:29, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! voorts (talk/contributions) 15:38, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

GWL

Hey there! This overall seems pretty solid, but I have plenty of comments. Hopefully they are useful! I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections. GeraldWL 09:57, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: Replied to everything. I have a couple of questions below. voorts (talk/contributions) 16:13, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Voorts, I did last tweaks to the table to adhere to accessibility guidelines. Overall I think with all that there is to the subject matter, it should make a good FA. I did however, find this scholarly source, which should fit in the themes section. Lemme know what you think-- after that it should be an easy support. GeraldWL 05:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: I saw that source and didn't cite it because I'm not sure how reliable that journal is. The article reads like an undergrad paper, IMO. voorts (talk/contributions) 13:14, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: I also just dug into it a bit more, and it actually plagiarizes the "Critical reception" section of this article from before I started working on it: see this diff. I knew parts of the article looked familiar. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:17, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Also, the first sentence of the article plagiarizes the opening sentence of the Wikipedia article on Film. voorts (talk/contributions) 21:20, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I see. Then this is an easy support. Good work! GeraldWL 03:15, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! voorts (talk/contributions) 04:22, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 05:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

* The alt text is kind of overly lengthy, but they should be as brief as possible, enough so that blind readers can understand the gist of it. I'd remove the first sentence as it repeats the caption. I'd change it to "The main character in the foreground of the left side, with minor characters in smaller proportion to his side, and an old church under dark skies at the right." Done Similar to the second image, I'd remove the "Morris" mention, but instead describe the car's shape, like round, boxed, etc. Done I recommend using Ghostarchive for ref 14 since IA won't save the video Done YouTube should be in publisher, to not be italicized Changed cites with youtube to Cite AV media and made it "via" YouTube with the channel name as publisher since they're press outlets. Remove the url in ref 21, 22, since it's already served in the DOI parameter I didn't include URLs for those. Something is either broken with the cite journal template or there's been an update where DOI automatically files the URL. Here's the current source for one of those cites: {{Cite journal |last=Ezepue |first=Ezinne Michaelia |last2=Nwafor |first2=Chidera G. |date=July-September 2023 |title=October 1: Metaphorizing Nigeria’s Collective Trauma of Colonization |journal=[[SAGE Open]] |doi=10.1177/21582440231197271 |doi-access=free}} Ah I see! Yeah, it's probably Cite journal doing its job. GeraldWL 05:39, 17 September 2023 (UTC) Ref 41 is easily replacable by ref 62 Good catch. For ref 49 you can remove the doi since it redirects to MUSE itself Done Ref 61-63, change website to publisher Done The official website is now used by some Wordpress guy, should probably change to an archive Done I really think you can expand on the release sentence: when and where it premiered, and the box office bomb Done The infobox should also include the premiere date; see WP:FILMRELEASE Done Generally I would avoid meta language like "Following an opening sequence", "the film begins", or "the film shifts", in favor of a more natural story, unless doing so would not do the article service. I'll try detail it in the points below. Done "Following an opening sequence depicting a young woman being raped by an unknown man"-- the sentence after this describes a rape investigation, which would be enough for readers to understand that the film concerns such cases, so this can be dropped. Done "In a flashback, Waziri narrates the story of his investigation in a voiceover."-- Another meta language. I think that combining "Upon his arrival in Akote" with the paragraph would make it more natural and direct: this guy is tasked to investigate, so he goes to the village. Done The third paragraph can also be combined since they concern the same day Done "After leaving a celebration of the investigation's closure, Waziri hears whistling and is assaulted by the killer; however, he is too drunk to identify him. Afonja sees Waziri lying on the road and takes him home. During his recovery, Waziri remembers the face of the killer." --> "After leaving a celebration of the investigation's closure, Waziri hears whistling and is assaulted by the killer. Although he is too drunk to identify him, he would slowly remember the face as he recovers." Done Remove the cast paranthesis. Also why is it Reverend in the Cast and not Father? Should have been Reverend in the plot summary. "who reveals that Father Dowling"-- the "Father" here can prob be dropped Done "The film then shifts back to Waziri presenting his account of the investigation to a group of British officers. They instruct Waziri to withhold the Aderopo's identity; he reluctantly agrees to do so for the sake of a peaceful independence." --> "Waziri later presents his account of the investigation to a group of British officers, who instruct Waziri to withhold the Aderopo's identity; he reluctantly agrees to do so for the sake of a peaceful independence." Can also merge with above paragraph. Done "the screenplay. The screenplay that he produced was originally titled Dust" -- repetition of "the screenplay" --> "the screenplay, originally titled Dust" Done "he wanted to produce a "national film with a universal appeal". In an interview, Afolayan said he wanted the film to appeal to younger and older audiences" --> "he wanted to produce a "national film with a universal appeal", with a focus on younger and older audiences" Edited I think it would be relevant to have a naira conversion of the budget, fixed in the time of production (2013) Done "particular to the 1960s, which is the film's time setting." Changed to something else "as Funmilayo Ransome-Kuti"-- should probably detail a bit about this person, shortdesc-style. Done "October 1 featured a soundtrack"-- or score? Done Should prob cite ref 9 in the caption since it isn't explcitly stated in prose Done "Nigeria's unification and independence" linked here but not in lead Done "Critics noted that October 1 ... Critics generally noted that October 1" repetition --> "Critics noted that October 1 ... Many observed that the film" Done Link tribalism Done "those criticisms and the Boko Haram insurgency's criticism" --> "those and the Boko Haram insurgency's criticisms" Done Don't think NewswireNGR should be italicized-- it's a newsroom Done. Also changed to Agency instead of Website parameter in cite. "the film's "rhetoric of return", positing that the film relies on the "motif of return"" --> "the film's "rhetoric of return", positing that the film relies on it"-- motif is the same as rhetoric Changed "Afolayan described the "take-away" of the"-- take-away can be easily paraphrased to moral or message Done Why the "[,]"? I think it's still correct without it, no? Removed "2014; the film" --> "2014, where the film" Done Link Nollywood Done "New York University in New York City"-- isn't it obvious that it's in NYC? I think "the United States" would be a better replacement for NYC Removed in NYC. I don't think adding in the US is needed. "The film premiered in the United Kingdom on 3 November 2014 at the 2014 Film Africa Festival in London" -- misleading "premiere", 2014 repetition --> "The film's European premiere was in London on 3 November 2014 at the Film Africa Festival" Done Link Netflix Done Unlink Nollywood in last paragraph Done DStv dup link Where? "Africa Magic channel" Done I think these two sections can be merged into "Reception" Done "status as a "Neo-Nollywood" director" --> "status as a director of the New Nigerian Cinema" Done "cinematography, costume, production design and acting"-- why in quotes? This is a relatively generic sentence Removed quotes "October 1 was nominated for the most awards at the 2014 Africa International Film Festival"-- I... don't think so, 3 versus 12 with the Africa Magic Viewers. Removed See MOS:DTT on accessibility for tables. Added a caption; any other accessibility issues? I'll take a look at that and a last skim thru the article tomorrow :) GeraldWL 05:41, 17 September 2023 (UTC) Thanks! voorts (talk/contributions) 16:18, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Electron backscatter diffraction

