Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William Pūnohu White/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 archived by Sarastro1 via Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:09, 11 March 2017 (UTC).[reply]

William Pūnohu White edit

Nominator(s): KAVEBEAR (talk) 05:35, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about William Pūnohu White, one of the leading Native Hawaiian political leader during the time of the overthrow of Hawaii which has generally been written as a conflict between the queen and American businessmen, neglecting the contributions of Native Hawaiian leaders (other than the queen) in the struggle. His colorful and controversial life is a great illustration of the different forms of resistance during the period between 1893 and 1898 against American imperialism in Hawaii and also the negative repercussions of misaligning against the Euro-American power holders in the islands at the time. This article was written and sourced on the same level of standard as my previous FA nominations. At this point, this article contains all existing knowledge about this figure. --KAVEBEAR (talk) 18:33, 4 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

~~Doing...~~ — Maile (talk) 14:15, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio/close paraphrasing checks

Earwig's Copyvio Detector. The return of 83.2% "violation suspected" is primarily due to two large block quotes in the article, appropriately cited as to their source. Other items flagged are common phrases and proper nouns (names, titles, etc.). i.e. "the opening of the legislature", "annexation to the United States", "the Queen and". Returns that show a lesser percentage, are flagging the same issues. Nothing to be concerned about.
Individual spot checks on citations with Duplication Detector show nothing of concern.

Checklinks tool gives false positives on some links as "Heuristics resolved as likely dead" and "Error code indicates dead status", but checking each one shows the links are alive and working fine.
Bibliography section

Helena G. Allen book, wikilink publisher Arthur H. Clark Company, and the first instance any other publishers that have a Wikipedia article.

Sources

Citation 56 - "William, White (January 9, 1894) correspondence is a primary source, used only in conjunction with a secondary source, so it is allowable in the place and purpose for which it is used.
Sources used are in accordance with MOS.

Formatting

Consistent throughout
No bare URLs, and no external links used as inline sources
Citations are appropriately placed in every paragraph
Table citations in their own column

KAVEBEAR everything looks pretty good on your sourcing, nice and detailed, appropriately formatted. The only thing I have suggested above is under Bibliography; you ought to wiki link the first occurrence of each publisher, if Wikipedia has an article on them. — Maile (talk) 16:32, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Maile66 Done.--KAVEBEAR (talk) 17:18, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

OK. Source review is completed, and everything looks good. — Maile (talk) 23:00, 20 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment: This has been open over a month with little feedback, and nothing has happened for quite a while. I think it would be best if this was archived now. If the nominator wishes to renominate before the usual 2 weeks, please leave a note on my talk page. Sarastro1 (talk) 00:09, 11 March 2017 (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. Sarastro1 (talk) 00:09, 11 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

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