Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:FAC)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page.
This star, with one point broken, indicates that an article is a candidate on this page.

Here, we determine which articles are to be featured articles (FAs). FAs exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FA criteria. All editors are welcome to review nominations; please see the review FAQ.

Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review and adding the review to the FAC peer review sidebar. Editors considering their first nomination, and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion, are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor, to assist in the preparation and processing of the nomination. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured article candidates (FAC) process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make efforts to address objections promptly. An article should not be on Featured article candidates and Peer review or Good article nominations at the same time.

The FAC coordinators—Ian Rose, Gog the Mild, Buidhe and Hog Farm—determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FA status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the coordinators determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the coordinators:

  • actionable objections have not been resolved;
  • consensus for promotion has not been reached;
  • insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met; or
  • a nomination is unprepared, after at least one reviewer has suggested it be withdrawn.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support.

Do not use graphics or complex templates on FAC nomination pages. Graphics such as  Done and  Not done slow down the page load time, and complex templates can lead to errors in the FAC archives. For technical reasons, templates that are acceptable are {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}}, used to hide offtopic discussions, and templates such as {{green}} that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples without altering fonts. Other templates such as {{done}}, {{not done}}, {{tq}}, {{tq2}}, and {{xt}}, may be removed.

An editor is allowed to be the sole nominator of only one article at a time, but two nominations may be allowed if the editor is a co-nominator on at least one of them. If a nomination is archived, the nominator(s) should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating. None of the nominators may nominate or co-nominate any article for two weeks unless given leave to do so by a coordinator; if such an article is nominated without asking for leave, a coordinator will decide whether to remove it. A coordinator may exempt from this restriction an archived nomination that attracted no (or minimal) feedback.

Nominations in urgent need of review are listed here. To contact the FAC coordinators, please leave a message on the FAC talk page, or use the {{@FAC}} notification template elsewhere.

A bot will update the article talk page after the article is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FAC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates {{Article history}}.

Table of ContentsThis page: Purge cache

Featured content:

Featured article candidates (FAC)

Featured article review (FAR)

Today's featured article (TFA):

Featured article tools:


How to nominate an article

Nomination procedure

  1. Before nominating an article, ensure that it meets all of the FA criteria and that peer reviews are closed and archived. The featured article toolbox (at right) can help you check some of the criteria.
  2. Place {{subst:FAC}} at the top of the talk page of the nominated article and save the page.
  3. From the FAC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link or the blue "leave comments" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the FAC talk page for assistance.
  4. Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~, and save the page.
  5. Copy this text: {{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}} (substituting Number), and edit this page (i.e., the page you are reading at the moment), pasting the template at the top of the list of candidates. Replace "name of ..." with the name of your nomination. This will transclude the nomination into this page. In the event that the title of the nomination page differs from this format, use the page's title instead.

Commenting, etc[edit]

Commenting, supporting and opposing

Supporting and opposing

  • To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the article nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FAC page). All editors are welcome to review nominations; see the review FAQ for an overview of the review process.
  • To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s), which should be based on a full reading of the text. If you have been a significant contributor to the article before its nomination, please indicate this. A reviewer who specializes in certain areas of the FA criteria should indicate whether the support is applicable to all of the criteria.
  • To oppose a nomination, write *'''Object''' or *'''Oppose''', followed by your reason(s). Each objection must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the objection, a coordinator may disregard it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who object are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their objection has been addressed. To withdraw the objection, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternatively, reviewers may transfer lengthy, resolved commentary to the FAC archive talk page, leaving a link in a note on the FAC archive.
  • To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or objecting, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice.
  • For ease of editing, a reviewer who enters lengthy commentary may create a neutral fourth-level subsection, named either ==== Review by EditorX ==== or ==== Comments by EditorX ==== (do not use third-level or higher section headers). Please do not create subsections for short statements of support or opposition—for these a simple *'''Support''',*'''Oppose''', or *'''Comment''' followed by your statement of opinion, is sufficient. Please do not use a semicolon to bold a subheading; this creates accessibility problems.
  • If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so, either after the reviewer's signature, or by interspersing their responses in the list provided by the reviewer. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, or add graphics to comments from other editors. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.


Fort Southerland[edit]

Nominator(s): Hog Farm Talk 13:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After the Duckport Canal FAC was archived due to inactivity, I was given a waiver of the normal two-week waiting period. So now follows a hopefully more interesting subject - a minor Confederate fortification in southwestern Arkansas. It's short, but I believe it is as comprehensive as can be, although there is some confusion about the original name (spoiler: it's fairly likely that it's on the NRHP under the wrong name). Hog Farm Talk 13:23, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • "after a Union victory in the Little Rock campaign the previous year" - specify that this relates to the American Civil War?
    • Done
  • "and when beginning the Camden Expedition in March, decided to veer to the west and move through Arkadelphia instead" - don't think you need that comma after March (or if you do then you also need one before "when")
    • Removed
  • "the field of fire of the positions were" => "the field of fire of the positions was" (the subject of the verb is "field of fire")
    • Done
  • Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:31, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Now happy to support BTW if you had any spare time and fancied taking a look at this current FAC, your thoughts would be most gratefully received. If not, not to worry. Have a good day -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 20:01, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by Lee Vilenski[edit]

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 08:40, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Media review (MSG17)[edit]

Only two pieces of media in the article: a freely-licensed relevant image of the site as it currently (in relative terms) stands and a location map. Passed. MSG17 (talk) 19:34, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Nominator(s): Constantine 18:17, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about the 23rd Abbasid caliph, who ruled as a puppet of the Buyids. His tenure is generally held to represent the nadir of the caliphate's prestige and power, but the very powerlessness of the office allowed it to regain some stability and end the constant infighting of the Abbasid princes for supremacy. I rewrote the article effectively from scratch during 2021, and it passed GA in May 2021. Al-Muti and his time are not well covered in literature, but I am confident the article is the most complete English-language treatment of the subject in existence, and worthy of FA status. I am looking forward for any and all suggestions for further improvement. Constantine 18:17, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


I will review this soon. AhmadLX-(Wikiposta) 13:58, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments Support from AviationFreak[edit]

I have next to no knowledge of this subject or the context in which he ruled, so I'll only be able to provide prose/formatting input. I'll do my best to follow the article though and if there's anything that I feel is overly unclear I'll make a mention of it.

  • MOS:SOB in "Abbasid caliph"
    • Changed.
  • Suggest the rewording of the "nadir" phrase, or at least the delinking or linking to the specific section. The link to an article that is not obviously related to the prose at first glance is confusing, imo.
    • Indeed, not a wise choice to link it.
  • Suggest linking rubber stamp
    • Done.
  • rapidly declined during his tenure - While the meaning here is obvious, I think something like "sharply declined during his tenure" is more accurate.
    • Changed.
  • Al-Mustakfi and al-Fadl were said to have hated each other sounds WP:WEASEL-ly.
    • Have rephrased a bit.
  • SOB in "Buyid Mu'izz al-Dawla"
    • Changed.
  • In practice, al-Muti was deprived of any meaningful authority, and served chiefly to provide legitimacy to the upstart Buyid regime in the eyes of the Muslim world, in exchange for being allowed to lead a comfortable and secure life in the vast caliphal palaces, the caliph provided legitimacy to the upstart Buyid regime in the eyes of the Muslim world. - I assume this is a typo?
    • Indeed, fixed.
  • reduced his income to about a fourth - Suggest "reduced his income by 75%", appending "of its former size", or making some other modification to make this clearer gramatically.
    • Changed.
  • the construction a series of pavilions - Missing "of".
    • Fixed.
  • troubled relations between caliph and the Buyids - Is this meant to be "the caliph"? I see this same omission of the definite article later on, but "the caliph" also appears. This feels like it should be consistent unless there's something I'm missing.
    • Missing 'the', fixed.
  • Suggest linking chamberlain
    • Done.
  • Muslim refugees from these cities flooded to Baghdad, and clamoured for protection. - Comma is extraneous to my eyes
    • Removed.

That's all I have. Truly stellar prose, particularly in the lede - I had to check a couple links for definitions to understand the context of everything, but the article itself is excellent. Really well done. AviationFreak💬 21:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for taking the time, and for your corrections, AviationFreak. I am glad that despite your unfamiliarity with the topic, you could follow the article. Anything else that might be improved in that area, above and beyond FA criteria? Constantine 16:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For sure! The only other thing I worry a little bit about is readability to a "general public" reader - Evaluating one's own abilities is always difficult, but I feel I have at least an average and likely above-average command of English as native speakers go. Despite this, there were a few terms that I had to Google to be sure of their definitions (e.g., "profligate"). As far as I know there isn't a guideline in the MOS against overly erudite prose and this article is by no means egregious in that respect, but I worry a little that it might be a bit difficult to read comfortably for many English speakers. In any case, this is at most a minor concern that is very much subjective so I am happy to support. AviationFreak💬 17:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2021 British Open[edit]

Nominator(s): Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about the return of the British Open snooker tournament. This is the second nomination, as the first died due to lack of comments. Let me know what you think, as I look forward to any concerns you may have. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 10:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Drive-by comment[edit]

  • Will do a full review later but putting this here largely as a reminder to myself to do so.....
    • "All rounds in the tournament were played after a random draw was made [....] and was drawn" - bit of a grammatical disagreement going on there..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 16:00, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More comments[edit]

  • "first held in 1980 as the British Gold Cup, won by Alex Higgins" => "first held in 1980 as the British Gold Cup, when it was won by Alex Higgins"
  • Is there any background to why the tournament restarted after 17 years?
    • Other than PR stuff? Not really. It shared some similarities to the last version in 2004, but it's very different - different amount of participants, best of fives (rather than nines and elevens), different venue etc. The only thing that remained was a random draw that wasn't even a thing in every event and it's title. I suspect it was just brought back to have another event held in the UK. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:47, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "The event was broadcast by: ITV4" - don't think that colon is needed
  • "At 46 years and 90 days, Higgins became the oldest player to make a maximum break in competition. Higgins was already the oldest player to make one" - this reads a bit weirdly, as the first sentence suggests that he broke someone else's record but then we learn that he actually already held it himself. Maybe reword to something like "Higgins broke his own record as the oldest...." or something?
  • "Mark Allen and Reanne Evans who had been in a relationship between 2005 and 2008, met" - needs a comma after Evans
  • "Hendry won the match 3–2, his first main tournament win since retiring in 2012" - strange to read that he won his first match since retiring - presumably he must have "un-retired" at some point.......?
  • "David Gilbert who had won his first ranking event at the preceding Championship League event reached" => "David Gilbert, who had won his first ranking event at the preceding Championship League event, reached"
  • "A break of 111 in frame three for Williams was his first century break of the event, before Wilson won frame four.[43] Wilson won frame three with a break of 101 to lead the match for the first time" - this reads oddly because we seem to move from frame three, to frame four, then back to frame three.....?
  • Photo captions need full stops
  • Think that's all I got! :-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Now happy to support BTW if you had any spare time and fancied taking a look at this current FAC, your thoughts would be most gratefully received. If not, not to worry. Have a good day -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 13:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shefali Shah[edit]

Nominator(s): ShahidTalk2me 14:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Shefali Shah is an Indian actress who started on Indian television and for much of her career, acted sporadically in films, often playing character roles. Although consistently respected for her talent with awards and praise from critics, it was not until recent years that she gained wide recognition, starting with the internationally acclaimed series Delhi Crime on Netflix. Since then, her career has only been growing, courtesy digital streaming platforms, with substantial leading roles. Having liked her work myself, I thought taking this stub and turning it into something of worth would be a great idea. It was challenging and interesting to find out more about an actor I didn't know much about myself. I'd be grateful to get help from WP peers and promote this article. ShahidTalk2me 14:39, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review (pass)[edit]

Addressed comments

Apologies in advance as I will not be able to conduct a full prose review of this article, but I wanted to try and help with an image review. Hopefully, this will take some of the pressure and work away from the reviewers who normally do this kind of work in the FAC space.