Nominator(s): FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about a scanning electron microscopy (SEM) technique used to study the crystallographic structure of materials.EBSD is a versatile and powerful technique that can provide valuable insights into the microstructure and properties of a wide range of materials. Hence, it is widely used in materials science and engineering, geology, and biological research. It is a key tool for developing new materials and understanding their behaviour under different conditions. FuzzyMagma (talk) 10:10, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

First-time nomination

• Hi FuzzyMagma, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check and a review for over-close paraphrasing to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:19, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Hawkeye7

Very impressive. Some minor points to prove I read it (fixed one minor one myself):

• "Typically they can not be easily used in modern SEMs with multiple designated uses" Comma after "typically"; "can not" -> "cannot"

• MOS:STATEABBR: "In references and bibliographies, 2-letter United States Postal Service state abbreviations should not be used"

• fn 29: Page number?

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:20, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the kind words. I amended as requested, although point 2, I am not sure if you mean changing NY to New York or something more? FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:37, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

I would change it to "New York". There is no pressing need to save a few bits. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:05, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

I did it earlier. Was just checking if you were pointing to something more. FuzzyMagma (talk) 21:32, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

Didn't check the captions. I think that File:Overview of EBSD indexing procedure.jpg while freely licenced is a derivative work of another file here which is under a non-free licence. File:Indent Si.tif is from an arXiv - is it a reliable source for the file content? None of the images seems to have ALT text. The "Depth resolution" section may have some WP:SANDWICH issues. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:30, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

• The authors are the same, Ben Britton and Angus Wilkinson, so I am not sure what rules apply here since the image is free from one source and not from the other one, under different journals but the same 1st and last authors
• The Arxiv image is typical, you can compare it to the one from here (same link you posted previously)
• Added ALT text, although mostly from the caption but replaced symbols and equations with words where needed
• Removed one of the images from the "Depth resolution" section

let me know what you think FuzzyMagma (talk) 12:52, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

I think ALT text works better when it shows what the image looks like, rather than saying what it represents. I've sent the file to the Commons deletion process; if they keep it, it will automatically stay. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 16:24, 15 September 2023 (UTC)

Sandbh

I read through the section called Pattern formation and collection.

I wasn’t able to follow the logical flow of the contents of this section, since the topic sentences for each paragraph don’t tell a story. Unfamilar terms are introduced (recall the trarget audience of WP is the general reader) without explanation.

For example, here are the topic sentences from the first subsection:

Setup geometry and pattern formation

"For electron backscattering diffraction microscopy, a flat polished crystalline specimen is usually placed inside the microscope chamber, tilted ~70° from Scanning electron microscope (SEM) original specimen positioning and 110° to the diffraction camera."

Grammatically, this sentence doesn’t make sense. And what does "original specimen positioning" mean?

"The phosphor screen is located within the specimen chamber of the SEM at an angle of approximately 90° to the pole piece."

Suddenly, the concept of a phosphor screen is introduced without any connection to the topic sentence of the previous paragraph.

"The systematically arranged Kikuchi bands, which have a range of intensity along their width, intersect around the centre of the regions of interest (ROI), describing the probed volume crystallography."

Ditto, re Kikuchi bands.

"If the system geometry is well described, it is possible to relate the bands present in the diffraction pattern to the underlying crystal and orientation of the material within the electron interaction volume."

This one introduces “system geometry”. Where does that come from?

"While this 'geometric' description related to the kinematic solution (using the Bragg condition) is very powerful and useful for orientation and texture analysis, it only describes the geometry of the crystalline lattice."

What is the kinematic solution? What is the Bragg condition? What is "orientation and texture analysis"?

The rest of the section appears to suffer from the same problems. Sandbh (talk) 07:39, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

• "For electron backscattering diffraction microscopy, a: fixed by separating to two sentences and replace "original" by "flat"
• "The phosphor screen is located ..: fixed by introducing the concept first and change the wording to "EBSD detector"
• "The systematically arranged Kikuchi bands..", Ditto, re Kikuchi bands.: this described in the sentence above it as it reads "The backscattered electrons form Kikuchi lines – having different intensities – on an electron-sensitive flat film/screen (commonly phosphor), gathered to form a Kikuchi band." no change
• {{tq|"If the system geometry is well described,": changed "system" to "setup"
• What is the kinematic solution? What is the Bragg condition? What is "orientation and texture analysis"?:
  • "What is the kinematic solution?": the whole sentence is moved to the "Pattern indexing" section. Wikilinked the word kinematic solution vs. the word dynamic later in the paragraph
  • "Bragg condition" is described and wikilinked earlier at "In this configuration, as these backscattered electrons leave the sample, they interact with the crystal's periodic atomic lattice planes and diffract according to Bragg's law at a range of scattering angles (θ_hkl)."
  • "orientation and texture analysis": that was descried in the sentence above it at "it is possible to relate the bands present in the diffraction pattern to the underlying crystal and crystallographic orientation". The word texture is wikilinked too

Commed and copyedited until the section of "strain measurement". FuzzyMagma (talk) 13:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

I intend to give the next part of this article a look, likely towards the end of this week or over the weekend. Sandbh (talk) 08:21, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from RoySmith

