Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Stanley Bruce/archive1

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

The article was promoted by Ian Rose 10:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Stanley Bruce edit

Stanley Bruce (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Nominator(s): Unus Multorum (talk) 00:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article status because after a successful GA process I believe this article is now well-researched, well-written and broadly meets the FA criteria. I've invested a lot of time in the article, rewriting it almost from scratch some months ago, and now feel confident that with the scrutiny of peers here this article can be brought to FA status. This is my first nomination and I'm hoping the process of initiation will give me inspiration/confidence to continue writing FA articles and to help out reviewing. Thanks! Unus Multorum (talk) 00:26, 27 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Preliminary review
  • First/Second World War or World War I/II? Be consistent. I think per British English it should be the former.
  • 1914–1918 → 1914–18 throughout, per WP:YEAR.
  • I'd rather Later life become Later life and death, and Legacy get its own section (could it be expanded?).
  • I thought about this as well, but I think that would leave quite a short legacy section. I could not find consensus among other biographies of GA or FA quality - some put death with legacy and others don't. And unfortunately there isn't a great deal written about the Bruce legacy itself. Unus Multorum (talk) 06:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Yet Bruce never forgot his Australian roots and for much of his career was a tireless advocate for her interests."—source?
  • Double-check that a few paragraphs towards the end aren't too big—the second FAO one definitely needs splitting.—indopug (talk) 17:35, 29 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Good call, I've broken up a fair few of them so their easier to digest. Unus Multorum (talk) 06:33, 30 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments, not a complete review: - Dank (push to talk)

  • "importing/exporting business": I don't have a problem with this, but others might. See WP:SLASH
  • Single quote marks: See "Reasons to prefer straight quotation marks and apostrophes (and double quotation marks)" at WP:MOS.
  • " close association (and in for many of them, long periods of residency) with Great Britain.": close association with (and for many of them, long periods of residency in) Great Britain.

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • Missing bibliographic info for Sawer, Henderson, Plowman, Fitzhardinge
  • Be consistent in how Edwards short cites are notated
  • No citations to Brett, Murray, Moore, Barber, Connor, or "Election Speeches of Stanley Bruce"
  • Mathews or Matthews?
  • Don't repeat cited sources in External links
  • Newspapers should include title, author if known, and page number
  • Be consistent in whether you include locations for books, and if so how these are formatted
  • FN49, 183, 184, 204: page formatting
  • FN110, 116, 117, 135: publisher?
  • FN167: page?
  • Be consistent in how editions are formatted
  • Check alphabetization of Bibliography
  • Titles of periodicals should be italicized.

Comments This is a very high quality and content-rich article. I have the following comments and suggestions, most of which are of a fairly minor nature:

  • "hit hard upon the Bruce family fortunes." - how about "hit the Bruce Family's fortunes hard" or similar?
  • Please reduce the uses of "Bruce" in the para which begins with "In the aftermath of his father's death in 1901" - the terms appears at least once in all but the last sentence. The word is over-used through much of the article.
  • Yes that is good point, I've managed to cut the number down by almost a third. Unus Multorum (talk) 03:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Bruce himself was wounded on 3 June by a shot to the arm, though it was this injury that spared Bruce" - ditto
  • "Minister of Defense" - should this be Minister for Defence?
  • "With his aristocratic manners and dress (he drove a Rolls-Royce and wore white spats) he was also considered to be the first genuinely "Tory" Australian prime minister. Under Bruce, the government took on a decidedly more conservative hue than had been the case under Hughes." - this material isn't covered by citations
  • Removed the later sentence as its quite contestable now that I think about it. The former statement is oft remarked with different words, and conveniently the end of the ADB entry. Unus Multorum (talk) 03:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Unemployment and inflation were relatively low internationally and in national history and if taken as a single entity, Commonwealth revenues had grown significantly since its becoming a Federation" - this is a bit unclear, and could be simplified
  • "These changes were amongst the most impacting" - "most impacting" is awkward
  • "or if they disagreed gave means by which cabinet members could be absent from meetings to preserve cabinet solidarity" - what's meant by this? Did Bruce adopt a procedure where ministers who disagreed with a proposal were encouraged to skip the meeting? That's a rather dysfunctional approach, and not in line with how the modern cabinet operates (where ministers are expected to turn up and participate in the discussion, and to strongly uphold and defend the outcomes even if they disagree with them(.
    Yes that is exactly what he did, and it is true that is no longer the procedure, though cabinet procedure was pretty much whatever the PM determined it to be prior to WWII. I've reworded there so it is exactly clear what is meant.
  • "The business of transferring government and cabinet operations to the new capital proceeded over 1927 and 1928" - you should note that many functions remained in Melbourne (some of the main departments only completed their moves to Canberra in the 1980s!)
  • "though the eventual treaty was not binding on the dominions." - needs to be covered by a reference
  • The level of detail in the "Prime Minister, 1923–29" section is excellent
  • "Lyons leaned heavily on Bruce and Latham in his first six months of government, though Bruce had by now set his sights on international affairs rather than the domestic crisis." - reference needed
  • When did Bruce resign from parliament?
  • Added. 09:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • "Over two years, Bruce negotiated with the Westminster Bank and the British Government for loan conversions worth £84 million, which saved Australia millions of pounds in interest over several years and along with the Ottawa Agreements were significant in helping alleviate Australia's financial difficulties" - how did a few million pounds less interest have a significant impact on the economy? The trade agreements would have been helpful, but the loan conversions don't sound all that significant in the context of the size of the Australian economy.
  • You are right, what I actually mean here is the beneficial impact on the government bottom line, which was signficant, not the economy as a whole. I've reworded accordingly so its clearer! Unus Multorum (talk) 09:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "but he could not find funding elsewhere" - where the funding was obtained from isn't clear
  • Yes this nonsensical clause must be left over from something else, I've removed it. Unus Multorum (talk) 09:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "He became the first Chancellor of the newly established Australian National University in 1952, and took an active interest in its development, especially as a research center for the study of Asia and the Pacific." - not covered by a citation
  • Added. 09:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • "In 1947 Bruce became the first Australian to sit in the House of Lords (Sir John Forrest had been granted a peerage but died before it could be invested)." - also needs a reference
  • Added. 09:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
  • "The Canberra suburb of Bruce, and the electoral Division of Bruce based in south-east Melbourne, were both named for him after his death." - ditto Nick-D(talk) 00:56, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Added. Thanks so much for your helpful comments. 09:22, 21 August 2013 (UTC)