  • File:Shefali2022 (cropped).jpg: The image has WP:ALT text and a clear and defined purpose in the article. I would encourage archiving the source and author links to prevent any future headaches with link rot and death, but this is not a requirement for a FAC. Would it be possible to expand the caption to include the location/event (i.e. a screening of Jalsa)? I believe further context would be beneficial for readers.
  • File:Shefali Shah 2022.jpg: The image needs WP:ALT text. As with the previous image, I'd suggest archiving the source and author links, but again, it is not required. Do we know in what capacity she is promoting the film (i.e. is this a screening, an interview, etc.)? I am only curious because the current wording seems rather vague.
  • I am guessing these are the only usable images for the article?

I hope these comments are helpful. For the infobox image, I only have a question about the caption, and for the second image, I recommend ALT text and I have a question about the caption there as well. I also just have a general question about the amount of images in the article. Once everything has been addressed, I will be more than happy to pass this image review. Aoba47 (talk) 02:00, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Aoba47: Good to hear from you and thank you for stepping in. First image: From my experience with infobox images, mentioning the location is not recommended. I can add it anyway if you like. The second image has been replaced by a newer one - please have a look (alt and stuff has been added). Also, a new image with her huband. All images have informative captions, ALTs and proper info. ShahidTalk2me 10:30, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Where is it recommended to not include the location/event for the infobox image? It seems strange to not provide the full context of an image to a reader in a way that easily accessible. FAs such as Oscar Isaac, Lady Gaga, Katy Perry, and Taylor Swift include this information. In my opinion, it boils down to helping the audience. I do not think a reader should look at an image and question where it was taken. As the infobox currently stands, this image could have been taken anywhere in 2022 and that's an issue in my opinion. That's the reason why I'd include the event for the infobox image and File:Shefali Vipul.jpg.
There is a Personality rights warning for the image of Shah and her husband. Could you explain this for me as I am not fully aware of what this means? File:Photos-Celebs-attend-the-premiere-of-Delhi-Crime-2-0086-1.jpg looks solid to me. It is a shame that there are not earlier pictures of her, but I can understand the difficulty of finding images in the first place and sometimes there is just a gap in what can find and use. Once the issue with the image captions and my question about the personality rights warning are answered, I would be more than happy to pass this image review.
I want to add that I greatly appreciate your work with biographies on Indian actors (such as Dimple Kapadia and Preity Zinta) and it is great to see FA content about subjects outside of the English-speaking world. Aoba47 (talk) 00:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Aoba47: Well, as I said, it's from my experience in my previous FACs :) This was a clear request in my last FAC and I see that Kate Winslet, Michelle Williams, Brie Larson and the likes do not have information of the sort. Having said that, I don't have any problem at all and will be more than happy to provide more information. Please have a look.
The Personality warning has been removed as was the other tag because they're both irrelevant for this version.
Thank you for your kind words, as always. ShahidTalk2me 09:49, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment - yes, I read WP:CAPLENGTH, and indeed, it is recommended to keep the infobox caption short and to the point, so, if you don't mind, I'll keep it as it suggests. If you insist, I'll restore the full caption. :) ShahidTalk2me 12:03, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I will pass this image review. It likely boils down to a matter of personal preference. I was honestly confused by where the infobox image was taken, especially since the background is not in focus, so I would have appreciated more context because it honestly just looks like a candid photo of her walking down a street. The WP:MOS is pretty clear about it though so it should be fine. Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 13:29, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from SNUGGUMS[edit]

  • From a glance, I'll say this: having otherwise empty sections that solely consist of referral links (what you've currently done with "Filmography" and "Accolades") is lazy and uninformative with no accompanying text, which renders them useless. Either add some text or move the links elsewhere and scrap those headings altogether. More comments to follow later. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 12:11, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    @SNUGGUMS: Totally. I'll follow the format of other FAs, where filmography and awards are part of the career section. ShahidTalk2me 13:16, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Now for other parts.....

  • Having "an Indian actress of film, television, and theatre who mostly appears in independent Hindi films" seems rather long for the opening sentence. Maybe cut "of film, television, and theatre"
  • The use of "several" from "several accolades, including a National Film Award, two Filmfare Awards, two Screen Awards, and an Asian Academy Creative Award" is an understatement that implies only 5-10 total, also having this list of awards is redundant when specific ones are mentioned later in the lead.
  • Are you sure husbands and kids are lead-worthy? Tacking that on as the very last sentence makes it come off as a shoe-horned addition. In either case, it reads awkwardly to start a sentence with "Divorced from".
  • The first and third paragraphs from "Early and personal life" are rather short and make the flow of text feel choppy. Either expand on these or merge them with other paragraphs.
  • Under "Early theatre and television work (1990–1996)", you should replace the hyphens in time ranges with dashes like the one used in this very heading per WP:DASH, and its second paragraph uses "she" too much in quick succession. Try to change up the pronouns to avoid monotony.
  • You're missing a citation for "At the 44th Filmfare Awards, she was nominated for the Filmfare Award for Best Supporting Actress and was awarded the Critics Award for Best Actress" from "Breakthrough with Hasratein and Satya (1997–1999)".
  • Within "Intermittent work on stage and screen (2008–2016)", the use of "illegitimate" from "adulterous husband's illegitimate child" gives off a "you're not actually my child" vibe and we'd be better off with something like "child from wedlock" or "child from an affair"
  • Contrary to what the use of "recognised" from "recognised by critics and the media as one of India's finest actresses" implies in the "Artistry and reception" section, being among the "finest" is a personal opinion and not a fact, so let's go with "described", "ranked", "deemed", "praised", or something similar.
  • Continuing from the same section, assuming "women much ahead of her years" is supposed to mean older than Shah, just say that instead. The use of "poor" from "left it due to poor content" also is blatantly subjective.

That's all from me. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:57, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@SNUGGUMS: Thanks so much for taking the time to read the article. My changes can be found in this link. To address each point:
  • The opening sentence has been cut as requested.
  • The parts of the awards has been changed from "several" to "various". Since these are the general functions of the awards and not the categories, I believe it is possible to provide a summary of competitive awards and then give the specifics (like it's done on Kate Winslet, for one).
  • Removed part about the husband.
  • Merged paragraphs from Early life and rewrote parts of it. Now there's one section.
  • Changed pronouns as suggested
  • Dashes applied across the board - thank you for noticing this.
  • Citation added for the award.
  • Part rewritten as follows: "accepts the child her adulterous husband had out of wedlock"
  • Changed "recognised" to "described"
  • Changed to "women older than herself"; changed the other part to "she left it citing poor content", which takes out the implication that this is the writer's opinion and clarifies it's hers.
ShahidTalk2me 10:58, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Comment - award list in lead has been removed as suggested. ShahidTalk2me 11:54, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Almost there: the use of "citing poor content" reads awkwardly, maybe just write "dissatisfied with the content" or "not liking the content" or something similar. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 14:36, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@SNUGGUMS: Great idea! Thank you, done. ShahidTalk2me 17:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You now have my support for the nomination. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:13, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source review – pass[edit]

I will do a general review soon but a source review for now. Version reviewed; spot-checks not included.

  • I suggest archiving the sources using this tool so that you don't have to deal with the headache of dead links in the future.
  • Linking of the publishers/newspapers/magazines is rather random. For sources like The Tribune, it's done consistently for every entry, but then we Hindustan Times, which is linked randomly (not in 1, 2 but in 13, 16). I suggest remaining consistent: either link them all only in their first instances or link them everywhere.
  • Watch out for MOS:QWQ in ref. 6 title.
  • I would remove The Times Group in ref. 12 and 21 (and wherever else I haven't mentioned) since you haven't listed publishers for newspapers elsewhere.
  • The newspaper for ref. 45 is The Indian Express, not Screen. Although Screen (magazine) is owned by the same company, it's not the article's publisher.
  • Ref. 46 - Bollywood Hungama's previous name was IndiaFM, not indiaFM.
  • Ref. 53 - link Screen (magazine) to Screen.
  • WP:SHOUTING in ref. 63.
  • Ref. 76 - I would remove The Sunday Tribune from the title.
  • Gandhi, My Father should be italicised in ref. 78 and 78 titles as per MOS:CONFORMTITLE.
  • Ref. 93-96, 104-108, 111-114, 118, 125-127, 129, 173-176, 178-184, 186-190, 196, 198 - see my point about CONFORMTITLE above.

Mostly formatting issues; sources are all reliable. FrB.TG (talk) 17:59, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@FrB.TG: Thanks so much! Okay - all your comments have been addressed. Tool used as suggested for archives; only the first link of each publication is now linked across the board; MOS:QWQ point fixed; The Times Group removed; IndiaFM capital I applied; SHOUTING removed; redundancies in #76 title removed; CONFORMTITLE has been applied across the board (never heard of this guideline re italics in ref titles). The only one that hasn't been changed is the use of Screen in #45 - the link is actually to the magazine and not the newspaper - in the late 1990s, the link to the magazine was not (as it was later known when it got its own independent address) but Thanks for this meticulous source review. ShahidTalk2me 22:18, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Deja Vu (Olivia Rodrigo song)[edit]

Nominator(s): NØ 11:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about Olivia Rodrigo's song "Deja Vu". Though her popularity exploded with the number-one hit "Drivers License", many critics thought her second single was even better than it. The song also performed strong commercially and debuted at number eight on the Billboard Hot 100, making Rodrigo the first artist in history to debut their first two singles in the top 10. It interpolates a Taylor Swift fan-favorite called "Cruel Summer". I worked on this article a bit earlier in the year and I think it is in a good position with respect to the FA criteria. Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.--NØ 11:11, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review (pass)[edit]

Unfortunately, I will be unable to do a full prose review, but I will still help out by looking through the images.

  • File:Olivia Rodrigo - Deja Vu.png: The image has a clear purpose in the article and a complete WP:FUR. I appreciate the archived source link, and the WP:ALT text is solid.
  • File:Olivia Rodrigo with Dr Fauci 1.png: The image has clear WP:ALT text and the information on the Wikimedia Commons end looks solid to me. I would recommend revising the caption to include the year the photo was taken for full context but that is not an absolute requirement for this image review.
  • Do you think it would be helpful to include an audio sample?