• I agree with Jo-Jo Eumerus about the alt texts. I've taken a shot a writing one that I think is more descriptive. I hope I have accurately represented how this is supposed to work; I'm particularly unsure if "disk of diffraction cones in which the specimen is embedded" is correct, so please double-check that. Also T346835 :-(
  • PS, I confess I chose this image because it was the easiest to write a coherent alt text for. Most of the others will be more difficult to describe in this fashion.
    • thanks for doing that, now I know how to do it and will fix other figures in due course
• Setup geometry and pattern formation
  • I (mostly) get why tilting the sample gives you more scattered electrons, but when I see "70 degrees", I want to know what's so special about that angle. Why did they pick 70 and not, for example, 45? It would be good to explain this.
    • The next sentence explains the logic of tilting, and there is a reference with detailed explanation and simulation of this at page 17 (the book is available for free). Also in the external links there is a link for software to simulate patterns while using different configuration. But the configuration that I used is vert typical and if you randomly open any of the paper that I have cited or any to be honest, they will use similar configuration as it reduce uncertainties when comparing results between different maps.
  • Likewise, why 20kV? I'm guessing it's some compromise between better resolution and blasting the sample to smithereens, but worth explaining.
    • see above. I will add that the text states that "The spatial resolution varies with angular width, interaction volume, etc".
  • The screen is coupled to a compact lens... It might be worth saying "compact optical lens" to differentiate it from what I assume are magnetic lenses which focus the electron beam. Or maybe handle that by saying "visible-light image" instead of just "image" later in the sentence?
  • removed the word "compact" as it indicate fibrous structure that is not there for CMOS cameras. I am not really not sure if the image is "visible-light image" or not. if you are confident, then please change it. As far as my experience with X-ray detectors, visible light has a different photon energy. The phosphor screen here is excited by the backscattered electrons.
• image caption: I assume gnomically projected refers to Gnomonic projection. If so, link it.
  • yes wikilinked
• EBSD detectors
  • Commercially available EBSD systems typically come with I would imagine this is rapidly developing technology, so {{as of}} would help here.
    • done
  • Link "binned" to Data binning? Oh, I see you link to pixel binning further down; maybe link to that instead, the first place it's used.
    • fixed
  • This enables very rapid and rich... Perhaps my personal hang-up, but delete "very"
    • done
• Sample preparation
  • or 2 hours (50 rpm speed and 5N force) and using 7.5 keV dual beam energy for 15 min, with a gun angle of 8° good for a method paper, but perhaps an excessive level of detail for this kind of article? I'm assuming the ion beam polishing is done with a Ion milling machine; if so, link to that.
    • removed excessive details and wikilinked Ion milling machine
• Depth resolution
  • Besides, even for a given definition drop "besides"
    • removed
  • Most reports on depth values do not mention a definition or present any rationale for the definition of depth resolution I'm not sure I get the point of this section. Who said "most reports"? Is there some survey paper which has evaluated the poor quality of the literature in not giving this data, or are you extrapolating (i.e. WP:OR) from the two reports you cite that "most" omit this data? In any case, how does it enhance the reader's understanding of Electron backscatter diffraction to know that the literature is deficient in reporting these things?
    • paraphrased, changed to "A recent comparison between reports on EBSD depth resolution, Koko et al indicated that ...". The Depth resolution is critical to know what exactly are mapping, as you are not mapping the immediate surface.
• Pattern indexing
  • File:Overview of EBSD indexing procedure.jpg is up for deletion, but even if it wasn't, the text in the image is barely readable on my large desktop monitor. I would imagine it's totally illegible on a small screen. I know image quality isn't a WP:FACR, but if you can't read the text, it's hard to see how it meets MOS:IMAGERELEVANCE. Not to mention MOS:TEXTASIMAGES.
    • I agree, removed
  • then four (four choose three) votes will be cast, I assume we're talking about Combination, so link to that. My understanding is that while this is often pronounced "n choose k", it's not usually written that way, so consider writing it as C(4,3) or some other standard way (and still link to Combination).
    • reworded and wikilnked to Combination
• As a FA newbie, I think I've gone as far as I can with this. This is clearly a highly technical subject. Looking at WP:TECHNICAL#Audience, I would put myself in the "knowledgeable reader" class. I have a good grounding in physics and understand the basics of crystallography, but to be honest, I'm having trouble getting through the article. Maybe that's unavoidable for a topic like this.
  • Thanks for your comments. Please let me know if my reply was adequate. I am still working on the alt description only 3 lefts. FuzzyMagma (talk) 19:02, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

  Glad I could add some value. Us newbies need to stick together :-) RoySmith (talk) 20:51, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Philadelphia Athletics 18, Cleveland Indians 17 (1932)

Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about... one of the most peculiar but exciting games in Major League Baseball history. You'd expect a pitcher who gave up 14 runs and 29 hits to lose the game, or at least not be the winning pitcher wouldn't you? But on the afternoon of July 10, 1932, Eddie Rommel did win that game, coming in as a relief pitcher and pitching 17 innings, and thereby lies a tale ...Wehwalt (talk) 17:54, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

• Suggest adding alt text

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:55, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

• File:Eddie_Rommel,_Philadelphia_AL_(baseball)_LCCN2014716263.tif: when and where was this first published?

I've removed the copyright not renewed tag. The Bain tag does not rely on when it was published.

• File:Connie-mack-cover.jpg: source link is dead, tagged as lacking author info.

I've replaced the source link. I looked through the April 11, 1927 issue and it doesn't say who the photographer is, nor does the Time site or an internet search, so I've changed it to "not known". The copyright is expired in any case. Thank you for the image review.--Wehwalt (talk)

• Nikkimaria (talk) 04:57, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Drive-by comment

• I'll do a full review later, but one opening thought. The first sentence says "On Sunday, July 10, 1932, the Philadelphia Athletics defeated the Cleveland Indians 18–17 in eighteen innings." Nowhere in that first sentence does it say what sport they were playing. Yes, Major League Baseball is mentioned right at the end of the second sentence, but I think it really needs to be stated that this was a baseball game in the very first sentence. I wouldn't write an article on this football match and have an opening sentence that simply said "On 12 November 2022, Liverpool beat Southampton 3–1" because it doesn't give sufficient introductory context to the reader.......... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:53, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

  I've moved "Major League Baseball" into the opening sentence, albeit at the end. Wehwalt (talk) 10:08, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

More comments

• "The Cleveland Indians, despite not having won a World Series since 1920,[3] were under new ownership" - I can't see any obvious reason why their not having won the World Series for 12 years would make it unlikely for them to be under new ownership, so "despite" doesn't seem appropriate here
• "Another reason for giving rest of the pitching staff" => "Another reason for giving the rest of the pitching staff"
• "When play resumed, Glenn Myatt walked to put runners on first and second,[16] Bill Cissell attempted a sacrifice bunt, but popped the ball into the air towards Rommel." => "When play resumed, Glenn Myatt walked to put runners on first and second;[16] Bill Cissell then attempted a sacrifice bunt, but popped the ball into the air towards Rommel."
• That's all I got on a first pass. There's more commas than I would personally use, but I think based on past reviews that's probably a UK/US difference..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:14, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, ChrisTheDude I've done those things. I split the sentence rather than add "then" in your final comment. Wehwalt (talk) 16:42, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

• Nice one - support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:07, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments from Therapyisgood

• The Cleveland Indians had not won a World Series since 1920. you never actually link World Series anywhere to the term itself, just the years. At a minimum a link should be established to give readers an understanding of what this is.

