Self-Nominator. I just created this article yesterday, but already it is showing incredible potential and promise as a possible featured article, with clearly-cut sections and sub-sections, ten nine stable and copyrighted images that are relevant to the topic, 35 42 inline citations (some used multiple times) from 12 17 different scholarly sources, has about 30 34 KB in size (including everything besides body prose), and has been appropriately categorized at the end of the article. I've even got a worthy external link at the end. Plus, a bonus: this is an interesting subject, so it is not going to bore you to tears reading about it. Lol. Enjoy.Pericles of AthensTalk 17:25, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Comment References look good. You scared the crap out of me with the "I just created the article yesterday ..." until I saw the article itself, not just the nomination page. No fair scaring reviewers like that! I'll try to look at the article itself in a bit, it certainly looked interesting at first glance. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:46, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Comment Looks good to me, from a brief glance "and then ultimately executed during two political purges in 1498 and 1504" should be re-worded as it seems that he was executed twice. The lead also seems rather short in my opinion. There is also a great deal of images in the article, which seems to be a bit of an overload, especially the picture of bamboo shoots. That might be something to consider. Mattyness (talk) 19:01, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Oops! I just fixed that mistake in the introduction; thanks for looking out.--Pericles of AthensTalk 19:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
In careful consideration of what you suggest, I too believe that the bamboo shoots picture is perhaps a bit excessive. I've deleted that image from the article.--Pericles of AthensTalk 19:20, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
I've just expanded the introduction a bit as well, as you've suggested.--Pericles of AthensTalk 19:29, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
Support although I think a copyedit by someone wouldn't hurt, as I'm no expert on prose styling. Slight oppose Keep in mind I'm reading this as someone who has never studied Chinese or Korean history beyond a couple of books here and there. No systemic study, so some of my questions are going to sound pretty stupid to folks who know more.
Which court was he banished from? Chinese or Korean? Context is unclear to me.
"Ch'oe's diary accounts of his travels in China became widely printed since the 16th century ... " sounds awkward to me somewhere in there.
Agree that the lead seems skimpy. Of course, since mine are skimpy too, I'm not sure how to help here.
What's the difference between a prefectural town and a "normal" town?
A bit of context on what a chinsa examination was so I don't have to click through?
That third sentence in the first paragraph of Official career is quite a doozy, LOTS of offices listed there at the end that just sort of drag on ... Consider rewording, perhaps to "During his 18-year career as a graduate scholar official, he held posts in the Hudoang Library, printing office, and the national academy. He also held posts involving the military, such as on the military supplies commission, with the office of the inspector-general, and with the Yongyang garrison." (If I messed up on guessing which went where, I'm sorry. I didn't know where the "office of the special counselors should go.)
Consider this as the next sentence: "His career career culminated as the minister of the Directorate of Ceremonies for the capital, a distinguished office.
The first sentence of the southern china section starts "While still raining heavily, Ch'oe's crew..." which gives the impression that the crew was raining, a bit odd. Perhaps "Although it was still raining heavily, ..."
Any reason for the Chinese/Korean/Japanese translations of "brush conversations"?
One thing I'm noticing is that you cite things in sequence to the same source. Such as in the last two sentence of the second paragraph of Southern China or the first two sentences of the third paragraph in the same section. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe you can cite the source once at the end of the two consecutive sentences. Nothing particularly wrong with the way you have it, it just makes for a LOT of little letters in the references.
Ch'oe and his party make a dash for shore, then suddenly in the next sentence they are under escort? Did I miss something in there?
The first sentence of the fourth paragraph of Southern China is pretty long. Consider chopping it up a bit?
"The battalion escort of Ch'oe's party reached Jiantiao Battalion ..." makes it sound at first like only the escort arrived, only later did I realize that the Koreans were along with too.
Another really long sentence is the one in the seventh paragraph that starts "Due to the hai jin laws, the Ming government .."
I don't understand what is meant by "lofty provisions that were complements of the transport offices".. provisions as in food or provisions as in arrangements?
Second sentence of the eighth paragraph, which starts "After visiting the Suzhou..." is "the Suzhou" needed for some reason? It isn't used in the sentence before.