This FAC passes my image review. I do have a minor suggestion for one of the image captions but it is nothing that will hold back my review from passing. I also have a question about including an audio sample, but that is more outside of the realm of an image review. I hope this was helpful and best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 23:52, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you for this. Regarding a sample, I considered it unnecessary for this article as I believe the song's composition is amply described by words. Hope you're having a great weekend.--NØ 04:26, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the response. That makes sense to me. I respect your choice as usage of non-free media should be kept to minimum and you should not force something into an article if there is not a clear and defined need for it. I hope you have a great rest of your weekend as well! Aoba47 (talk) 23:03, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source review (passed)[edit]

  • Sources are reliable
  • Shouldn't Rolling Stone be italicized for ref #6?
  • Some Rolling Stone refs are tagged with |url-access=limited but some are not
  • I believe The New York Times and the Los Angeles Times refs should be tagged with |url-access=limited
  • Spotchecks: 1, 7, 11, 18, 19, 22, 35, 50.
  • Why the quote in ref #5?
  • Out of curiosity, why don't we use {{single chart}} for the Billboard charts in the table? Ippantekina (talk) 02:06, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All addressed. Regarding point 7, Billboard does not seem to maintain a chart history record for Rodrigo yet, which would probably be located here when it gets created.--NØ 02:55, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This source review passes. Ippantekina (talk) 01:53, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Pseud 14[edit]

Article is in great shape overall, a few comments:

  • set in Malibu, California -- I think it should be filmed in Malibu, California
  • on the set lists for her 2022 concert tour Sour Tour, and Glastonbury Festival 2022. -- "tour" and "2022" are a bit repetitive here, perhaps tweak this.
  • He direct messaged Rodrigo suggesting they make music together. – DM is a bit informal, perhaps "he reached out to Rodrigo" or "connected with Rodrigo"
  • a month after "Drivers License" -- was this a month after DL was released? Or a month after working on/writing DL? Perhaps some clarification is needed.
  • eating strawberry ice cream, trading jackets, -- these seems to be WP:OVERLINK
  • ensnarling production -- the source says ensnaring, unless I misunderstood. Perhaps you can simplify for unfamiliar readers since it is not in a direct quotation, per WP:NOTSIMPLE.
  • Changed to "enmeshing". Apologies if this is still too complex and I'd be glad to open up to suggestions.

Great work, I have not read the other editors' comments so apologies if there are repetitions/overlaps. Pseud 14 (talk) 20:01, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much for the review, Pseud 14! Very helpful and there weren't any overlaps. These should be addressed now.--NØ 06:12, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
My concerns have been addressed. Support. Pseud 14 (talk) 14:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Addressed commnets
  • This is likely a dumb question so apologies in advance. Could you clarify what you mean by "retroactive interpolation"? I read this as meaning this interpolation was put in later, but from my understanding, this was something identified in the song later. I'd just like some clarification about this part.
  • What I was trying to convey is the identification. So I've removed this word.
  • To continue with the interpolation bit, was there any commentary or criticism tying this in the larger issues in the music industry (specifically the seemingly rising case of lawsuits around plagiarism in songs like "Shake It Off" and "Dark Horse")? I vaguely remember the retroactive insert of writing credits being a rather big moment so I would think there is more on that. I was thinking of stuff like this source.
  • I don't think I can connect it to any official lawsuits without inserting original research, so I've now mentioned Swift's writing credits on another Sour track instead. The piece in the above link seems to be by a law school student so are you sure its reliable with regards to the FA standard?
  • You are correct. It would not be reliable enough by Wikipedia's standard let alone a FA standard, Apologies for that as I missed that. My primary question still stands. I remember there when the writing credits were added retroactively, there was a discussion about it connected with the state of music and creativity as a whole. Were any of these discussions picked up and addressed by third-party, reliable sources? It could just be a case where it was more so discussed in forums and the like. Aoba47 (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I am not sure the comma is needed here, they did, in his new relationship, but I am uncertain so I wanted to ask you first.
  • For this part, which Rodrigo released as her debut single, I'd say "she released" as Rodrigo is repeated twice in the same sentence and this would be clear in context.
  • I'd link bridge in this part, The song's bridge was influenced, to help readers less familiar with music jargon. I would also link hook later in the article.
  • For Citation 6, the entire title should not be in italics, and I would include a time-stamp to where in the video this information is supported.
  • Since interpolation is linked in the article, it should be linked in the lead as well for consistency.
  • I'd clarify the attribution for these quotes, pretty chimes" and "blown-out electronics", as it is not immediately clear to me.
  • I believe these work best as part of the same sentence, and since these quotes are from different critics (The Independent and The Guardian), I am having a hard time working the critic names into it. Apologies for that.
  • My issue with these quotes is the attribution is not made immediately clear to readers which leaves room for misinterpretation on who is saying what. I have been told in the past to not use quotes without clear attribution in the prose (or they become "ghost quotes" for a lack of a better descriptor). I would be interested to see how other reviewers respond to this point. Aoba47 (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Apologies for beating a dead horse, but I have a question about this part, alleged similarity with "Cruel Summer". The earlier section clearly says the song was influenced by "Cruel Summer", but this section is more coy about it by saying "alleged".
  • Maura Johnston should be linked in the article and in the citation. I would double-check the music critics to make sure you did not miss anyone else.
  • I have a comment about this sentence, Chicago Tribune shared the latter's viewpoint. I'd avoid saying "shared" when it comes to reviews unless the Chicago Tribune critic explicitly tied his review to the Rolling Stone one. Plus, this sentence does not really add anything new for the reader. I'd recommend removing it.
  • The quotation marks in this part, described it as a "'don't know what you're missing' fantasy" that flourishes under thick drums and hurtingly relatable snark, do not cover the full quote.
  • This is more of a clarification question, but I am guessing the music video did not receive a lot of coverage? I must admit that I am rather surprised since it is still one of her earlier singles, but music videos in general seem to be falling out of popularity.
  • I attribute this to Rodrigo releasing the song, music video, and the album preorder on the same day (April Fool's, no less!), which probably took critical attention away from the video.
  • Understandable. Thank you for the clarification. Aoba47 (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I hope this review is helpful. I will read through the article again once everything has been addressed. Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 21:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I am ecstatic you found the time to review this after all! Thanks and I await your reread.--NØ 04:57, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your responses. Apologies for pressing the point, but I was curious about your response to my question about the larger (potential) commentary about the retroactive writing credits. It could have been a case it was more discussed in forums (and less in reliable publications) but I wanted to clarify that point before re-reading the article. I am not 100% sold on the quote issue as I believe attribution is important, but again, I'd be curious on how other reviewers respond to that point. I will re-read the article either tomorrow or on Tuesday at the latest. Aoba47 (talk) 19:49, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I have read through the article a few more times and I could not find anything to comment on further. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. If successful, this would be the second song FA with this title (alongside the Beyoncé song), I believe that would be the first time that happened. It is super minor, but I think that kind of stuff is interesting lol. Aoba47 (talk) 02:57, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Anarchyte[edit]

Sour is a fun album. I'll be happy to have a read over this shortly. Here are a couple of comments to start off:

  • It could be interesting to mention "Deja Vu"'s appearance on the Triple J Hottest 100, 2021. Garnered the #33 spot alongside four other songs from Sour (two placed higher).
  • it heralded Rodrigo's "tru[e] arriv[al]" - can probably paraphrase this to avoid restructuring the tense of the quote. Not much will be lost by losing "truly arrived".

Anarchyte (talk) 14:36, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you so much for taking the time! I've accepted both of these suggestions and am excited for any other comments you may have.--NØ 18:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Regarding Triple J, it's probably more suited next to the rest of the Australian information: "... Australian Recording Industry Association certified it 3× Platinum. It appeared at number 33 on the 2021 Triple J Hottest 100, alongside four other songs from Sour" or something of the like. Anarchyte (talk) 04:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • direct messaged - unless the article intends on making more of a point out of the quote ("I literally DM’d her that second"), this can be replaced with "contacted" or a similar synonym.
  • Rodrigo and Nigro co-wrote the song "Drivers License" - I like that the article provides background on their past work, but if possible, a timeframe for Drivers License would be nice for context. It notes that Drivers License was her debut in January 2021, but then jumps back to August 2020 for Deja Vu.
  • Notes application - very minor detail, but if the article is going to capitalise Notes, do we know if it was Notes (Apple)? Otherwise, if it's not an official name, it can probably be lowercase.
  • It may be interesting to explore the contrast between the original notes version and the final version: "Do you get déjà vu when she's with you?"
  • I think this would make a great addition if there was a critical piece analyzing why this change occurred, but alas there does not seem to be one.
  • I don't see the relevance of Salt Lake City.
  • She chose "Deja Vu" as her second single - personal opinion, but I think the ending of this paragraph might fit better after "On March 29, she revealed its title, "Deja Vu", artwork, and release date" or the MTV news sentence
  • Link Wurlitzer and Juno 60 to their relevant articles.
  • "angry-chanty thing" - unencyclopedic.
  • Now a quote directly attributed to the critic to make it clear this is not in Wikipedia voice.
  • reached the same destination - unsure what this means.
  • On the song - does "Throughout the song" work?
  • as an element that recalled Swift as well - consider "an element reminiscent of Swift as well".

Here are some more comments. Will continue later. Anarchyte (talk) 10:39, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I'll let you get through the rest of the article and complete your review before making further changes so it's not changing too much in between your reads. Regards.--NØ 11:16, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Based on what I've been told in past reviews, you will need some citations for "many of whom perceived it as a strong follow-up to "Drivers License"." as this is a generalised statement.
  • Since the three sentences immediately following this one are a testament to it, I believe we could get away with not putting them here altogether to avoid citation overkill.
  • its similar subject matter - do "their similar subject matter" or "their shared subject matter" work?
  • a likewise illustrious follow-up - cut "likewise".
  • honed - I'm not aware of a definition that meets the context here.
  • "first-ballot hall of fame material" - unclear what this means. Perhaps paraphrase.
  • with Joel on piano - Billy Joel was only named in Composition and the context of "Joel" in Live performances does not encourage someone to make the connection. Should write out his name in full and consider rewording the tour mention to avoid repetition.

That's all from me. Anarchyte (talk) 09:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • One other idea that I'm not set on but just want to share is adding a photo of Ryder to the Music video section. Could be a useful juxtaposition with the photo of Rodrigo earlier in the article. Anarchyte (talk) 10:16, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks a lot for your review, Anarchyte! While I think the Ryder picture taking up two sections is a little too much, I've kept this for now as it complements the music video part quite well. Let me know what you think about how it looks.--NØ 16:22, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IMO the picture is a good addition. All my concerns have been addressed. Support. Anarchyte (talk) 03:17, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by Lee Vilenski[edit]

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

  • producer Dan Nigro; Taylor Swift, Jack Antonoff, and St. Vincent received - I feel like the semi-colon makes this sentence not work. Can we not just say "with". Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • and included it on the set lists for her 2022 Sour Tour and the Glastonbury Festival. - there's a word missing here, as her Tour and festival isn't right Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Not following exactly what you are referring to but added the word "concert" in case that fixes the problem . NØ 16:35, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 08:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

2022 Masters (snooker)[edit]

Nominator(s): User:HurricaneHiggins, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about the 2022 edition of the Masters (snooker). A fantastic event, looking forward to your feedback! Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 12:07, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments Support from Henni147[edit]

Followed this tournament closely myself on TV, so I'm familiar with the topic and would like to contribute to this FAC review.