Linked by splitting the 1930 World Series link.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• The Cleveland Indians had not won a World Series since 1920.[3] By the late 1920s, they were under new ownership, who were determined to spend freely to acquire talent, and after a seventh-place finish in 1928, finished in the top half of the league standings the next seven years. we never actually said which league (ie AL or NL) the Indians were in.

Clarified.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:37, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• Lead: Sunday baseball was still illegal in Philadelphia, article: Sunday baseball was illegal in Pennsylvania. was it illegal in the whole state or only in the city?

The whole state. The voters of Allegheny County legalized it in 1933, the same time Philadelphia County did. The idea of phrasing it this way is to focus on Philadelphia.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• There was no scoring in the second inning, which ended with the Indians leading, 3–2, but in the top of the third, Brown gave up a solo home run to slugger Jimmie Foxx, his 31st of the season, to tie the score. too many commas, perhaps break into two sentences.

OK.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• Rommel walked with two outs in the top of the fourth inning, you need to wikilink walks here and not later in the paragraph.

Done.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• disagreeing with the choice of Hudlin. can you clarify this means as a pitcher, as that's what I'm implying but it's not said outright.

• What makes BallNine a reliable reference?

This site makes it clear they have ample subject-matter experts and an editorial structure, sufficient in my view to qualify per WP:RS.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:33, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• they would never again be so close that season, right? Or all-time?

Clarified.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

All I have. Therapyisgood (talk) 21:09, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

All done. Thank you for the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• Support Therapyisgood (talk) 15:28, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Comments Support from Usernameunique

Lead

• The first and last paragraphs each list a variety of records; it's unclear why they're split up the way they are.

I think you've got to lead an article with your strength, and you tell the reader right off the bat why this game was exceptional in the lead paragraph, especially in the era of Google previews. You tell them immediately that this game set records. But there's no need to shoot off all your ammunition in the first paragraph, especially as you have to give baseball information. Thus, the end of the lead can hold some of the records, and of course there are more mentioned later.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Background

• lost considerably — A bit vague, and I think the grammar is off (verb/adverb, not verb/noun)

Expanded.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• At the time of the July 10, 1932 game, it was within three weeks of opening. — Better off in the second paragraph?

Not really. We're just trying to give a thumbnail sketch of background on the two teams in the first paragraph.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Cleveland manager Roger Peckinpaugh was nearly as bad off for pitching as was Mack. — Meaning their bullpen was spent? Can you give more details, in the way that you gave details for the A's?

I've added the info that they left a half-dozen (so says source) players behind them in Washington. The July 10 Plain Dealer says that Peckinpaugh was talked into starting Sarge Connally in the second game on Saturday against his better judgment and he did pretty badly but the article doesn't connect all the dots. I think the info on the players left behind and the knowledge Cleveland had played five games in three days is enough. It's the A's shortage of pitchers that's a major theme of this article anyway, no source says (or discusses) that Cleveland was out of pitchers.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:34, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

First through sixth innings

• Mack relieved Krausse and sent Rommel to the mound for the second inning — Seems like a pretty odd decision. Is there any word on his thinking?

I think a lot of baseball historians would like to know his reasoning. He takes only two pitchers to Cleveland and then promptly locks Rommel in the game? Regrettably, there's nothing beyond speculation. The "He Won?" source has someone who speculates Krausse might have been injured but I find that dubious because he pitched in the second game the next day. Mack's biographer doesn't say, he didn't put a reason in his Sunday column on the 17th and he doesn't seem to have given any interviews about it, hardly surprising given their likely rush to get out of Cleveland, but there's nothing in any newspaper.com newspaper or the Cleveland papers I have access to from another database.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:55, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Seventh through ninth innings

• Foxx hit a two-run home run — Note that it was his second of the game?

Fair enough.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• Mack called time — What does this mean? A mound visit, or some arcane rule?

You have to call time to replace a player. That's been the rule since King Kelly tried to declare himself in the game as a ball flew towards him in foul territory.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• He had planned what to do in that situation for years — How do we know this/what's the statement attributed to? Was it his error, or the second baseman's? What about the infield fly rule?

The infield fly rule does not apply to attempted bunts. That Rommel had planned what to do appears with minor variations in multiple sources. It was his throwing error, and that appears in the Retrosheet box score.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:48, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Did Rommel state in interviews that he had planned it? If so, maybe worth adding. When an article talks about what someone thought/intended/planned, a logical question becomes "how do we know that?" --Usernameunique (talk) 03:41, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• the fans cheered Peckinpaugh for several minutes — What does the source say?

"But when the Indians came back, as if to vindicate Peck, and scored six times themselves, the fans tendered Roger several minutes of applause, as second-guessers sometimes will."--Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Extra innings

• How many innings did it take Wilbert Robinson to get his seven hits?

Nine innings, in a 25-4 win over the Browns.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• he hit his third home run of the game — How many on the season? Any word on the number of pitches/the count, or is that lost to history?

Counts and pitches are lost to history unless mentioned by the press. I'll mention it was his 33rd.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• took an unexpected bounce over Vosmik's head — What does this mean? What does the source say?

" Eric McNair then hit a ball into left field that took a crazy bounce over Vosmik’s head. This allowed Foxx to score the go-ahead run. McNair was thrown out trying to stretch the hit into a triple."

• The game had lasted four hours and five minutes. Had neither team scored, the game would have continued until nightfall put an end to it. — What time was it when it ended? How close to nightfall?

The article says this was a three pm game and says the game lasted 4:05. The reader can compute the time the game ended. None of the sources gives the time of sunset in Cleveland on July 10, 1932. I could find it, but there's an extent to which that would be unwarranted OR since the condition of the lighting (and, to some extent, the breaks in the innings) would dictate when the game was called.

• he probably threw more than that — Why?

Per source. If he threw three per batter, he threw 261 pitches "and likely threw more".

Records set

• No other player has had more than seven hits in a game — Who else has hit seven? Worth a footnote?
• A total of five players, per here. Since all of these take a back seat to Burnette, I don't see the point of a footnote.
• he won all of them — Footnote with some details, e.g., the scores and number of innings of those games?