First paragraph of Northern China subsection, the second, third, and fourth sentences all start with Ch'oe, which is repetitous. Consider changing one of them to something different.
With the seventh sentence of the first paragraph of Northern China, did you mean Southern Chinese rather than Southern China? Given that you talk about the northern Chinese in the second half of the sentence, and the comparison would make more sense if you were comparing the peoples.
Okay, is it important that the early printed copies of the diary are located in various libraries in Japan?
Mostly, I enjoyed the article, but I can't help feeling it wasn't so much about Ch'oe Pu as it was about his trip in 1488. While it was interesting, at times there was too much information, with a bit too much detail on dates and exact places stopped, especially in the first sections.
I've pointed out several very long sentences. There are others also, that might profitably be shortened a bit.
My main concern is the prose which tends to be a bit wordy and have long sentences. I've pointed out some concerns above with them, I'm not sure I'm the best one to be massaging the prose, since I tend to be wordy myself. I'm also a bit concerned about how much of the article is about the one journey and how little is on him or his family or even the importance of his diary in historical studies. Don't get me wrong, the story was a very interesting read, but I'm not sure it should be in so much detail in an article about the man who took the journey. Perhaps some of the detail could be in an article on the work itself? Ealdgyth - Talk 01:34, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Nominator Response I've addressed each and every one of your immediate and specific concerns in the bulleted list. However, as to your concern about his journey in China, that is arguably the most significant event of his life in terms of impact on pre-modern literature and modern scholarly historical studies (which is covered extensively in the section after the "Death" of Ch'oe). To be honest, I've exhausted all the available resources on events of his personal life, career, and death. I can't find anything else. Most sources tend to focus on this one monumental event of his life. Therefore, the weight is given to that section. Plus, how is anyone going to make sense of the "Publication of Ch'oe's diary" section without knowing what his travel accounts entail? I agree with everything else you've suggested (which is reflected in the recent edits to the article I've based on your suggestions), but this one part I have to firmly disagree on. There is sufficient information on his official career and ultimately, the end of it. Although I couldn't find information on his immediate family beyond his father dying, it is significant that his grandson who published his work is mentioned in the last section of the article, which goes to show he obviously had a married life.--Pericles of AthensTalk 13:40, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Definitely an editorial decision on what to focus on. I'm not suggesting cutting the travel section way back, not even somewhat back. I just think it could profitably cut some of the minute details that are present in the beginning, including the exact distances traveled per day. For example, this sentence "In a daylong trip, the party reached the next station located 35 km (21.75 miles) north by the second watch of the night." would convey the same impression without the level of detail written something like "In a daylong trip, the party reached the next station during the second watch of the night." But, as I said, it's an editorial decision, and I'm not going to oppose based on that. I do suggest that if you don't cut the Southern China section back, that you break it into sub-subsections to make it easier to read. Right now it's a rather large wall of text and without being broken into section it is a bit hard to read.
That's a fair assessment. Also, if you feel like the real "Ch'oe Pu" is lost in all of this, I have recently added a very good quotation from Kleiner's book on Ch'oe's affinity towards Chinese culture in comparison to his own. Just another tidbit to demonstrate his opinions rather than travel times and Chinese battalion names and other technical stuff.--Pericles of AthensTalk 16:35, 16 March 2008 (UTC)
Support. Although I was curious if there's a chance we could find an image of this guy. Even a fair-use one would be better than nothing here. Otherwise, another fantastic East Asian article, Pericles! --Hemlock Martinis (talk) 17:39, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
UPDATEUser:Historiographer has recently moved the page from Ch'oe Pu to Choe Bu, and this has pretty much severed the link between the FAC talk page and the article. I hope administrators can fix this soon, and keep his move of "Choe Bu"; otherwise I will have to revert his page move so that people reviewing this article as a candidate will be able to access the page from the article. Thank you.--Pericles of AthensTalk 17:28, 18 March 2008 (UTC)
Fixing that does not require an admin; I'll do it for you, but you could do it yourself. Follow my contribs to learn. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:25, 18 March 2008 (UTC)