  • Structure: logical and uniform with other tournament articles. Pass.
  • Tournament ladder: properly formatted and sourced. Haven't checked MOS:ACCESS for screenreaders yet, but since it's the same template as in other articles that have passed the FAC review already, it's probably fine.
  • Final table: properly formatted and sourced, and seems to satisfy MOS:DTT as well. Pass.
  • Century break section: properly sourced and formatting uniform with other tournament articles. Pass.
    • Footnote: I wondered if 26 century breaks are a lot or rather average for recent Masters tournaments. If the information is available, it might be useful to add the century record of the event until then, and by how much it was missed in the 2022 edition.
  • Images: copyright status looks fine for all.
    • Tournament logo needs alt-text and caption.
    • QF and Final images need full stop in the caption.
  • Referencing: inline citations and sources consistently formatted arcoss the page. Pass.
  • Copyright: quick run with Earwig's Copyvio Detector shows no serious violations. Need to check citation of direct quotes, but looks good overall.


  • Lead:
  • Overview:
    • "best-off-11 frames" → maybe link from "best-off" to Playoff format#Best-of formats for readers who are not familiar with this match format.
    • "Superstars Online" → change to "the mobile app Superstar Online", and if there is a Chinese version of the article, use the Template:Interlanguage link. Also, you may check inline-citation [14], it doesn't load for me. However, the required information are covered by [13] already, so you may just drop [14].
      • That's not actually covered by the source that just says it's broadcast there - I don't know enough about the product to say whether you can view it outside of the app. I've not seen a Chinese version of the article, or I would have ILL'ed it. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 08:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • First round:
    • "[...] as he bridged over the pack with the rest." → Link "pack" here or be more explanatory in wording like "pack of reds". Casual readers may not know what it means.
    • Done Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 08:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • "In the decider, Bingham missed a pot on the pink ball" → I think, you can remove the link from "pot" here. It's been added in the first paragraph of the section already.

Content and wording: In general, the prose part is nicely written. Especially the summary section is very informative, rich in variety, and phrased as reader-friendly as a tournament summary can be. Very well done.

  • Lead:
    • Remove The from "The 16 competitors were invited [...]". The players weren't mentioned in the lead previously.
    • "cutoff date" → missing hyphen in "cut-off date" in accordance with Collins Dictionary. Same issue in "Participants" section.
    • "Ding Junhui, who had made 15 consecutive Masters appearances [...]" → This is rather a matter of taste, but I would flip the sub-clauses in order to make them more compact and vary the wording of the paragraph a bit: "Ding Junhui, who dropped to 27th place in the rankings, missed the Masters after 15 consecutive appearances between 2007 and 2021. The only debutant in 2022 was Zhao Xintong, who entered the top 16 for the first time by winning the UK Championship." A similar re-phrasing might brush up the quality of the "Participants" section as well.
      • Yeah, I think I prefer categorising that Ding was previously in the tournament (thus why we should care) and then state why he wasn't competing. I realise we could say that Xintong had entered the first time at the UK was the only debutant, but I feel that "there was just one debutant" is the important part. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Overview:
    • "[...], which were the best of 19 frames played over two sessions." → missing hyphens in "best-of-19". Same issue in the summary sub-sections. Personally, I would also remove "the" for nicer wording, but if that's the convention for snooker articles, it can stay.
    • "The event was simulcast in Hong Kong [...]" → change "The event" to "It" to reduce repetition in the paragraph.
  • Participants:
    • "[...] who were ranked highest in the world rankings after the UK Championship in December 2021." → maybe note the exact cut-off date instead of December 2021.
      • There isn't an exact cutoff date realistically - it's just based on what the scores were after that event concluded. For instance, people were being "confirmed" before the UK even started. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • First round:
    • "That evening, the 2012 champion Neil Robertson, who had lost in the first round in his last two Masters appearances" → change "That evening" to "In the evening session" and "in" to "of" to reduce repetition.
    • "After Higgins made a century break in the first frame [...]" → "had made" (?) I'm no grammar expert, but since the events in the sub-clauses precede the events in the main clauses, my guess is that it has to be past perfect tense here. This issue occurs in multiple sentences.
    • "On the next afternoon" → maybe skip "on" here.
    • "Selby won the 45-minute opening frame and the players traded frames" → Not sure, but since the subject of the two main clauses changes, there might need to be placed a comma before "and" here.
    • "Allen won a scrappy tenth frame" → The term "scrappy" may be too judgemental for an encyclopedic entry and borderline violate WP:Voice. Better use something more neutral like "hard-fought" or "error-filled".

That's it from me so far. I will continue with the QF section, when the article has been updated. The article looks very promising overall, and with the few issues being fixed, I will give my support. Good job. Henni147 (talk) 10:33, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks fair. I'll make necessary changes today. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 07:19, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've worked my way through the above Henni147 - fantastic work, some great suggestions. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:37, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Lee Vilenski: Great. I agree with your comments above, so feel free to keep those parts as they are. I can take a look at the remaining prose sections now and give some comments about content and linking as above. Henni147 (talk) 13:39, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More comments from Henni147:

  • Quarter-finals:
    • According to MOS:EMDASH there should be no spacing around em dashes. Also, MOS:SPARETHEDASH says that there should better be a max of two dashes per sentence to keep the structure clear. My suggestion is: "The quarter-finalists comprised six former champions with O'Sullivan, Williams, Higgins, Robertson, Trump and Selby,[49] and two former runners-up—Hawkins, who lost to O'Sullivan in 2016, [...]"
    • Maybe also add "comprised six former Masters champions" to make clear what kind of champions we're talking about.
    • "Robertson noted the difficulty of competing at the Masters against O'Sullivan, commenting" → add a colon after "commenting".
  • General:
    • This is a matter of taste, but I prefer to call players with their full name at their first mentioning in each round. As a long-time snooker follower I am familiar with the players, but casual readers may not, so it might be helpful to read their full name once per section (especially with family names like Wilson, which multiple players share).
    • According to MOS:LINKONCE, links should ideally be inserted at their first occurance in the article body. So you may remove the links from "red ball" in the QF section as well as "snooker" in the SF section, and link them at their first appearance in the second to last paragraph of the first round: "[...], as Trump required a snooker with one red remaining. However, Allen failed to escape from a snooker and went in-off, [...]"

Yeah, that's actually it. I really liked to read the second part of the prose. The direct quotes were nicely selected and the "Final" section was very informative. Didn't realize that Hawkins had lost all his Triple Crown finals until now. I give my support for FAC now. Great job! Henni147 (talk) 15:14, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Lake Street Transfer station[edit]

Nominator(s): – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about a double-decker elevated rail station. Chicago is a city (in)famous for keeping most of its rapid transit above-ground, and this was particularly the case before the 1940s and 1950s, when it didn't have any subways. A particularly striking example of this "L"-mania, coming about due to the competing rail lines of the 1890s, was when two lines, the Metropolitan and Lake Street Elevateds, crossed each other, making the Metropolitan have to cross over the Lake Street. This is the article about the station at that crossing, and the tracks surrounding it and the circumstances that led to its demise and replacement by a subway. This is my first time writing an article about transit despite being a lifelong railfan, but from what I understand I'll ping Lost on Belmont, Kew Gardens 613, and ZKang123 (the last of whom gave me advice to which I am indebted) as particularly appropriate prospective reviewers of this article. If this works out, I hope to also get a Four Award out of this. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 02:35, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Steelkamp

  • I'm not a fan of the first sentence of the lead. You have to read all the way to the end of it to find out what city the station is in. The railroads are quite wordy so I think this sentence would benefit from being split into two.
  • Milwaukee–Dearborn subway uses lowercase subway, but this article uses uppercase Subway. Is there a reason for this?
  • There is an inconsistency between the lead and body as to whether "the Subway" has the s capitalised or not.
  • I know it can be hard to make maps look good, but File:Laketransfercontext.svg is quite ugly. Could you ask for someone at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab to make a better map? It also lacks labels in the actual image. Maybe if labels were added to the image, the caption wouldn't need to be quite so long.
    • @Steelkamp: I added the lakeshore and river to the map to put some geographic context to everything, hopefully that doesn't make it worse. I've also considered making labels in the image, but I'm not sure to what extent that would leave visually-impaired persons unable to receive information from the caption. Granted, I doubt such persons would use the map directly anyway, but perhaps it saves on the alt text. I also think it's best practice to leave keys and legends outside of the map proper, but could be wrong on that. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 01:45, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The infobox image lacks alt text.
  • First mention of Chicago "L" in the body can be linked.
  • What's up with the station name in all capitals in the infobox? Also, what does 1700W 200N mean?

More to come. Steelkamp (talk) 02:44, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "between California and the Market Street Terminal." This should be changed to California station to avoid confusion with the state. Steelkamp (talk) 10:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Done in most places, not done in a few places where context should be sufficient as explained in the edit summary. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 12:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "The station house at California in 2011". Same thing. Steelkamp (talk) 10:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • Not done, as "station house at California station" is redundant, awkward, and unneeded given other context clues in the articles and my edits. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 12:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Does "Congress Superhighway" need to be capitalised? Steelkamp (talk) 10:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Skip-stop on the Chicago "L" began as an experiment on the Lake Street Elevated on April 5, 1948; stations in between Pulaski and the Loop, exclusive, became either "A" or "B" stations and were serviced by respective "A" or "B" trains during weekdays. Despite being located in this area, Lake Street Transfer was exempt from this system and continued to be serviced by all Lake Street Elevated trains." I suggest rewording this to "When skip-stop trains began on the Lake Street Elevated on April 5, 1948, Lake Street Transfer was the only station between Pulaski and the Loop to be serviced by all trains." Steelkamp (talk) 10:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'll have to disagree with you on this part. I want to express that a) skip-stop on the entire system began on the Lake Street "L" (and then, implicitly, spread to other lines), and b) what "skip-stop" actually means (i.e., "A" trains and "B" trains). Perhaps a better wording is possible, however. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 12:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • What makes reliable? Steelkamp (talk) 10:34, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Elias / Your Power

I know nothing about trains ... except for the fact that they get things moving I suppose ... so consider this a prose review from a beginner POV. Comments to come this weekend Face-smile.svg ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..."
06:42, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

TV (song)[edit]

Nominator(s): ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..."
10:09, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

At this point, everyone and their grandma knows about Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard. I think many of us have a few hot takes surrounding the situation; Billie Eilish seems to be one of those people. She thinks that the explosive media popularity around the trial was extremely unjustified - so much so that she wrote a whole line in a song, "TV", comparing it to the (in her view) relatively silent online reaction about the Dobbs draft leak.

But "TV" is more than just an ode to politics or publicized celebrity drama. It is also an exploration of disillusionment and numbness, about trying to distract yourself as the world around you crumbles to dust.

I've been on a spree of improving Billie Eilish articles lately. Here is the second one I am taking to FAC. This one is about a recently released song, but it was surprised-released and has fallen off major charts that the article shall hopefully remain stable for many months. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..."
10:09, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review (pass)[edit]

  • File:BillieEilishO2160622 (44 of 45) (52152978743) (cropped).jpg: The image has appropriate ALT text and a clear purpose in the article. I would include the year that the photo was taken to the caption to provide the full context to readers. I would also archive the source and author links for this image to avoid any potential headaches in the future with link rot and death. However, to be absolutely clear, neither of these two points are required for a FAC so that does not hold up this image review. They are more suggestions than requirements.
  • This is outside the scope of an image review, but I was curious if there were any negative reviews of the song?