The source doesn't mention it and I don't think the mention is with the digging. It's just a "wow" statistic, worth the inclusion but not worth listing all of them.

• the MLB record of 181⁄3 innings — Specify what the category of record is—presumably total number of innings pitched in a game.

Clarified.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:38, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• won't be seen once in a blue moon — Is this a correct quotation? I get what it means, but as written, it's close to a double negative (unless he's trying to say its rarer than once in a blue moon).

It's what it says.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:51, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

• probably the only one that Burnett will ever make — The only what? Record?

Yes, that's what it means. Technically there are two records, one for hits and one for singles but it's worth quoting.

Aftermath

• the games on Tuesday and Wednesday — I would mention somewhere that these were also against the A's?

It is mentioned in the "Background" section, but I restored the language and clarified it was against the Athletics..

• On September 2, 1932, Krausse started — Was that his next appearance?

No, as I mentioned he pitched the next day. He only pitched one inning on July 10, it's not terribly necessary to track his appearances. This is more in line of this is what happened to the major figures in this drama.

• he said neither pitcher was ever the same — Neither pitcher in which game? This one, or the 26-inning one? Also, Brooklyn Dodgers 1, Boston Braves 1 (26 innings) says that "There were stories told that the lengthy pitching appearance ruined the arms of Oeschger and Cadore; this was not the case as both pitched several more years in the major league and Oeschger won twenty games in 1921."

As the article on the 26 inning game says , there was a myth that Cadore and Oeschger shut their arms out, and this is an example of that. It's good as a lead-in to the fact that Rommel in fact never pitched effectively again

It might be worth noting that the claim as applied to the 26-inning game is a myth. As you say, there's a worthy point to be made in noting Robinson's comment, but it currently reads as unrebutted fact. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:49, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

• his arm was finished — For good? Or as in "boy, that was a long day; I'm spent"?

I think the text makes it pretty clear it was for good. That's what he said in retrospect, anyway.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Overall

• Nicely done, Wehwalt. A few nits above, but nothing major. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:03, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks. I think I've answered or respond to all.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)

Added two comments above, but am adding my support. Very nice article. --Usernameunique (talk) 03:50, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Raffles Place MRT station

Nominator(s): ZKang123 (talk) 06:59, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

After City Hall MRT station got promoted to FA, I shall also take this chance to nominate its brother station Raffles Place. All aboard! ZKang123 (talk) 06:59, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

GWL

Congrats on CH's FA! Am reserving a spot here, will get through tomorrow. GeraldWL 10:38, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

And incoming comments! I've put invisible comments to divide my comments based on sections. GeraldWL 09:48, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 08:39, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

* "the centre of Singapore's financial district"-- Central Area, Singapore? Central Area quite encompasses the entirety of the Central Business District (including Orchard, Tanglin, Boon Keng...) So no, it isn't accurate to link to the general area. Probably good courtesy to link OCBC Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "Cross-platform transfers between the NSL and EWL"-- I know I didn't catch this in the CH article, but I think you could mention how it shares the same cross-platform feature with CH? Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Link Aw Hee Tong Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Why isn't there alt on the lead img? ...I overlooked that while adding alt to the other images. Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "would be called Raffles Place"-- "would be called as such" for less repetition Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "and the Central Area"-- since you elaborated on the lead that it's SG's financial district, it's probably better if you also include it here. As said, I'm not too sure to elaborate as such given it's not stated in source.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) In footnote a, perhaps link Marina Bay? Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) I didn't see any mention in the newspaper that it's "In September 2000"? I only saw the years 1999 and 2005. I removed this. A side effect from copying from another article...--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "During the diversion of utilities at the site, the contractors used the utilities departments' records to determine the location of utilities"-- repetition of utilities --> "During the diversion of utilities at the site, the contractors used the utilities departments' records to determine their location" Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "Construction of the station began on 28 May 1984. The station was built right in the city centre." --> "Construction of the station specifically began on 28 May 1984, right in the city centre." I feel like with the repetition of "May 1984", "specifially" is warranted. I just said 28 May and drop the year.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "supplemented by using a "down-the-hole" (DTH) percussion machine." Well I don't know about you, but I just thought of percussion instrument. Some engineering terms can be weird.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Found this, could use this perhaps? GeraldWL 04:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk) 07:58, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "they were brittle and easily broken." I thought brittle itself means easily broken? Kept "easily broken".--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Suggest enlarging the image using upright-- also link Aw Hee Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "contract included the construction of the adjacent Tanjong Pagar station." If it was still called Maxwell that time (which was why you put TanjPag in brackets), it should probably be called Maxwell too in this part. I see. I thought I must use the present name to avoid confusion.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) "from Empress Place" --> "from the Empress Place Building" "Building site of Empress Place" --> "Building site of the Empress Place". Not sure why I didn't catch these two too from the CH FAC. Done for both above.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) The multi-imgs here could also use abit more size Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Now that I think of it, it would be beneficial if you mention the line of specific platforms. Something like "Platforms A and B (upper platform level) of the station serve the EWL and NSL, respectively." There isn't an official source for this, I'm afraid. Which is why I withheld doing this.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Isn't it visible on the image though? If you zoom in you could clearly see the signs saying "EW" and "NS". GeraldWL 04:17, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Oh so like in the caption Yepp! :) That has been done.--ZKang123 (talk) 08:24, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Link through service Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Per my cmt on the lead, could probably link OCBC and Prudential Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC) Link Mercantile Bank of India, London and China, could also expand the words to not confuse it with the other "Mercantile" bank. Done.--ZKang123 (talk) 01:55, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• Support -- good work once again, and goodluck for Chonk's comments and other comments henceforth! GeraldWL 08:39, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

MyCatIsAChonk

Will review, but don't want to reiterate GWL's points- let me know when you've addressed theirs and I'll continue with mine MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 22:06, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

• City Hall station is linked twice in the lead
  • Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk)
• While the boulders were hard, they were easily broken. - IMO, not necessary to include
  • Ok removed.--ZKang123 (talk) 11:54, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
• Ground treatment of the soil began on 28 May 1984 and completed by April the following year - "was" completed the following year...
  • Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk)
• These murals on vitreous enamel panels depicts scenes of Singapore's history - might be reading this wrong, but I don't think depicts should be plural
  • Fixed.--ZKang123 (talk)
• The "Information portfolio" source in the Bibliography has no sfns pointing to it
  • It's actually for another piece of info I forgot to include, or accidentally deleted. Just added in.--ZKang123 (talk)