Support My comments have now been addressed, and I'm pleased to support this article's promotion. Nick-D (talk) 23:13, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comments - According to the London Gazette, Bruce was commissioned as a lieutenant on 7 February 1915 in the 12th Battalion, Worcestershire Regiment. See here. Also, there are the Gazette entries for his Military Cross and Croix de Guerre. Template:London Gazette exists, if that helps. On the note of his MC and CdeG, is it known why he was awarded the decorations? Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 03:35, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the references, I've incorporated them. Bruce was typically modest about his military service - when asked in an interview about his Croix de Guerre, he didn't give and reason and simply stated that the French 'gave medals to everyone'. So no, I have not found in my research what these citations were specifically for. Unus Multorum (talk) 02:27, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comments: G'day, thanks for your efforts with this article. I only took a quick look at the military service and World War II sections: AustralianRupert (talk) 04:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • not sure about this: "World War I broke out in September of that year". Britain, and therefore Australia, declared war on 4 August 1914, I believe;
  • "2nd Battalion Royal Fusiliers" --> "2nd Battalion, Royal Fusiliers";
  • "and rose to the rank of Captain on 5 August" --> "and rose to the rank of captain on 5 August" per WP:MILTERMS;
  • this seems a bit repetitive: "which was then assigned to the British 29th Division which was..." (two instances of "which" in the same sentence);
  • "Bruce's regiment landed at Helles..." The link here for Helles appears to go to a Pale lager, which doesn't seem correct. Perhaps try Cape Helles;
  • "and the subsequent failure of the Royal Navy to force passage"... I don't think that the Royal Navy were alone here, I believe that the French navy was also involved. The sentence also seems quite long. Perhaps it could be broken down?
  • "File:Sbruce.jpg" probably also needs a US licence, such as "PD-US-1996". It also probably needs to outline what date it was taken
  • "File:Stanley Bruce and the Troops.png": probably needs a US licence such as "PD-US-1996";
  • is there a reference for this: "n spite of his tempestuous relationship with Churchill, Bruce was held in high regard by many cabinet members, particularly future prime ministers Clement Attlee and Anthony Eden, and his dogged determination to advance dominion interests during the war years earned him high praise from John Curtin and the other dominion prime ministers."?AustralianRupert (talk) 04:53, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have reviewed the changes that have been made during the review and am happy that the article meets the criteria, pending resolution of the final image points below. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 21:04, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review from Crisco 1492
  • Note: I will only include links to the files if I find an issue
File:Australian Migration Poster, 1928.jpg - Why is this a UK tag? It looks like it was made by the Australians.
  • Although the program was designed by Australia, this poster appeared in the UK and was designed and printed by the UK government as part of the empire migration scheme. Unus Multorum (talk) 02:29, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Paterson, Laing and Bruce.jpg - Think a crop is in order?
File:Garran and Bruce ANU.jpg - This is not PD in the US owing to the URAA (has to be prior to 1946). As such, this can't be used as a free image.
  • Quite right, I've removed the PD-US tag and removed it from the article - should the image also be deleted from the commons? Unus Multorum (talk) 06:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Pius XIII and the World Food Council 1950.JPG - This is not PD in the US owing to the URAA (has to be prior to 1946). As such, this can't be used as a free image.
  • Well I did some investigating of this photo (which I also scanned out of the Bruce collection), and asked the collection desk about the copyright status of the photo, and the file note at the archives seems to indicate that it was created/first published in Italy in November of 1950, and so actually it should fall under Italian copyright jurisdiction, which if I am understanding the meaning of 'simple photo' correctly, means that it is PD-US as per the PD-Italy rules set out in the tag. Hope I have that right.... 06:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
  • That's... interesting. Can you track down the name of the publication? That'll be needed for the file page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Stanley Bruce and the Troops.png - Have a source link?