This passes my image review. I did have two brief suggestions on how to improve the only image used in the article, and I did have a single prose question about the reviews as I was somewhat surprised about there being apparently no negative or even mixed reviews to this song. Aoba47 (talk) 15:50, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi @Aoba47! Thank you for all the diligent work you do at FAC, and ofc thank you for this review in particular. The image caption has been tweaked. I tried including archive links for the source, but the image isn't showing up in the archived version for some reason. Will get to it eventually. Though I suppose the green verified template on the file's licensing section on Commons should do enough to assuage worries wrt source validity?"
About the reviews - I cannot find one single negative review about the song. TBH there were few full-fledged reviews of the song - I think the Nylon and Guardian articles come the closest to such - but there were enough articles that included opinions about "TV" that there was an emerging, seemingly unanimous consensus about the song's quality. Many people liked it because of the lyrics; no one said anything remotely critical. A reception section does not necessarily have to include criticism or negativity to be considered neutral and balanced, after all Face-smile.svg Once again thank you for the comments! ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..."
04:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for your responses. There should not be any issues with the images. Archiving the source and author link is more of a suggestion than a requirement. I was only curious if there were any mixed or negative reviews because when I read the article, I must admit that I did find some things I did not enjoy about the song, but that is just my personal opinion. I did not mean to imply that the article was not comprehensive or the like. It is likely the case that the music critics who did cover the song had positive reviews for it. I'd also imagine that some critics would feel uncomfortable posting a negative review about this song given its topic or fear any potential blowback for critiquing a popular artist. Anyway, apologies for rambling and best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 05:12, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Aoba47 - those are completely fair assessments :) glad we're on the same page here ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ 💬 "What did I tell you?"
📝 "Don't get complacent..."
05:21, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • Maybe wikilink Manchester both times it is used. As Eilish is American, people might not initially make the connection with the city in the UK
  • "speaking about writing the lyrics after the first verse in hindsight" - should this be "speaking in hindsight about writing the lyrics after the first verse"?
  • "12 days later" => "Twelve days later"
  • "She sings about "sinking in the sofa while we all betray each other,"" - think that comma should be outside the quote marks
    • Done all four :)
  • "In particular, entertainment columnists for the Manila Bulletin" - multiple columnists from the same paper?
    • Most likely - the article's byline says "Manila Bulletin Entertainment", and if there was a single author I think they would have spelled it out.
  • Think that's all I got! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:43, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 06:03, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Katana Zero[edit]

Nominator(s): JOEBRO64 13:45, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Second time's the charm, I guess. Since the last FAC unfortunately got virtually no input, I'll repeat what I said last time: One of my favorite video games of the last few years has been this 2019 indie platformer, which blends the tone and themes of neo-noir cinema with fast-paced, insanely difficult side-scrolling gameplay and a killer synthwave soundtrack. Katana Zero was an intense labor of love for its creator Justin Stander, who developed the game almost entirely by himself over the course of six years. It was delayed repeatedly and switched publishers at one point, but was finally released in April 2019 to strong sales and rave reviews.

I've spent a substantial amount of time since last year building this up from a mere stub to a fully comprehensive good article and I believe that it meets the criteria to earn a bronze star. Hope you enjoy the article! JOEBRO64 13:45, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review (pass)[edit]

  • File:Katana Zero cover.png: It has appropriate ALT text and a clear and defined purpose in the article. I would recommend archiving the source link to avoid any potential headaches with link rot and death but that is not required for FACs.
  • File:Katana Zero Gameplay.gif: It has appropriate ALT text and a clear and defined purpose in the article. The FUR is solid to me and I appreciate the addition of a GIF in this context. As I have already said above, I would recommend archiving the source link, but I am not sure if a GIF can be archived or how that really works.
  • File:Katana Zero Dialogue Tree.jpg: It has appropriate ALT text and a clear and defined purpose in the article. As I have already suggested twice above, I'd recommend archiving the source link, but none of this is required for FACs. My primary concern with this image is the size. The image is rather small and the text, which is the purpose for its inclusion, is not clear in the article. When I look at the image in the article, I cannot read the text and it is honestly difficult to make it out. Would there be a way to include a larger picture?

I hope this image review is helpful. Apologies in advance as I will not be able to do a full review, but I thought I should at least help a little. My only concern is the size of the Dialogue Tree screenshot, but everything else checks out to me. I hope you are having a great week so far. Aoba47 (talk) 02:38, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aoba47, thanks for the review. I've archived all three images. As for the third's size, its primary purpose is to illustrate the dialogue tree system and use of color, rather than the text. I personally think both the dialogue tree and use of color are clear within the image and reading the text itself is not necessary. JOEBRO64 18:04, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you for the response. I am still uncertain, but I do appreciate and understand your rationale. This passes my image review. Best of luck with your FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 19:43, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support Comments by DWB[edit]

First off, it seems to be a thorough and well researched article which is what I like to see. Now for all the complaints I have!

  • "When Zero uses precognition to mock V, he shoots Al-Qasim." Who is the one shooting Al-Qasim?
  • "In the present, Snow informs her superior of V's death, the Dragon contemplates a board of evidence, and Comedy and Tragedy taunt the girl as she cowers in fear." I can see in the plot the Girl disappears and then she is here, so is this saying that the Girl is a prisoner? Because some of the events seem to be hallucinations it's confusing what is going on here.
    • So the game doesn't actually explain where she is or what happened to her—the credits end with a short scene of Comedy and Tragedy taunting her in a dark room. The game heavily implies that the girl actually isn't real and is only a manifestation of Zero's last shreds of innocence, but unfortunately for a Wikipedia plot summary never outright says it (the closest it comes is when the landlady denies she existed) and I didn't come across any reliable sources that mention the implication. JOEBRO64 14:35, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Are there any portals to add at the bottom of the article such as 2010s, video games, etc. to interlink with relevant projects?
    • I've added the video games and 2010s portals. I wasn't sure if there were any else that would fit; I almost did the USA one since Stander's American but he spent a substantial amount of the development working in Canada, so I wasn't sure if either would fit. JOEBRO64 14:35, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I've done some minor copy editing, if there wasn't a four month wait on the Guild I would say it could maybe use an overall copy edit. The lead for instance seemed quite repetitive about mentioning the time manipulation/precognition so I've tried to make that flow a little better and remove the short sentences.
    • I did some additional copyediting around the article to alleviate any instances of repetition/verbosity I noticed. JOEBRO64 13:35, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Refs #14, #27, #31, #33, #40, #41, and #42 do not appear to be archived
  • Same for #21, #25, and #44. I know some of these are YouTube but occasionally they can be archived.
  • I prefer text to videos, but I assume for a small indie game it's hard to get all of the information in print.
  • Overall it looks fine, it sounds like an interesting game that I might give a try. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 11:47, 17 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Good job JoeBro, good luck with the rest of your nomination. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 14:26, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by Blue Pumpkin Pie[edit]

  • Lead

The summarization in the Lead suggests Zero is a Katana-wielding Assassin. But in the Plot, the description is different.

Neither contradicts one another. The fact he's a katana-wielding assassin is established in the Gameplay, the Plot doesn't contradict this—it just adds that he's a war veteran. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Plot
  • "The psychiatrist supplies him with a drug as treatment, but their relationship becomes strained as Zero deviates from assigned objectives and learns the psychiatrist is lying about the reasoning behind the assassinations." Is this sentence necessary so early in the plot? It seems to make the Plot more awkward because, in the following paragraph, it suggests that the Psychiatrist is still an ally to Zero.
  • Zero continuing to work for the psychiatrist doesn't contradict the fact their relationship is strained. I personally think it's important to establish that the psychiatrist and Zero's relationship becomes strained early—it happens regardless, but when it happens depends on the player's choices. I worded it in a way to make it clear that it doesn't happen immediately. If there's any other problems, just let me know. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "At his apartment, the girl gives Zero a videotape that contains a recording of V, a Russian mobster, torturing and killing Zero's neighbors." Is this detail relevant to the Plot?
  • Yeah—it's the story's main introduction to V, the moment he becomes relevant. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "The next morning, V picks up Zero in his limousine. V seeks to recreate Chronos, a drug the New Mecca government gave to soldiers during the Cromag War, and offers to partner with Zero, who refuses. Zero tracks V to an abandoned film studio but is interrupted by the swordswoman Snow, who threatens Zero and leaves with V." Why does Zero need to track down V if he was just in his limousine? is it even necessary to point out that he's being picked up in a limousine? When Snow leaves with V, was it an escape? Or did they leave peacefully with Zero heeding the warning?
  • I've condensed this and made it clearer. If it needs any more work let me know. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Zero hallucinates Comedy and Tragedy, two men wearing theater masks who taunt him about impending disaster in his future." The placement of this plot point is awkward. Was it at that point that he started to hallucinate about two individuals known as Tragedy and Comedy? Or is this something that is happening throughout the story? '
  • This is the first time he hallucinates them. I've made the transition smoother. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Zero acquires a tape cassette but is cornered by the police. Comedy and Tragedy ask whether Zero wants to embody life or death. If he chooses life, the police kill Zero; if he chooses death, the police die, and Zero escapes, but Comedy and Tragedy warn that his actions will have consequences for others." Is this relevant to the main story? The current Plot doesn't make any note of it.
  • No, it was added by someone else. I've removed it. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "A caller directs Zero to a training facility for NULLs, New Mecca's Chronos-enhanced soldiers." Another distractingly vague sentence. Is this caller anonymous? if they are not anonymous, who are they?
  • The caller is anonymous. It's implied to be the Dragon but it isn't explicitly stated. I've made it slightly clearer. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Zero discovers his psychiatrist preparing to flee the city and kills him." Is there a reason why he killed him?
  • Yeah, Zero's fed up with the psychiatrist's lies and takes out his rage on the psychiatrist. I've made this clear. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "He returns to his apartment but finds it burglarized and the girl missing. The landlady tells investigating police that no children lived in the building. When questioned, Zero flees and the police give chase." So are the police searching for the child? the events are confusing here.
    • The police are investigating the burglary—I've clarified it. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think there are too many small details that don't help the overall understandability of the story, and some key events or details seem to be missing. Just did a little digging and it seems like the character "the Dragon" isn't even referred to as the Dragon as much as the Plot implies, and goes by the name "Fifteen". I'm personally not sure it meets 1a. Might need a full rewrite In my opinion.
    • There's nothing missing that's not relevant to the plot—the plot is pretty vague, with a lot of foreshadowing and events left up to interpretation. "Fifteen" is the Dragon's "real" name but that's not relevant to the plot. There's no need for a full rewrite. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Development
  • The development has a lot of quotes that I don't think are necessary to explain the development process of the game. I say it borders on failing criteria FAC 1f (compliant with Wikipedia's copyright policy). I would reduce the number of quotes to only keeping the most necessary ones. A lot of the quoting structure is odd, I have never seen it the way it's done here, and MOS:QUOTE doesn't make much mention of the quoting style.
  • I've gone through and paraphrased all the quotes that aren't necessary. JOEBRO64 13:16, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • He worked on multiple projects alongside it to "hedge my bets... [so] I didn't spend the last five years of my life only working on one game that flopped." This reads very awkwardly in my opinion. The sentence mixes first and third-person perspectives with awkward quoting. I'm not sure it's necessary to do a full word-for-word quote.
  • Stander "wanted to make something more narratively-driven, that paid homage to all my favorite storytelling tropes and expanded on them in my own way... That was definitely a big part of [Katana Zero]: I had a story I wanted to tell." Same issue, an awkward mix of perspective writing. And once again, not sure if it's necessary to fully quote him in the prose to understand what he's saying.
  • "Stander focused on attention to detail and said that adding a single mechanic, such as a gun turret, "would mean tinkering with 20 different systems, like lighting and replay, to make it all cohesive". The quote isn't bad, but I would recommend sticking with summarizing the details or quoting Stander properly.
  • Reception
  • I find it odd that the Review prioritizes the order of visuals, audio, writing, and gameplay last. Considering it's a video "game", the gameplay should be highlighted much closer to the top.
  • I personally don't see a problem with it—it's a structure I've used in most of my FAs, including the recently-promoted Donkey Kong Country. I tend to structure reception sections as presentation → gameplay. Presentation is usually the first things reviews focus on, before getting into how the game plays. JOEBRO64 13:25, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • In my opinion, the Sales information belongs in the "Reception" section. Release information seems to be only about recording the different platforms and the timeline of the releases.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 08:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I prefer to group sales with release as it's more relevant in the context of its release than whether critics liked it or not. It's similar to how film articles categorize the box office performance in the Release section rather than Reception. Again, I did this at Donkey Kong Country, which was recently promoted to FA. JOEBRO64 13:25, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Blue Pumpkin Pie: thank you for the thorough review! I've responded to all points above. JOEBRO64 13:25, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@TheJoebro64: So I watched some cutscenes of the story to get a better idea of the pacing of the Plot and made edits to help it flow better. I classified it as bold edits, so it is no problem if they all get reverted. I do have one question about the plot. "Zero is assigned to kill Al-Qasim, a wealthy industrialist, but is captured when he encounters V and his men storming Al-Qasim's mansion." The opening sentence for the third paragraph has no transition or connection from the previous paragraph. Was this the very next assignment Zero has following his hallucinations? Or were there other assignments in between?