ZKang123, that's it, nice job! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 11:40, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Support - lovely work! Also, if you get time, I'd appreciate any comments at this FAC. Thanks! MyCatIsAChonk (talk) (not me) (also not me) (still no) 19:49, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

Thebiguglyalien

I'll have a review written within the next few days. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:56, 24 September 2023 (UTC)

Campbell's Soup Cans

Nominator(s): TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

This article is about a set of paintings and subsequent variations/derivations by Andy Warhol. This is a seminal piece of art. It is one of 17 paintings listed at vital articles level 4 and one of 10 contemporary art works listed at vital articles level 5. I was the nominator when it previously failed FAC1 on 20 January 2007 and when User:Raul654 relisted the failed nomination which passed on 26 March 2007. It was delisted on 5 March 2021. It seems that there were many citation needed and NFCC issues. I have updated and expanded the article, which now seem fit for relisting.TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 16:54, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi Tony. You now need to add this nomination to the top of the list of FACs. Gog the Mild (talk) 00:10, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Image review

• Suggest adding alt text

• Given the number of non-free images in this article, the fair-use rationales for each will need to be much stronger to justify their inclusion. At the moment the justifications provided are insufficient.

• File:Warhol_Campbell's_Soup_Can_(Tomato)_1962_Pencil_on_paper.jpg: why is the US Olympic Committee believed to be the copyright holder?
  • P.S. Since at one point on the page it says Andy Warhol Foundation and the other it says US Olympic Committee, I assumed the latter was an artifact from format copying. I made it so both parts of the page refer to AWF as the copyright holder.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 23:07, 23 September 2023 (UTC)
• File:100_Cans.jpg: source link is dead. Ditto File:Small_Torn_Campbell’s_Soup_Can_(Pepper_Pot),_1962.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:41, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
  • User:Nikkimaria, There was much ado in the FARC regarding images. I sort of thought that since that discussion talked of 11 articles, and this version had only 7 left that the remaining images were resolved. However, I will get to all of these issues within a couple of days if not sooner. I do have one caveat that there are two different stories added to the article about a common set of 10 screenprints. I was wondering if I could add an image of that set to the article.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:08, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
    • The general issue as raised at the FARC persists: the more pieces of non-free content you have, the harder it becomes to justify each. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:12, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
      • User:Nikkimaria, Well I have decided to make getting this up to snuff a priority. All images are open for discussion.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:57, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
• Let's start with the main image File:Campbells Soup Cans MOMA.jpg seems to be well justified.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
• The second most important image is File:20070624 Campbell's Soup Cans - Milwaukee Art Museum.JPG. I have expanded the text regading this and included a mention in the WP:LEAD. Is this in good shape (well justified in terms of actual need and description of the fair use)?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:03, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
• File:100_Cans.jpg source updated.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:08, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
• File:Warhol Campbell's Soup Can (Tomato) 1962 Pencil on paper.jpg is the third most important image to this article if I need to prioritize my fair use.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:40, 11 September 2023 (UTC)
• File:Small_Torn_Campbell’s_Soup_Can_(Pepper_Pot),_1962.jpg source updated.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:09, 12 September 2023 (UTC)
• User:Gog the Mild am I allowed to make the following edit that is commented out?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 03:02, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

You are. Feel free to attract the attention of editors who you think may be willing to review - and this is defined fairly broadly - so long as you do so in a neutral manner - which your proposed edit does. Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:35, 11 September 2023 (UTC)

Pings:

From Wikipedia:Featured article review/Campbell's Soup Cans/archive1 @SandyGeorgia, Hog Farm, Nikkimaria, Czar, Politicsfan4, DrKay, and Z1720:

From Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans @Manderiko, AnonEMouse, AaronY, Circeus, Dark Shikari, Raul654, Xyzzy n, Ceoil, 17Drew, SandyGeorgia, Balloonman, Johnbod, Tyrenius, and Michaelas10:

From Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Campbell's Soup Cans/archive1 @GeeJo, Christopher Parham, Tony1, AndyZ, Rlevse, and SandyGeorgia:

Top 10 editors by edits at Talk:Campbell's Soup Cans @Tyrenius, Research Method, MartinGugino, ChrisRuvolo, Modernist, TeeVeeed, Franciselliott, and Wafulz:-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:04, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Extending additional invites to the most active editors of the page not listed above @Gkklein, Bus stop, Mandarax, Gurchzilla, and Research Method: for edit count @Dsavla, Simon KHFC, Wehwalt, Wafulz, Lindseytoni, and Gleb95: for text added @TheQuandry, Pauljrmillers, Gkklein, and OckRaz: for characters count added.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:27, 20 September 2023 (UTC) That was a typo for User:Mandarax-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 18:38, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• User:Nikkimaria would you state which images have sufficient fair use rationales, which have defiient fair use rationales and which images are of questionable necessity.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:24, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
  • I am not sure that File:100 Cans.jpg depicts anything of encyclopedic merit.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
• File:Small Torn Campbell’s Soup Can (Pepper Pot), 1962.jpg depicts an encyclopedic topic of relevance and would be the fourth image I would try to defend.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:43, 16 September 2023 (UTC)

• The only image whose FUR IMO is sufficient at the moment is File:Campbells_Soup_Cans_MOMA.jpg. Several other images have rationales which are nearly identical - any one of them could be substituted for this one without an issue, but they are not justified as additions at the moment. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:27, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
• I have tried to expand FURs at File:Warhol Campbell's Soup Can (Tomato) 1962 Pencil on paper.jpg, File:20070624 Campbell's Soup Cans - Milwaukee Art Museum.JPG and File:Small Torn Campbell’s Soup Can (Pepper Pot), 1962.jpg. Can we discuss whether these are now satisfactory or what is necessary to make them so.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:11, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
• Also, can we discuss File:Black font crop from Campbells Soup Cans MOMA.jpg and File:Cheddar Cheese crop from Campbells Soup Cans MOMA.jpg, which were both cropped from the main image before it was reduced.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:46, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

• My opinions on the non-free images haven't changed since my last comment. On the new images, File:Andy_Warhol_in_1950.jpg is missing evidence of pre-1977 publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:44, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
  • User:Nikkimaria, I have switched to the cropped version of that file. Where do I go at commons to initiate a discussion on that file?--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
  • User:Nikkimaria, note that the the two cropped versions are a different issue on what may be necessary? I am in need of guidance.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 14:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

