Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Matthews (priest)/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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 09:08, 31 July 2018 [1].

William Matthews (priest) edit

Nominator(s): Ergo Sum 18:56, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the first Catholic priest who was born in British America. He went on to play a pivotal role in the establishment of Catholicism in Washington, D.C., as he created several schools and orphanages, founded several churches, was a well-known pastor of the largest church in the capital, was a president of Georgetown University, and became the vicar general of Philadelphia. I created this article and have worked to promote it to GA status. It now contains (in my humble opinion) mostly everything about the subject that is both known from history and encyclopedic in nature. The article failed the previous FA nomination due to the unknown copyright status of the infobox image, which I have now determined. Ergo Sum 18:56, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Citations edit

Some of the citations are missing publisher locations, which you might want to consider adding. The citation style is also a mix of short form and full citations, and you might want to consider standardizing this.Seraphim System ^(talk) 16:08, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphim System: I'll go through and try to find locations for the books, although I didn't think there were many for which the publisher locations were known. As for the long-from and short-form citations, I based those off of Barack Obama, which uses both. The short-form citations refer to the full citations found under Sources. I thought this was an acceptable practice. Ergo Sum 16:38, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure, I'm new to FAC - the criteria as I read it strongly implies the article should use either short form or long form, but I'd appreciate input from a more experienced reviewer. Seraphim System ^(talk) 16:43, 4 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. In the meantime, I've added the locations of publication to all of the books and all of the other media for which I could find locations. Ergo Sum 02:47, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I should clarify, yes the short form citations refer to the long form in the Sources section, but there is a mix of templates and freehand shortform in the "Citations" section. My understanding is that this would have to be standardized. Seraphim System ^(talk) 11:19, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at Barack Obama and Guy Fawkes Night, two FAs, as well as others, it seems the intermixing of the two styles is permitted. In fact, some FAs use {{Harvnb}}, which is specifically designed for that. I can implement that template for all the short-form citations. Ergo Sum 18:10, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really confused- is this the right version of the article [2]? It looks like those references were added later. I think I've seen articles lose their FA status over this? I'll let you know if I come across the FAR I'm thinking of...Seraphim System ^(talk) 18:25, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphim System: Are you talking about something like this, where all long-form citations are segregated in one section while all short-form citations are segregated in another? If so, I didn't realize that was required, but I can do that. The only thing I'm unsure of is where news, web, and journal citations would go, in the full ref or shortened ref sections, and how they should be styled if they have short-form counterparts like books. Ergo Sum 19:56, 5 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Seraphim System: I've checked a number of other FAs, where the same intermingling of short refs and full-form ones is used. If you do find anything proscribing that, I'm genuinely curious to know. Also, I've updated all of the shortened refs to use {{harvnb}}, so that the short refs will link to the full-form ones. Besides that, I'd welcome any other comments you have. Ergo Sum 14:13, 8 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note edit

Sorry but after remaining open almost a month it appears this review is a bit of a non-starter so I'm going to archive it -- given the lack of commentary I'm willing to waive the usual two-week waiting period if you want to renominate, but I'd suggest trying Peer Review first. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:07, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, 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. Ian Rose (talk) 09:08, 31 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

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