I won't push for sales to be in Reception, nor the organization of the Reception having gameplay last.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 23:24, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Blue Pumpkin Pie: Yeah, it's the very next assignment, the day after Zero hallucinates. JOEBRO64 15:36, 24 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Prince Octavius of Great Britain[edit]

Nominator(s): Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about Prince Octavius of Great Britain, the thirteenth child of George III. His death deeply affected the King and Queen, and the former even had hallucinations of the prince in his later years. Despite the article's short length, I believe the prose and citations are good enough to constitute a featueed article. Past examples of featured articles about a royal prince who died young are Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil and Pedro Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:10, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • "husband of his first cousin twice-removed, for whom the Earl of Hertford, Lord Chamberlain, stood proxy" - did the Earl stand proxy for the husband or for the first cousin twice-removed? Wording is ambiguous

Done: now reads: "His godparents were the Duke of Brunswick-Wolfenbüttel (husband of his first cousin twice-removed), for whom the Earl of Hertford, Lord Chamberlain, stood proxy; the Duke of Mecklenburg (his first cousin once-removed), for whom the Earl of Ashburnham, Groom of the Stole, stood proxy; and the Duchess of Saxe-Weimar-Eisenach (wife of his sixth cousin), for whom Alicia Wyndham, Countess of Egremont and Lady of the Bedchamber to Queen Charlotte, was proxy." Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:25, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "other events organized" - article is about a British topic so British spelling should be used per WP:TIES and therefore the last word should be "organised"

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:13, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "Another witness wrote George and Charlotte" => "Another witness wrote that George and Charlotte"

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:14, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "and went with her and their siblings, Elizabeth and Edward to" => "and went with her and their siblings, Elizabeth and Edward, to"

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:18, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:15, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "Biographer John Watkins added Octavius was" => "Biographer John Watkins added that Octavius was"

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:15, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "The prince's death had a marked effect, both mentally and physically on Queen Charlotte" => "The prince's death had a marked effect, both mentally and physically, on Queen Charlotte"

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 20:17, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:20, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • File:Octavius_of_Great_Britain_-_West_1783.jpg needs a US tag. Ditto File:The_Apotheosis_of_Prince_Octavius_-_West_1783.jpg. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:55, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Done Unlimitedlead (talk) 11:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

How do I tag an image? Do I just go over to the Commons page to do so? Unlimitedlead (talk) 01:24, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, just edit the image description page at Commons. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:05, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Alright, I have just done so. Unlimitedlead (talk) 02:09, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It doesn't seem that the first of those two has been tagged? Nikkimaria (talk) 02:46, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi, the second image was tagged; I just tagged the lead image. Thank you for the feedback. Do you have anything other suggestions for this nomination? Unlimitedlead (talk) 10:46, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Not at this time. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:54, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt[edit]

I would suggest Janice Hadlow's book: A Royal Experiment: The Private Life of King George III as containing useful information about the death of the prince, that I don't see here. Since the article is (necessarily, perhaps) short, could more be said about the childrearing techniques of George and Charlotte, to the extent that the prince would have experienced them?--Wehwalt (talk) 15:13, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you kindly for your source recommendation. It was flooded with useful tidbits on Octavius's life and the royal court during that time period. I have gone ahead and included such references. Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:33, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by Johnbod[edit]

  • I have made some edits. Watch out for false title in British English.
  • He died 6 days after his smallpox innoculation, some 15 years before Jenner introduced the much safer cowpox innoculation. You say "Octavius has the distinction of being the last member of the British royal family to contract smallpox", presumably contracted from the innoculation, but don't give this clearly as the cause of death. Was the innoculation blamed? Did the death have an effect on the popularity of the technique? More on this would be good - the sources must say something, one would think.
  • I agree that "more be said about the childrearing techniques of George and Charlotte". Johnbod (talk) 02:33, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you for your comments. I will try to resolve said issues by tonight. Unlimitedlead (talk) 10:49, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Alright, I have added information and citations regarding the circumstances of Octavius's death. Additionally, I expanded on the techniques George III and Queen Charlotte used to raise their children, including several anecdotes from members of the royal court. I hope this has taken care of everything; hopefully, this article is now ready for FA status. If not, please let me know what else I can do. Thank you! Unlimitedlead (talk) 19:12, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

1973–74 Gillingham F.C. season[edit]

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

After the successful promotion of 1963–64, 1985–86, 1986–87, 1987–88, 1988–89, 1989–90, 1990–91, 1991–92, 1992–93, 1993–94, 1994–95, 1995–96, 1996–97, 1997–98, 1998–99, 1999–2000 and 2000–01, here's yet another season from the annals of Gillingham F.C. history. With this one we step back to the sensational seventies and only the second time in club history that Gillingham got promoted from one division of the Football League to another. All feedback, as ever, most gratefully received..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:56, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review (pass)[edit]

File:Gresty Road - - 1493956.jpg and File:Priestfield1.jpg are appropriately licensed and have appropriate ALT text. I recommend archiving the source and author links for the first image to avoid any potential future headaches with link rot and death, but that is not a requirement for a FAC/FA. I will assume good faith that the second image was taken by the uploader. Aoba47 (talk) 23:54, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Aoba47: it absolutely was. I took that picture with the first camera I ever owned! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Very nice! Thank you for the clarification. Aoba47 (talk) 13:27, 12 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments Support from mujinga[edit]

Not much to say, the article seems in decent shape. Strange they had own goals two weeks in a row!

  • There are 15 "but"s in the whole article which is arguably too much. There are four in the first paragraph of the lead and that is too many I'd say.
  • Per MOS:ORDINAL 2nd and 7th could be second and seventh -- Mujinga (talk) 09:47, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Mujinga: - all addressed bar one point - the only "2nd" I could find was not in prose but in the infobox, is that the one you meant? Existing FAs such as 1920–21 Cardiff City F.C. season and 1921–22 Cardiff City F.C. season use numerics there, and IMO if Gillingham had finished 22nd rather than 2nd it would look odd to have "Twenty-second" written in full in that parameter.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:02, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
      Yeah I know what you mean, just wanted to query it. For me the 2nd in the infobox is ok. Sorry I also forgot to mention 9th at "In the 1972–73 season, Gillingham had finished 9th out of 24 teams in the Fourth Division". Good work on the buts! Mujinga (talk) 10:29, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments Support from Yolo4A4Lo[edit]

This look good already.

  • There are tables that still need a caption, based on MOS:TABLECAPTION. You could use Template:Screen reader-only if you find making them visible is redundant.
  • "They remained in the top three and a victory over Colchester United on 20 April" Needs a comma after "three"
  • "Gillingham were again top of the table, however defeat to Peterborough United meant that their opponents overtook them to win the championship of the division." Change "however" to "but". See here
  • "Redevelopment work took place at the club's home ground, Priestfield Stadium, between seasons..." -> Suggestion to change it into "Redevelopment work took place between seasons at the club's home ground, Priestfield Stadium,..."
    • @Yolo4A4Lo: - am I going mad? I can't see this sentence anywhere in the article.....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • I'm sorry, it seems I confused two articles. I was comparing it with other articles from the season series since I'm not familiar with it. My bad. - Yolo4A4Lo (talk) 10:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "due to injuries sustained in pre-season" is pretty long, so it needs a comma.
  • "a Gillingham team" shouldn't it be "the team"?
  • "only the second". Remove "only", it's redundant.
  • "Although Gillingham lost their next game 2–0 away to Stockport County, they remained behind the league leaders only on goal average." -> "Gillingham remained behind the league leaders only on goal average despite losing in their next game 2–0 away to Stockport County." Suggestion to avoid repeating "although"
  • "they were top of the Fourth Division table," I suppose better turn that into full stop to reduce "but" after that.
  • "behind second-placed Gillingham" Remove "second-placed", it's just stated in the previous sentence they closed March in second place.
  • "in the first round, but were beaten" Remove comma.

If you like my comments, could you please take a look at FAC of Yuzuru Hanyu Olympic seasons. You reviewed the sister article List of career achievements by Yuzuru Hanyu last year. I would really appreciate it if you do. Good luck for your FAC! - Yolo4A4Lo (talk) 10:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

All done! Many thanks for your review! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by Lee Vilenski[edit]

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Securitas depot robbery[edit]

Nominator(s): Mujinga (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

During the COVID lockdown, I pursued an interest in the history of heists which resulted in a featured list amongst other things. A loose end was always the page for the Securitas depot robbery since I wanted to improve this account of one of the world's largest cash robberies: of the almost £53 million stolen banknotes, around £32 million has never been recovered. The history of the gang which did the heist is unique, taking in crashed sports cars, mixed martial arts and various locations in Kent, UK. I took it to Good article in June 2022 and I then put it to peer review where unfortunately it did not receive comments. This is my second FA nomination (after Olive Morris) and I hope the discussion will be as fruitful as first time round. Thanks for all constructive comments. Mujinga (talk) 10:08, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:59, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for that Nikkimaria! Mujinga (talk) 13:06, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support. It is well-written, seems comprehensive and well sourced. John (talk) 14:49, 11 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Harry[edit]

Your interest in heists overlaps with my interest in policing and police use of firearms!