• • • What kind of discussion are you looking to start? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:49, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
      • FYI, I have Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Questionable_file_licensing open.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:37, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
      • First thing I need to know is whether there is a chance that the crops can be justified since the discussion points don't appear visible in the reduced main image.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:37, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
      • Second, the other files are highlighting sourced content. How do I justify those? Are there other works where you can point me to exemplary FURs. The justification is a little different issue here since they are not crops.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:37, 19 September 2023 (UTC)
      • User:Nikkimaria, can you direct me to a discussion forum page where I might get some general advice on FURs and NFCC for this article?-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:22, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

• • • • • WP:MCQ. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:25, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
          • Waiting for feedback there.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 01:27, 21 September 2023 (UTC)

Irere (Alexander McQueen collection)

Nominator(s): ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

For Spring/Summer 2003, Alexander McQueen surprised the fashion world with a mature, romantic collection bursting with soft lace and tropical colors. Irere channeled film, Shakespeare, and Amazonian influences into a three-phase show of pirates, conquistadors, and tropical plumage, set against a film backdrop that reflected the show's narrative. It was a smash hit best remembered for the oyster dress, one of the most recognizable garments of the 21st century, and the skull scarf, which became a brand signature. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:13, 7 September 2023 (UTC)

GWL

Hi! Just want to note that I added nine archives to the references, feel free to adjust or remove if any of them don't work or aren't supposed to have archives! See invisible cmts to see my cmts divided by sections. GeraldWL 09:04, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

Resolved comments from GeraldWL 05:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Found some duplicate links: Paragraph 2, Concept: "pirates, menacing conquistadors" Paragraph 3, Concept: "Elizabethan fashion elements" Paragraph 1, Significant: "design by John Galliano", "sewn to a bias-cut" Paragraph 2, Reception: "Hoyer of Sydney's Sunday Telegraph" Paragraph 1, Other media: "appeared in Vogue" Paragraph 1, Ownership: ""by Philip Treacy, jewellery by Shaun Leane" Paragraph 2, Recurring: then-assistant Sarah Burton" Handled, I think; I did leave Galliano's second link in there since it's directly relevant to the section and far enough away from the background that I think it's not worth making the reader scroll back up. Found some duplicate refs: Paragraph 3, Concept: ref 6 Paragraph 2, Show: there's [30][8], then [30][8][35] Paragraph 2, Significant: refs 51, 62 Paragraph 1, Reception: there's [65][66], then [65] Paragraph 3, Reception: ref 43 Paragraph 3, Ownership: ref 78 Yeah, these are generally deliberate. Some reviewers get shirty/confused by sentences without refs, even when they're supported by the ref that follows the next sentence. Also, I often reorganize things during the editing process and it's easier for me if each sentence has its refs rather me having to worry about which ref in the next 3 sentences goes with the one I just moved. Now onto prose. "eponymous fashion house"-- shouldn't eponymous be part of the link too? Ditto with Concept section Done "Its title is claimed to be an Indigenous Amazonian"-- in Concept section you added a link, but not here Done "the size of a basketball court"-- not sure what it's called, but I'm not sure using objects to compare size is effective. Standards of basketball court sizes vary by associations. If no sources mention the specific size perhaps say that it's "said to be the size of..."? Also perhaps this is overlink as well. Ditto for the Staging subsection. It's the comparison given in the source, without defining a specific size (I don't think anyone got out to measure) so I'd prefer to stick with it as-is. I'd say it's much better if it's "said to be", since the comparison with a basketball court itself is ambiguous. Just like how it's not ideal to say, "my arm is the size of two water bottles." GeraldWL 07:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC) Sure, fair, changed Maybe link Chiffon (fabric)? Ditto with image caption and Concept section Done "McQueen retrospective Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty"-- McQueen repetition here, maybe remove the first McQueen. Yep, done "his work featured a degree of craftsmanship that verged on haute couture"-- maybe add "the high-end" before "haute" just so it doesn't need clicking on the link to understand what haute couture is. That would be redundant. Couture is definitionally the highest end of fashion. Ah I didn't notice that! Link runway shows since you also linked this in lead Already linked in the first sentence Link Givenchy Oop, casualty of revisions, fixed "a Spanish Jesuit tries to protect a Paraguayan indigenous tribe"-- more specifically, Guaraní people Yes but a) iirc that's not in the sources I'm using and b) I don't think the detail is necessary to understand the concept (and I'd have to go and give the context of the Guarani being a Paraguayan indigenous tribe anyway) "Amerindian" is a legit word meaning "American Indian" so I'm not sure you need to quote that. Maybe change to the synonymous Native American if you feel that's needed to warrant removing quotes. Mm, I've left as-as and removed the quotes "although Judith Watt claims"-- found a source for ya :) Yeah but that says the word is Portuguese; her claim is that it's Amerindian, which isn't supported by that Fair enough, though I think the Portuguese thing is also worthy of inclusion, perhaps in a footnote. GeraldWL 07:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC) I'm not sure it's super relevant, I don't really want to get into the weeds of whether it's a loan word to or from Portuguese or what Maybe link politically correct Done "Author Judith Watt interpreted"-- we already knew who Watt is four paragraphs ago. Yep "it retailed for $15,000"-- should it be US$? For all we know so far these are British-made designs, so the $ is kinda ambiguous. But if you insist, this shouldn't be a problem too, I know people would just default their thinking to US. It's USD, the source is WWD; I've clarified Should heels and butterflies be linked? I think it's over. Lost heels but kept butterflies "A short film by John Maybury"-- is there a duration mentioned that'd be a better descriptor than short? No. I'd link short film but it'd be nearly a sea of blue Not sure that's called a sea of blue, if it has an unlinked word between ("by"). GeraldWL 07:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC) I did say nearly :P "as the "shipwreck dress" swims to a tropical shore after a shipwreck"-- why not link at the first mention of shipwreck? Because it looks silly to link it in the name of the dress when I can just link it half a dozen words later ""acting as co-director and art director""-- same case with the Amerindian thing. Co-director and art director is an official attribution in film credits. Maybe can change acting as to "assuming the roles of" I don't actually have access to the credits to see what McQueen was officially credited as, so I'm going to leave that as a quote I found this source, which states in the Irere column, "McQueen, as well as being a fashion designer, art-directed many photoshoots, he art-directed many films, and this film formed the backdrop to the collection Irere..." So I think it is safe to say it is an official credit; it also isn't an ambiguous credit like "camera guy" (could mean DoP or cameraman), which would make sense to quote. GeraldWL 07:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC) I'm not sure we can make that assumption here Adding em or endash to the quotebox author part would make reading it much clearer I don't see that it makes much difference Per its own article, the "A" in "Ancient Greece" shouldn't be caps Tweaked Link NYT Done "the death of Isadora Duncan"-- maybe add "dancer" before "Isadora" Done "WWD said"-- you should provide an abbreviation parantheses in the first mention of WWD. Also later you wrote "The staff writer at Women's Wear Daily"-- whether the abbr or full is used must be consistent Yep, casualty of reordering things Link Technicolor "confirm[ed] the gothic Cockney kid's unique point of view"-- should probably clarify what "gothic Cockney kid" means by either paraphrasing or links Revised a bit "of The New York Times"-- rm this link per my NYT cmt above Swapped Museum overlink I think it's fine "She described two examples in Irere. Shark teeth, used in Irere"-- change the second Irere to avoid repetition Done Since Other media para. 2 is just one statement in two sentences, maybe it'd be better if it's merged in the first para. Yes, done "The Metropolitan Museum of Art (The Met)"-- decaps second "the" Done Perhaps use the full title and link Savage Beauty in fn A since it hasn't been referred to in the body, thus far. Is it not... right there? "in both stagings of the retrospective exhibition Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty"? I was referring to footnote A, which is located two sentences away from "in both stagings". Ah sorry, fixed "of the retrospective exhibition"-- add 2011 before "retrospective" No, because it was staged twice, 2011 and 2015, and I've referred to both I see-- I only looked at the preview and thought it was a 2011 show, sorry! "purchased from Los Angeles"-- LA's link but not NYC in paragraph 1? Linked NYC "to an Oscars"-- using the official name sounds better Done "Cultural history" and "wedding dress" overlink I think both are pertinent First exlink has archive but not second and third? First is a deadlink that requires an archive, the other two are videos and afair IA doesn't archive YouTube/Vimeo clips I normally use Ghostarchive for YT and Vimeos below 15 mins, and Conifer for longer ones. I did it here and here, though you might wanna check the Vimeo one since I'm using a computer without VPN. GeraldWL 07:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC) Works for me I don't think exlink needs accessdate Removed