  • G'day, I've add a link to the State Library of Victoria database. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:45, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Bruce presiding over the League of Nations Council.png - Have a source link?
  • This is a scan from the original photo in the Bruce Collection, much of which is still awaiting digitization. Unus Multorum (talk) 02:29, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • If you scanned it yourself, you should note it on the file page. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:17, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Bruce chairing the Montreaux Conference.jpg - Needs US PD tag
File:Waterside Workers of Australia Banner.jpg - When did Markovic die?
  • OK, after schooling myself on the public domain and art tags, this image now has the correct tag and licensing information. I hope... Markovic was not the creator of the banner, just the NMA photographer. Unus Multorum (talk) 06:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • What was his contribution to this poster? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nothing, he is just an archivist who took the photo. Unus Multorum (talk) 03:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, he (essentially) scanned the poster. Right, no copyright claim in the US. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:55, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Bruce resigned newPMScullin brief meeting.jpg - What's with the PD simple tag? Also, you need a US PD tag
  • G'day, I've removed the PD simple tag and replaced it with PD-Aus and PD-US-1996. AustralianRupert (talk) 23:45, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Dog Collar Waterfront Licence, 1929.jpg - What's the copyright on the booklet itself?
  • Crown copyright has expired on the booklet, I've detailed this is the licensing information now. Unus Multorum (talk) 06:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Imperial Conference 1923 Cartoon.png - When did Partridge die?
  • Partridge died in 1945, and the tags have been updated and corrected for this. Unus Multorum (talk) 06:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Should also be noted on information page (am doing). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
File:Nla Bruce thelodge.jpg - A more direct link would be preferable.
 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:54, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please do not strike my comments. I will strike them when I deem them dealt with to my satisfaction. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:17, 25 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, my bad! Thanks for all your comments, I've certainly learned a lot about copyright. Unus Multorum (talk) 06:58, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Images look okay based on my check. Congrats on what looks like a good article, and I'm quite sorry I don't have time to do a prose review (although it looks like you're pretty much there anyways) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:55, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments taking a look - will make any straightforward copyedits as I go (please revert if I inadvertently change the meaning) and post queries below. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:41, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
...led to his dramatic defeat at the polls in 1929. - I'd link to Australian federal election, 1929 here - either as an easter egg or rephrase to "...led to his dramatic defeat in the 1929 federal election"
becoming treasurer in 1921 - link treasurer here
He worked to professionalise government administration - hmmm, I doubt they were amateurs beforehand, maybe "He worked to overhaul/modernise government administration"?
  • You would be surprised at how amateur government administration was prior to the 1920s, but yes, I've picked a more accurate phrasing. Unus Multorum (talk) 03:11, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
''Although he returned to parliament in 1931, Bruce's service in the Lyons government was brief and he instead pursued an international career, and was appointed High Commissioner to the United Kingdom in 1933. - two "ands" in this sentence - a little ungainly....
Bruce found Hughes' management of his government completely lacking in professionalism or structure - again "professionalism" can be reather nebulous in meaning in this context - more specific adjectives are better
capricious? Billy Hughes?...yeah I can see that ;) Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 07:16, 1 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In summary, reads well - prose engaging and well written. I don't know enough of Bruce to determine whether some criticism is missing or underrepresented. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:40, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Quadell edit