  • Personally, I dislike long lists of locations in prose like "Tonbridge, Kent, England" and I don't think the county is especially helpful to readers unfamiliar with English geography. I would go with "Tonbridge, Kent, in south-eastern England" but that's mostly personal preference.
  • I feel we could do with the year in the opening sentence just for context. The reader has to read a little bit before they find out when the event occurred.
  • "turned queen's evidence" strikes me as informal and not necessarily clear to an international audience; "testified" or "gave evidence" might be better.
  • who he realised were criminals impersonating police officers I believe that should be whom though I won't press the point but ... it took him that long? The timeline here could do with some copy editing. I'd suggest either spelling out at the beginning that the unmarked police car was the robbers and omitting the "realisation", or omitting the description of "hostage-taking car".
  • meticulously planned by organised crime → by *an* organised crime *group*?

I made a few tweaks as I went through but it looks in good shape. Can't see anything that would rule out promotion. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:08, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "Tonbridge, Kent, England" does seem unnecessary with UK in the same sentence, so removed England
  • Moved up 2006 as suggested.
  • In the lead, agreed it isn't very clear so changed
  • Yes I see what you mean, I've rephrased
  • Organised crime reads ok to me, or is it an americanism?
  • Thanks for the tweaks, I've re-added the inside job link in the text as that seems important. For an international audience I do think some of the legal terms you de-linked should be linked, such as conspiracy, handling stolen goods, life sentences and acquitted (plus HM Prison Belmarsh as well actually). But happy to see what other editors think on that.
  • Much obliged for the comments! Mujinga (talk) 11:39, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I would say those terms are mostly self-explanatory and, although the terminology varies by jurisdiction, the concepts will be familiar to most people. And Belmarsh was linked twice. But none of those are hills I'm willing to die on and if that's the worst I can say about an FA candidate, it must be about there. Happy to support. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:53, 20 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Oh I didn't realise Belmarsh was a duplink, that makes sense then - switched to first mention. Cheers for the support! As an aside, I managed to obtain a copy of Ripe for the Picking: The Inside Story of the Northern Bank Robbery which (as we discussed at the GA review) will help beef up that article. Mujinga (talk) 13:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Glad you haven't lost interest in that one; I remember the GA review. I've often thought about expanding an attempted heist, the Millennium Dome raid, to GA/FA level. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:23, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Oh yes you should! The article could definitely do with some attention. Mujinga (talk) 20:15, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Older nominations[edit]

American services and supply in the Siegfried Line campaign[edit]

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:53, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Second nomination. I previously nominated it back in April, but it attracted no reviews, and I asked for it to be closed to make way for another article. I hope things will go better this time. This article is about American services and supply in the Siegfried Line campaign. This campaign was part of the campaign that is officially called "Rhineland" and went from September to December 1945. In the first decades after the war, the strategy, operations and logistics of the campaign were controversial, and many of the issues covered by the article still exercise amateur armchair historians today: why was ammunition in short supply? Was the Sherman tank the better available? Why were there so many cases of trench foot and frostbite? Why did these crises occur when the US Army was the best equipped and supplied in the world? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:53, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support from Iazyges[edit]

Comments from JennyOz[edit]

Got here. Non-milhist member comments...


  • maybe mention France Belgium somewhere
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • failure to order adequate quantities in the mistaken belief that the war would end before it was required - before they were required
    Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • invasion of Normandy on D-Day, - add date, this section mentions dates but no years - doesn't even "mention the war"
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Normandy lodgment area in November - previous year?
    Changed to "two months later"
  • AS American forces confronted - As
    Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • confronted the defences of the - defenses
    Good catch. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Supply depots

  • develop a maintenance area in the vicinity of Rennes, Vitré, Laval, Segré and Châteaubriant - is this just one maintenance area in vicinity of all those places or one in each?
    One large, sprawling maintenance area. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • but Eisenhower directed that a maintenance area should not be established around Paris - why?
    He wanted to use it as a rest area for combat troops. Added a bit more about this. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • around Antwerp, but the - add in Belgium seeing diff country now
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • but the British would not agree to this - why?
    Source doesn't say, but I'm fairly certain that (1) the area had been allocated to the British and they already had plans for its use (2) intermingling of base units would create problems of transportation and coordination. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This prompted in a halt to shipments to - "in" intentional?
    Stray word. Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • depots in Seine and Oise Base Sections - wlink Oise
    Not sure. Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Major disruption of the supply system was causes by - caused by
    Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Representatives from the Army Service Forces studied - add (ASF)
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Base Sections - any link? There's this but it's iffy?
    That's World War I. ADSEC has its own article, but none of the others do. I doubt if I would create articles on the individual base sections, but I might create one on the Communications Zone some day. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Winter clothing

  • and pink trousers tended - wlink Pinks and greens
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • required frequent washing, but was difficult to iron, - remove comma before "but" if this is one message, or 'and' was difficult to iron
    Deleted "but" Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • A shrink-resistant cotton lining meant that it could be worn with or without undergarments - does that mean no shirt or nothing under shirt?
    Yes. See picture at right. Suggestions for re-phrasing welcome.
    British battle dress
  • Meanwhile, in the United States the Quartermaster Corps had - dab to United States Army Quartermaster Corps?
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • just as warm at both 0 and 20 °F - both? range?
    They're testing, so they have one of those meat freezers and set the temperature. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • where cold climate winter clothing - maybe hyphenate cold-climate
    Hyphenated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • through the minor ports in Landing Ships, Tank, (LSTs). - is second comma right?
    I think we can get away without it. It's a parenthetical comma. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Seventh Army, which was supported - move wlink to here Footwear
    Moved. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • 900,000 pairs of galoshes - wlink (are these same as overshoes mentioned elsewhere?)
    Yes. Changed so "overshoes" is used consistently. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]



  • The winter of 1944–1945 in Northwestern Europe was usually cold and wet - unusually?
    Yes. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • the daily minimum was seldom below freezing - seldom above freezing?
    Yes. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • A cold front then blanketed the front, - any way to avoid 2 different fronts?
    Re-phrased. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Eisenhower decided that logistical situation had - the logistical
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • In contrast, the British and Canadian armies reported only 206 cases of cold injury - insert 'together' (ie not each?)
    Yes. Re-worded. Hawkeye7 (discuss)


  • The principal causes of the shortage of artillery ammunition in the ETO in 1944 varied - dot points include 1945
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • American tactics relied heavily on fire support - wlink fire support?
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • were offloaded. The tonnage unloaded peaked - what is difference? offloading is transferring to somewhere after being unloaded?
    Offloaded is wrong. Changed to unloaded. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • used in the Sherman tank, and - wlink
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • and yellow for smoke on gray - yellow on gray for smoke
    Re-phrased to clarify this. Olive shells means handle with care; gray means do not handle at all. Especially not the ones with the green bands. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • for 90-days at a time to help - hyphen needed?
    No. Removed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • In some cases, shortages could be alleviated - meant to be new para?
    @#$%! Firefox. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Large numbers of women ... - wlink Rosie the Riveter
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Liquid fuels

Solid fuels


  • until the port of Antwerp was opened on 28 November no permanent - add year here
    Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]



  • Northwestern Europe v northwest Europe v North West Europe
    Standardised on Northwest. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • overstretched v over-stretched
    Removed hyphen. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Caption: US Navy Seabees loading ammunition at Roscoff - wlink Seabees and Roscoff
    Linked. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • talking re feet and footwear there is no mention of snow coverage (as in images)? Ie wet feet not just when rain
Jenny, did you blip here? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's it. Learnt a lot, so thanks. JennyOz (talk) 10:35, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Once again, thank you for taking the time to review. I keep telling people that logistics is not rocket science but the devil is in the details. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hi JennyOz, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:21, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Source review from Indy beetle – pass[edit]

General comments

  • Just a point of curiosity, but I presume this isn't called "American logistics during the Siegfried Line campaign" to differentiate it from American transportation in the Siegfried Line campaign?
    Originally there was an article "American logistics during the Siegfried Line campaign" but I split it in two to avoid concerns about the article being too large. Several editors have opined that the readers would be better-served by one really large article than two fairly large ones, as readers interested in the subject will read the whole thing anyway, but ones looking for certain information will zap to the section they are interested in, and splitting may make it harder to find. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The US Army demonstrated its ability to learn from its own experiences and to adapt to changing circumstances.[121] Many of the problems encountered during the Siegfried Line campaign in October and November could have been anticipated, and time was lost as increasingly higher echelons responded and developed solutions.[120] These two claims appear to fall under WP:RSOPINION and thus should be attributed in-text accordingly, particularly in the second sentence. "Could have been anticipated" is always going to be a somewhat subjective claim.
    Attributed second claim inline. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:09, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • They therefore acted simultaneously as base, depot and issue depots. Should "base" and "depot" be plural?
    They are fine. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • Ref 18 - (Moses et al. 1945, pp. 33–38.) Appears to support both claims/paragraphs. I do note, you wrote Eisenhower directed that a maintenance area should not be established around Paris while source literally ascribes that decision to his office, Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (p. 36). I imagine you know more about how these official reports like to word things so I'll defer to you on whether it is best to say "Eisenhower" or "the Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force". For citation clarity, I would also recommend breaking up the citations with expansive page ranges (33-38) to smaller page ranges attached directly to the sentences in these paragraphs which they support, if workable.
    Changed to SHAEF. Added a bit about Eisenhower. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 02:11, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Ref 56 - (MacDonald 1963, pp. 411–412.) Both claims supported.
  • Ref 81 - (Gropman 1996, pp. 134–135) Good.
  • Ref 82 - (Gropman 1996, p. 95.) Good for the claim Munitions production peaked in the last quarter of 1943,, but it would be preferable if this was a point made explicitly in source text, rather than by looking at a line on a chart, due to WP:SYNTH concerns.
  • Ref 115 (Smithsonian Magazine) Good.

-Indy beetle (talk) 03:07, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I think we're good here. Most of the sources are official publications, including some declassified assessments. Others are published by reputable publishers. -Indy beetle (talk) 04:34, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


For now I'll keep it small but might do a full review in the future.