Gerald Waldo Luis sorry for the delay, and thank you for the review! All responded to/fixed, let me know your thoughts. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:23, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries! I made a couple of replies which I signed so you can find it easier-- also just wanna note I didn't see the Technicolor cmt replied. GeraldWL 07:49, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

Gerald Waldo Luis, sorry again for the delay in responding, I have not had the brain juice all week. I've responded to the last few and made the Technicolor tweak I missed the first time. Thanks much for doing the video links :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:42, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

No worries about the delay; there is no delay after all :) I did a last read through the article and it seems all good for me now, so I'm supporting! A nice work about a nice work. GeraldWL 05:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Thanks kindly for your review, cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)

Vat

Marking a header. I expect not to have too much to say, though -- at a glance it's in strong shape. Vaticidalprophet 07:39, 12 September 2023 (UTC)

Extended content

Although he worked in ready-to-wear – clothing produced for retail sale – Does this need to be offset by dashes? It's a definition, yes, but the definition can be given in a non-offset sentence while sounding a little less jarring. I tried it in commas and in brackets and it feels awkward both ways. How would you suggest doing it? For the images in "Concept and creative process", can we fit in an image of a jerkin (maybe swapping something else out?). It's not a familiar article of clothing to most readers. Hmm. Swapped the bird out for a jerkin. If I've ever seen the case for {{non-free no reduce}}, it's on "images of extremely detailed articles of clothing that turn into inscrutable blobs at 'resolution some guys thought sounded good when most people had 640x480 displays'". (This is true across a lot of the McQueen suite, but it really stands out here because the oyster dress is the lead image and the focus of a huge chunk of the article, and I cannot see any of the things the sources talk about.) I dunno, I can see the ruffles fine, and that's really the part that matters. I know we disagree about NFCC to some extent, but I kind of think not being able to zoom right in and see the full detail here is the incentive for users to go to the original article I borrowed the image from and give them clicks Judith Watt argued that McQueen's use of colours for Irere was distinct from what others were doing because it was part of a narrative that explored concepts that were significant to him personally -- unsold on the prose/structure of this sentence. Honestly... yeah. It's kind of an annoying argument that she's making, almost a "not like other girls" thing. Like McQueen is somehow the only one using colors for Artistic reasons. It's hard to phrase in a non-pretentious way, but see what you think. I'm sure you know...wrt "only two copies of the oyster dress are believed to exist", should 'believed as' be understood as meaning this is at all hedged or disputed? I recall the DYK ran with a more certain statement. "Known to exist" might be better if we don't want to give the impression anyone thinks there are more. I am absolutely hedging here, and - ah. Part of it is to do with the article split. The oyster dress article mentions McQueen talking about 20 orders coming in for oyster dresses, but the Harper's ref says only two were ever produced, so I hedged the wording. It's not clear in any source what happened to those orders, although there are several possibilities. McQueen could have been inventing orders; the orders were real but got cancelled; multiple dresses were completed but then destroyed in accidents leaving only two (ie Harper's is mistaking "2 dresses still exist" for "2 dresses were ever made"); or there could be some number of privately-owned oyster dresses that Harper's just doesn't know about. It's hard to say. There's also the question of whether the McQueen Archive retains one. Per footnote a, "The catalogue produced for the original 2011 staging of Alexander McQueen: Savage Beauty says that all garments were lent by the Alexander McQueen archive unless otherwise noted. The oyster dress is not so noted, although The Met has owned their copy since 2003." Other garments owned by the Met that appeared in SB were noted as such in the catalogue. In my mind, this indicates some ambiguity as to whether this is a simple error or an indication that the Archive has another oyster dress which they lent to the Met for SB for some reason. I've messaged McQueen_vault asking about whether the Archive owns an oyster dress, hopefully he knows and isn't too sick of me to answer. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC) Left on read; speculation is the best I'm going to get. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:41, 20 September 2023 (UTC) Keep in mind DUPLINK lets you link by section these days (so Gerald's comments might have been wrong, but I don't know exactly what he checked). This mostly stood out to me with regards to the possibility of duplinking the oyster dress in the last section. Good point, added. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC)

That should be all, I think? Not much to say here. Vaticidalprophet 12:01, 13 September 2023 (UTC)

At long last, a response. Thanks for the patience while I got my shit together :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:09, 19 September 2023 (UTC)