This article is well-written and seems both complete and well-sourced. I'm quite impressed. There are still a few opportunities for improvement and clarification.

  • In the lead you say a type of defeat "would only next occur some 78 years later in 2007": I don't think "some" is doing anything useful in that sentence. It's exactly 78 years.
  • The whole clause seems clunky, I've reworded it better I think. Unus Multorum (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The last sentence in the lead has room for improvement. First, "important" is a value judgment, and I think the sentence would work better without the word. (If there are no criteria by which some diplomatic careers are deemed "important" and others not, then the word is meaningless here.)
  • Second, the "Tory" clause -- "and he held a reputation as an English Tory" -- is hard for a non-Australian to understand. The Tory article you link to only has one sentence about what "Tory" might mean in this context: "members of the conservative coalition Liberal and National parties." If so, wouldn't he be a Tory by definition due to his political party? Or is something else meant by "English Tory"? (He wasn't English, any more than any white Australian.) The article only has a sentence to back up this clause in the lead, and that sentence indicates that it was his outfit and mannerisms that made people think him a Tory... but that's not clear. In my opinion, you could either leave out the entire clause from the lead, or else explain it better (perhaps in the body).
    • Late addition: you later say "despite his image as a member of the British aristocratic elite", which I think describes it perfectly. It's just that many readers won't understand the connection between that statement and the term "Tory". – Quadell (talk) 22:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • And third, regarding his remains, it isn't clear whether "there" refers to London or Australia. The article does not support this statement in the lead, so it's essentially an unsourced statement. This could be fixed by rewording this sentence in the lead, and by adding the fact (sourced) to the body.
  • All good points, I've reworked it now and hopefully it reads a lot better. I've removed the Tory descriptor from the article entirely and replaced it with clearer descriptions. However his remained being scattered in Canberra is mentioned and sourced in the last section of the article. Unus Multorum (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Ah, I now see the reference to his ashes scattered in Canberra. I'd simply missed that. The rewording is excellent. – Quadell (talk) 18:06, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Related: the "Death and legacy" section starts its second paragraph "Returning to Australia after his years in London in 1945...". That seems to indicate that he was done living in England way back in 1945, and the text never again mentions him going back to England. But the infobox shows that he died in London in 1967. It's needlessly confusing. (Besides, 1945 is more than 20 years before his death, so I'm not sure why this information is in this section.)
    • Late addition: It seems to me that you could change "Returning to Australia after his years in London in 1945," to "As Bruce himself discovered upon his return to Australia in 1945," and it would flow much better. Or you could just discuss his legacy and image here without specifying the 1945-era, and I think it would be fine. Which do you think would be better? – Quadell (talk) 22:20, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I hate to mention this because it's so nit-picky, but... you usually omit serial commas, which is fine. But the last sentence in the first paragraph of the lead has one. Now perhaps that former case needs a serial comma just for clarity's sake... but be careful to always omit serial commas throughout the article (or always use, if you prefer), excepting in cases where there is a need to make an exception for clarity reasons.
  • Good you picked this up, as it happens I think I am generally a bit inconsistent on this matter and will pay closer attention to it in the future. Unus Multorum (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reword the first sentence of "Early life" so it's clear that St Kilda is not the youngest of five children. :)
  • Consider using {{spaced ndash}} to ensure correct linewrap handling, as suggested at WP:MOSDASH. (This is not a requirement for my support, at all, but it's a good idea.)
  • I will confess my ignorance about the use of hyphens and the two dash variants on Wikipedia, but I've had to learn now! I've gone through and put in the spaced endash in the article as you've suggested. Unus Multorum (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • In "Death and Legacy", the phrase "and he was to be disappointed" seems out of place. (At this point in the narrative he's already dead.) Woul "and he was frequently disappointed" work?
  • In the FAO section, you say "he had envisaged a post-war order based on a continuing alliance of the four powers (the United States, the British Empire, the Soviet Union and China) that could evolve into a new international body". It seems to me this would be improved by the use of ndashes instead of parentheses. Do you agree?:* Done. Unus Multorum (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I can't find any problems with the images, captions, infoboxes, reference formatting, other end sections, or anything MOS-related. A (very) few spot checks revealed no problems. All that's left is prose issues, which are mostly quite minor. – Quadell (talk) 19:49, 11 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support. This article is comprehensive, well-sourced, and well-formatted. I believe it to be among the best Wikipedia has to offer. – Quadell (talk) 18:06, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- A belated welcome to FAC, Unus. I will be happy to promote this shortly but before that:

  • P&O is a dab link, and I have to admit it's not clear to me just which of the company entities it refers to, so you may need to check the sources for more info to finetune.
  • You have a fair few duplicate links. Some may be justified by the space between them, owing to the length of the article, but pls review in any case and lose what you can. Note that the second occurrence of Richard Casey is a dab but if you drop that wikilink the problem will go away. You can use this script to highlight the dups for yourself. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:30, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rookie error with the strikeouts, thanks for pointing out that duplicate links tool, I've removed all the duplicates from the body of the article and pointed the P&O link to the correct page. Hopefully that resolves everything. Thanks for your comments! Unus Multorum (talk) 05:18, 15 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Stanley_Bruce/archive1&oldid=1166570288"