Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George Juskalian/archive2

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 GrahamColm 10:01, 27 September 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

George Juskalian

Nominator(s): Proudbolsahye (talk) 23:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because it has great encyclopedic value and contains considerable amount of information on a famous Armenian-American soldier. The article is at GA status and also contains a picture which is now at FP. Last nomination did not go through because it was not copy-edited as much and it wasn't a GA then. Looking forward for the review. Proudbolsahye (talk) 23:43, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just some very quick comments: lede is awfully short for an article of this length, paragraphs are somewhat choppy (many are quite short too, as are sections). May need some extensive polishing. Have you tried the MilHist project's A-class reviews yet? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 18:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I have talked to members of the A1 Class review. They provided positive feedback. Only one user had a concerns of reliability with a source (#8 and #15) which I personally believe is not an issue. The source is paraphrased in accordance to first hand accounts of Juskalian and can easily be verified with other sources. All other people were willing to pass it, including AustralianRupert (talk · contribs) and Anotherclown (talk · contribs). So I decided to bring it directly to FAC. I can expand on the lede a little bit. I agree, the second paragraph needs expansion. The sections I personally believe are suffice since he didn't spend much time in some of those places. I can always combine them with other sections. Proudbolsahye (talk) 19:07, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Combining would be better, particularly to keep the TOC a bit more manageable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 19:09, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I combined/removed some section headers. Added a bit more to the lede. Proudbolsahye (talk) 19:27, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Images

Oflag caption shouldn't end in period
File:US-O6_insignia.svg: source link is dead
File:Arrowhead_device.svg:source link is dead
File:US_Army_Airborne_basic_parachutist_badge.gif: tagged as lacking author info, and as this appears to be a 3D object we'd need licensing for both the object itself and the photo. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:34, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed all issues mentioned above, with an exception to the last. I can't seem to have it reverted to the original graphic design which would free the photo from all 3D object issues. I uploaded a new graphic picture but it seems like it seems to go back to the 3D artwork. Quite strange. Can we have someone from commons check it out? Proudbolsahye (talk) 14:49, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose pending thorough spotchecks - after a connection was made from here to a DYK nomination, I did some spotchecking here and found problems with paraphrasing and accurate representation of sources. Examples:

"He was an active and respected member of the local St. Mary’s" vs "was an active and respected member of St. Mary's"
"On April 23, 2007, during a formal session of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors, Juskalian was recognized for his heroism and honorable service to the United States" vs "The Fairfax County Board of Supervisors recognized Juskalian for his heroism and honorable service to the United States during a formal session on April 23, 2007"
~~A quote from Webb is cited to this source, which includes no such quote.~~ Nikkimaria (talk) 19:45, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed issues. Also, the quote is on the second page of the article here. Proudbolsahye (talk) 19:55, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I had missed that, now struck. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't get why a mere two sentences would constitute an oppose vote though. Proudbolsahye (talk) 20:41, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After a cursory check I noticed this close paraphrasing: "constructed from British biscuit cans and their handles made from the wooden slats of their beds" vs. "fashioned out of British biscuit cans with handles created from their wooden bed slats". And this inconsistency with the source, " In August 1942, Juskalian boarded the RMS Queen Mary, and along with the other 15,000 soldiers of the 1st Infantry Division, was shipped to Europe" where the source says "In August, the whole division — some 20,000 soldiers — boarded the Queen Mary and headed overseas." I agree that thorough checks are needed here. Graham Colm (talk) 09:32, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - At this level we shouldn't be having this many questions about sourcing and paraphrasing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll withdraw this and work on it later. Proudbolsahye (talk) 18:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn by the nominator, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Graham Colm (talk) 20:43, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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