Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Blackford County Courthouse/archive1

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

The article was not promoted by Ian Rose 14:48, 8 August 2012 [1].

Blackford County Courthouse

Featured article candidates/Blackford County Courthouse/archive1

Nominator(s): TwoScars (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I have upgraded the article's text, photos, and footnotes. TwoScars (talk) 00:59, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A properly written lead is a summary of the body of the article and as such will need few, if any, footnotes/refs.PumpkinSky talk 01:11, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My biggest fear has always been "not enough footnoes", not "too many". Featured Articles such as Harris Theater (Chicago) and Stanford Memorial Church have footnotes in the lead. I can rework the lead (this weekend) to remove any footnotes and notes for sentences where sources can be found in the body of the article. Please confirm that this is necessary. TwoScars (talk) 13:46, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They were also promoted 2-3 years ago. Barring a direct quote, a properly written lead would not need any footnotes as the details and hence refs would be in the body. 1-2 at most. 6-7 is pushing it. 16 or so as you have is way overkill. If you need to footnote that much in the lead, I have to ask "Why isn't that info in the body"?. But alas, I only commented here. I'm neither supporting nor opposing at the moment. Not likely to support with this many footnotes in the lead. Others can chime in. PumpkinSky talk 20:41, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will start working on it, while preserving the original version somewhere. About all of the info is in the body. I know I will like the "less footnotes" version better, I'm just afraid someone else is going to want me to put them back in.TwoScars (talk) 21:39, 2 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Excess footnotes and notes have been removed from the lead. The lead now contains footnotes 2, 3, and note 1. Footnote 2 refers to the NRHP form, which I believe is useful to have up front. Footnote 3 is a cite for a quote. Note 1 lists some web sites that picture the courthouse. If necessary, note 1, with a few added sentences, could be moved to the significance section. TwoScars (talk) 16:06, 3 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

FN7: italicization

Changed cite web template to cite news template—italics are now in.TwoScars (talk) 15:00, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

What makes this a high-quality reliable source?

Removed a sentence, added a sentence, removed source questioned, added NRHP form as one source and a web page from the Smithsonian Institution as another source.TwoScars (talk) 16:35, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Check for minor inconsistencies like doubled periods. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:21, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I found a place where there were two spaces in front of the word "and" in the Significance section—that is fixed. A search using Microsoft Word finds no doubled periods except in some titles. For one of the sources, I use "Unlisted (Biographical and historical record...)" as the author name, since no author is given. This enables the user to "jump" from the References section to Cited works section. The three periods will appear in every reference to that book, and the book title itself has three periods. The "cite web" for "Trunbull County Courthouse..." has the three dots/periods on the web page. Also, the 1986 book by the Blackford County Historical Society has multiple dots/periods: "Biographical memoirs of Blackford County, Ind: to which is appended a comprehensive compendium of national biography ... embellished with portraits of many well known residents of Blackford County, Indiana".TwoScars (talk) 15:27, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Changed comma at end of sentence to period in Original courthouse section.TwoScars (talk) 20:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

"Registered Historic Place" is a neologism. I'd rewrite the lead sentence as "The Blackford County Courthouse is a historic courthouse located in Hartford City, Indiana, the county seat of Blackford County.", or something similiar. Instead of "joined the Register in 1980", you could say "was listed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980.)

Made suggested changes. TwoScars (talk) 19:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Peacock terms in the second paragraph of the lead: "huge corner tower", "easily the tallest", "the impressive structure"

Removed puffery, added half sentence that mentions courthouse is still used. TwoScars (talk) 19:59, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a big deal (I've fixed them already), but capital refers to a city, capitol refers to a building.
In the photo of the southern facade, the shadows are distracting; it does not appear too difficult to clone them out, if you would me want to try.

Sure—if you can clone out the shadows, please do. Thanks! TwoScars (talk) 19:17, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Finished retouching the photo. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 23:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Put the retouched photo in—much better than original. TwoScars (talk) 20:41, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

While comprehensive with regards to its design and its history, however there is no information on what the courthouse is used for today.

I created a new paragraph at the end of the Current courthouse section. It mentions that the courthouse is still used by local government, and lists the mailing address. The reference links to the Blackford County web site. I originally thought of this Wikipedia page as about a building in the National Register of Historic Places (which creates its notability) that happens to be a courthouse, instead of a page about a courthouse that happens to be in the National Register. If you believe more information beyond the new (and small) paragraph is warranted, I can certainly add more.TwoScars (talk) 19:17, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Understandable, but adding which courts or which county offices use the courthouse certainly wouldn't detract from the article. I would consider that relevant, and not trivia. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 23:18, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I will add to the paragraph in the Current courthouse section, probably on Sunday. More current info added, including courts and some of the county offices. TwoScars (talk) 17:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Done with current courthouse update. TwoScars (talk) 23:34, 15 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I alway enjoy when someone takes the time to research and write an article on a local landmark, however there was some things I noticed straightaway. Niagara ^{Don't give up the ship} 02:28, 7 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delegate note -- given this has been open almost six weeks with no support and no activity since mid-July, I'm afraid it's time to archive the nom. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:45, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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