Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Juan Manuel de Rosas/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) 15:01, 16 July 2015 [1].

Juan Manuel de Rosas

Nominator(s): Lecen (talk) 14:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC) • Astynax ^talk[reply]

Juan Manuel de Rosas is one of the key figures in South American history, probably the most well-known 19th century dictator in that region (after Francisco Solano López). For a brief moment he was almost able to turn Argentina into the main power in South America, and almost conquered nearby countries. He became so powerful that the Empire of Brazil under Emperor Pedro II forged an alliance with his enemies to crush Rosas. This article uses dozens of well-known sources in academia, although is mostly based on John Lynch's biography, regarded as the best one available in any language. Lecen (talk) 14:50, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. - Dank (push to talk)

Welcome back, guys. First question: were you able to resolve the copyright issues mentioned in the last FAC? - Dank (push to talk) 15:14, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"As was common, Rosas formed a private militia, enlisting his workers, and took part in the factious disputes that had led to endless civil wars in his country. ... Rosas became the quintessential caudillo, as provincial warlords in the region were known.": If the reader has to guess which people this was common for, they might guess wrong. Also, I can't tell if 1, 2 or all 3 things you mention were common. For instance, if you're saying that the first two things were common for caudillos, maybe something along the lines of: Rosas enlisted his workers in a private militia, as was common for caudillos (provincial warlords), and took part in the factious disputes that had led to endless civil wars in his country. - Dank (push to talk) 15:24, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Dank. It's very good to see you again and willing to lend a hand here. Rural proprietors in Argentina had private armies (usually to protect them against Indian attacks or to meddle into their country's civil wars). I followed your suggestion and changed the text. The only problem left about the copyright issue was in regard to the last picture, a photo of Rosas' monument. Honestly, I had forgotten about it. I'm going to ask about the photo on Commons to find out what can be done. If indeed the photo can't stay, we'll simply remove it from the article. --Lecen (talk) 17:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - The picture can't stay. Argentine law allows for freedom of panorama regarding buildings, but not monuments. I changed the photo for one of Rosas'family vault at the cemetery in Buenos Aires --Lecen (talk) 17:29, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thanks much, I'll be back soon-ish. - Dank (push to talk) 17:44, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. A very solid and readable storyline. I read this one quickly, but I hope I caught most of what there was to catch. - Dank (push to talk) 20:22, 12 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Primer_Conquista_del_Desierto.jpg: what is the given source - a book, an article...?
File:Rosas_arenga_a_los_morenos.jpg: redundant to have both life+70 and life+100 - if the latter is correct the former is superfluous
File:Juan_Manuel_de_Rosas_exiled.JPG needs a US PD tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
It's a book. The original uploader forgot to add more details about it. I fixed the other issues as well. --Lecen (talk) 17:32, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

I think it would be helpful to mention in the lead that when he was born Argentina was a Spanish colony and independence in 1816.
"When the Empire of Brazil began aiding Uruguay against Argentina, Rosas declared war in August 1851," I do not like the construction "When..." which implies the reader already knows what is referred to. How about "In 1851 the Empire of Brazil..."
"his remains were repatriated by the government" "Peronist government" would be more informative.
"Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata" You need to explain the (later) countries this covered.
Agustina López de Osornio is in red - is she notable enough for an article?
"Rosas was schooled at home, as was then common. Later, at age 8, he was enrolled in the finest private school in Buenos Aires." I would say "Rosas was schooled at home until the age of 8, as was common, and he was then enrolled in the finest private school in Buenos Aires."
" The British were defeated in August 1806, but returned in 1807." Maybe " The British were defeated in August 1806, and again when they returned in 1807." (It was an unauthorized expedition, but this is probably not relevant.)
"He delved into the production of salted meat" "delved into" is an odd construction. Maybe "He started a business producing salted meat"
More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 21:05, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi, Dudley. I implemented almost all suggestions you made. Please check my edits. However, I didn't add "Peronist" to the lead because I fear that a careless reader might mistake it for "Perón's government". Nor I added the mention that he was born when Argentina was a Spanish colony, because I couldn't find a way into doing it without losing track of what was truly important. I hope you won't mind. --Lecen (talk) 22:34, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lecen I do not intend to comment further. It is a requirement for FAC that an article is stable, and although I do not know whether it is a formal requirement I would take that to mean that any application to the Guild of Copy Editors has been completed and closed, otherwise editors are reviewing a moving target. It might be better for you to withdraw the nomination and re-nominate once copy editing has been completed.
I also have doubts about the balance of the article. The lead presents him as a wholly unsympathetic figure who is a hero to the Fascist right, and yet you say below that he has been honoured by the left-wing Kirchners. This raises the question of whether the article is based principally on sources biased against him. You have also objected to specifying that he was honoured by the "Peronist" government because a careless reader might mistake it for Peron's government. However the term Peronist is constantly used about Argentina on Wikipedia (including in this article below) and elsewhere - it would be impossible to sensibly discuss the country if the word was banned. You might as well ban Marxist and Keynsian on the same grounds. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:26, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what do you mean by the article being unstable. I requested help from the copy editor guild to improve the article and an editor volunteered to help, which he did for the past few days. The shift between right-wing Fascists and Leftists in terms of Rosas' adoration is discussed in "Legacy" section. About balance as a whole, anyone who wishes to read a single book about Rosas would know whether I was biased or not when writing the article. Heck, even by taking a brief look at his article in the Britannica. Unfortunately, though, you seem unwilling to go beyond the article's lead, which shows why your argument is full of misconceptions. Patience. Thank you for your time. --Lecen (talk) 11:15, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

"Stable" is a term used in the FAC guidelines. It means that an article should only be nominated when it is in its final form, and the only changes during the FAC process should be ones made as a result of the FAC discussion. As to your other point, I have read the lead and the legacy section, and I am confused why leaders of the left-wing Justicialist party wish to honour someone who appears to be the opposite of everything they stand for. I think this needs explaining. Dudley Miles (talk) 14:23, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On Legacy section: "President Carlos Menem decided to repatriate Rosas's remains and take advantage of the occasion to unite the Argentines. Menem believed that if the Argentines could forgive Rosas and his regime, they might do the same regarding the more recent and vividly remembered past." Either you missed it, which is also repeated at the lead, or you didn't read the section as you claim you did. --Lecen (talk) 14:28, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I did read it but forgiving is different from honouring. The South Africans established the Truth and Reconciliation Commission to heal the wounds of the past, but they do not honour Verwoerd and put him on postage stamps. Dudley Miles (talk)

Comment: Certainly history is replete with examples of the process of rehabilitation for various political purposes that include both forgiveness and honor. Closer in time to Rosas: Robert E. Lee has been portrayed as everything from traitor, to freedom fighter, to misguided patriot, to champion of so-called states rights over federalism, by both major US political factions at times (and sometimes simultaneously). Lee has at times appeared on stamps, and even on coinage. As to article stability, there will always be editors tweaking for additions/deletions of material, style preferences or perceived clarity, even after gaining FA status. That this occurred during a FAC need not be construed as a stability issue, as there has been no substantive change to the narrative, which remains reflective of the sources. • Astynax ^talk 16:58, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment -- this has been open a month and a half without achieving consensus to promote, and has been quiet for two weeks, so I'll be archiving it shortly. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 15:00, 16 July 2015 (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) 15:01, 16 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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