Comments by Wehwalt[edit]

I've made some hands-on edits where there did not seem to be doubt about what was meant. They should be reviewed though.
  • "The advance came to a halt in September.[10] This was not a result of inadequate supplies or port capacity—there were still some 600,000 long tons (610,000 t) of supplies stockpiled in the Normandy lodgment area two months later" If I read this correctly, this gives a figure for November to explain why there weren't problems in September?
    Yes. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "the medical annex of the Overlord plan did not mention cold injury,[37] and the medical manual issued shortly after D-Day gave them only a brief mention," Should them be it?
    Yes. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Backlogs remained even after the opening of the port of Antwerp in November and were not cleared until February 1945.[40] Between June and August 55,000 long tons (56,000 t) of cross-Channel cargo tonnage had been allocated to clothing and personal equipment, but only 53 percent of that had been shipped. Some 62,000 long tons (63,000 t) remained in the UK, but its priority was so low that it could not be shipped before October.[41]" I'd toss a 1944 somewhere in the second sentence.
    Tossed. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thanks for this. Your reviews both here and on the astronaut articles are greatly appreciated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:50, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Will resume with "Medical".--Wehwalt (talk) 16:10, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "and the Third Army had to call off the Battle of Metz owing to ammunition shortages." This isn't mentioned in the article Battle of Metz.
    It is alluded to. "Direct assault was forbidden against the holdout forts in order to preserve artillery ammunition". That article is poor though, especially considering that Metz was one of the United States most significant battles of the war. It seems that World War II is of little interest to Americans. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm not sure the discussion of the credit system makes it clear how this worked in practice, and how this discouraged building up reserves and the other matters complained of.
  • "ETOUSA asked for a loan of 75 tanks designated for the Mediterranean Theater of Operations, United States Army, (MTOUSA), but that had been unloaded in Marseille, on the understanding that they would be replaced from the tanks being shipped in January." Should the first use of "that" be "those"?
  • "105 mm howitzer" linked, I think, only on the fourth usage. You might want to go through similar usages.
    Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
That's it. Thanks for the kind words. An impressive piece of research.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:25, 21 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support--Wehwalt (talk) 17:39, 22 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from John[edit]

Great article! I made some small copyedits, here is the cumulative diff if you want to inspect. Mostly small typos and smoothing out the language. One query (so far): when the Arado Ar 234 attack on Liege took place, you have: "...and started fires that resulted in the loss of 900,000 US gallons (3,400,000 l)." This isn't present in the Smithsonian reference, and none of my sources mention it, e.g. Price, Alfred (1991). The Last Year of the Luftwaffe. Arms and Armour. pp. 114–115. ISBN 1854091891.. My understanding was that this historic jet bomber raid was aimed at the city's rail station and achieved little, in line with the Ar 234's somewhat disappointing war record. Can this be sourced? John (talk) 17:48, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ruppenthal says: "The Advance Section lost about 900,000 gallons of gasoline as the result of fires started by German planes on two successive nights". I'll dig into it a bit more. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support from Ian[edit]

Recusing coord duties, I came by to perform an image review but decided I wanted to learn something so read and lightly copyedited the whole article -- very well done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Hi Ian, is that a general support? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review -- one certainly can't complain about the comprehensiveness of the imagery, and licensing appears appropriate. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 17:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Abdollah Mirza Qajar[edit]

Nominator(s): Amir Ghandi (talk) 19:17, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about... Abdollah Mirza, an Iranian prince of Qajar dynasty who was a poet and the governor of two provinces during his lifetime. I had nominated this before and I believe it was archived because it was so short, but there is barely any information on life to add. I have seen featured articles shorter than this so I don't think that's much of a problem. Thanks in advance for any reviewers. Amir Ghandi (talk) 19:17, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments Support from AviationFreak[edit]

  • Just as a note, the article would probably benefit from another image or two. Even a relevant map or something similar would be nice, but I know these things can be difficult to find and source.
  • due to complaints and dissatisfaction - Isn't this a bit redundant? Suggest either using a different second noun or only using one.
Deleted dissatisfaction
  • Unclosed parentheses when listing the reign of Mohammad Shah Qajar
Why? I thought years should be placed in closed parentheses
Yes - I agree that the style here looks good, but you have two opening parentheses and only one closing parenthesis - ...(r. (1834-1848)... AviationFreak💬 22:39, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Amir Ghandi (talk) 23:29, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Probably worth stating that Baba Khan was crowned after his predecessor's assassination
Added it
  • Perhaps clarify who "Behzadi" is, especially as the name is not mentioned earlier
  • Same for Ardakani
I think I'm gonna delete 'the according to' for these two.
Gotcha. I believe similar phrasing was used for other authors later in the article, so that should be reworded/removed as well (if it's not already). AviationFreak💬 22:39, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Added 'the modern historian' to those examples later in the article.
Amir Ghandi (talk) 23:15, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Does rule of a particular province not also grant rule of cities within the province? I would recommend somehow textually differentiating Zanjan from the cities within.
The borders of a province were defined by the territory its ruler had. So, there wasn't a Zanjan province with today's borders. I added a cities in the sentence "rule the cities of Zanjan, Sojas, Sohrevard, Abhar, and Soltanieh."
  • If it's not broadly agreed-upon that he ruled over Khamseh province, it probably shouldn't be in the lede. Also doesn't appear to be as talked-about in the article as Zanjan.
Deleted it from the lead.
  • Because of his youth, Fath-Ali Shah appointed Mohammad Taqi Saheb Ali Abadi, his favorite poet, as Abdollah Mirza's regent. - It's certainly implied that we're talking about Abdollah Mirza's youth here, but maybe reword this bit? Also, link regent.
reworded it
  • Abdollah Mirza developed a taste in poetry because of his teachings. - In my first skim, I though "him" referred to Abdollah Mirza, but it looks like it refers to Ali Abadi.
Also reworded it.
  • Ali Abadi served as regent for Abdollah Mirza until 1819 when he returned to Tehran from his father's order. - Who returned to Tehran? What does it mean to return from his father's order? I think the use of pronouns in this section could be cleaned up a little. :)
Amended it.
  • The name of the mosque can be linked in the caption, along with maybe adding ", constructed during Abdollah Mirza's rule" or something similar
  • Naming should be consistent throughout an article - Should he be referred to as "Abdollah Mirza" (used until mention of 1810 valuables discovery) or simply "Abdollah"?
I'll go with Abdollah Mirza.
  • They discovered the tomb of Arghun Khan, Ilkhan of Ilkhanate and it was filled with gold and jewelry Abdollah Mirza brought the findings to Tehran and presented them to Fath-Ali Shah. - This is missing a period. The first sentence also is a bit clunky; suggest They discovered the tomb... which was filled with gold and jewelry.
  • Include role/title of Abbas Mirza
  • According to tradition
  • Abdollah's family took a summer trip to Soltanieh. Fath-Ali Shah held a wedding party there for the new couple. can be condensed into one sentence by substituting the period with ", where"
  • by his fathers order should have an apostrophe in "father's"
  • Do we know anything about what the vassals complained to Fath-Ali Shah about, specifically? I know sources aren't always super specific but if we can get any better than just "complained", it would be great.
Unfortunately, there's nothing. Although, in the Appearance and skills section, James Edward Alexander says that he was cruel towards his subjects.
  • There's a jump from the subject accompanying his father on a trip to the father suddenly dying - maybe fill in a bit of context?
  • Wouldn't the upcoming conflict be better referred to as a battle than a war?
Replaced with battle
  • They dispersed two hours before dawn and before any confrontation took place and Abdollah Mirza was forced to flee to Qazvin. - Three "and"s here feels like a run-on.
Amended it
Amended it
  • Unclosed parentheses when discussing name and reign of Mohammad Shah
  • It's not super clear to me what happens in the last two sentences of this paragraph - How is Abdollah allowed to decide who is King of Iran if his brother has already taken control? Maybe I just haven't had enough caffeine yet this morning.
Replaced it with pledged allegiance.
  • Do we know how or where he died?
Only that he died in his sister's house
  • What is the significance of Divan-e Marathi?
  • MOS:SOB in "satire Mathnavi"
  • Last 2 sentences in paragraph can be condensed - "...satire Mathnavi about life of a balding person that Abdollah Mirza co-wrote with his brother..."
Changed the whole sentence to 'He also co-wrote a satirical mathnavi called Golnameh or Kalnameh about life of a balding person with his brother Mohammad Reza Mirza'
  • The idea of having an "appearance and skills" section seems a bit strange to me. Curious to hear what other editors think, but this could maybe be assimilated into the article somehow? The second paragraph also suffers from pronoun-specificity issues.
@AviationFreak: I think we can integrate James Edward Alexander's words into the 'Removal from Zanjan government' section as he explains that Abdollah Mirza was a cruel person and his subjects lived in misery. Any thoughts?
Yes, that seems to me like it would be a good reworking of the structure. AviationFreak💬 00:32, 16 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Overall, a solid first FAC article. The prose is a little rough around the edges but otherwise looking good to me. AviationFreak💬 15:35, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • Hi AviationFreak, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looking much better now. My only remaining quibbles are in the last section:
  • What is the significance of Divan-e Marathi?
Hi AviationFreak, there is not any significant to Divan-e Marathi, I just listed it among his other works.
Gotcha - I'd hesitate to include it just because it looks a bit out of place without any explanation of significance or content, but it's not a galring issue.
  • Suggest merging the two paragraphs as one is only a single sentence
Happy to support upon these items being changed or discussed here. AviationFreak💬 15:25, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Support on prose. AviationFreak💬 13:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from ChrisTheDude[edit]

  • I haven't read the above - this is what I got......
  • "He had two children with his wife, Mohsen Mirza and Shams al-Molok" - suggest changing to "He had two children, Mohsen Mirza and Shams al-Molok, with his wife" as at first glance I thought Mohsen was his wife's name
  • "When at the early reign of Mohammad Shah" => "When during the early reign of Mohammad Shah"
  • "Agha Mohammad Khan was still the king" - why "still"? I would think just "Agha Mohammad Khan was the king" will suffice
Amended it
  • Wikilink Shah of Iran
  • "Because of his youth, Fath-Ali Shah appointed Mohammad Taqi Saheb Ali Abadi,[1] his favorite poet, as Abdollah Mirza's regent" => "Because of Abdollah Mirza's youth, Fath-Ali Shah appointed Mohammad Taqi Saheb Ali Abadi,[1] his favorite poet, as regent"
Reworded it
  • Merge the para beginning "Abdollah Mirza's rule over Zanjan" with the previous one as it is very short
  • " and it was filled with gold and jewelry" - full stop is missing at the end of this sentence
  • "After this incident, Prince Hossein Ali Mirza Farman Farma, governor of Fars and brother of Abdollah Mirza immediately" => "After this incident, Prince Hossein Ali Mirza Farman Farma, governor of Fars and brother of Abdollah Mirza, immediately"
  • "or according to Khatibi, 1812" - who is/was Khatibi?
A modern historian, changed it to 'according to another source'
  • "According tradition" => "According to tradition"
  • "by his fathers order" => "by his father's order"
  • "Mohammad Mirza (later known as Mohammad Shah (r. 1834-1848)" - you haven't closed the brackets opened before the word "later"
Amended it
  • "about life of a balding person" => "about the life of a balding person"
  • "According to Behzadi" - who is/was Behzadi
A modern historian; added it in the article
  • "Abdollah Mirza had found his father's companion" - eh? He found his father's companion? Who was his father's companion and where did he find him? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:26, 10 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Reworded it
@ChrisTheDude: I believe all points have been addressed. Amir Ghandi (talk) 19:23, 14 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hi ChrisTheDude, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:09, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Aarrggh, another one I commented on and then forgot about. I'll try and take a look at lunchtime...... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:39, 26 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Growing Up Absurd[edit]

Nominator(s): czar 17:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

While hardly a classic today, this book was once the bible of a generation, found on bookshelves across American college campuses during the 1960s counterculture as well as, years later, the cabin bookshelves of Ted Kaczynski. Growing Up Absurd was a paean to 1960s youth, written by a hopeful yet outcast intellectual finally finding his audience after a lifetime of striking out. Originally writing on the then-hot topic of rising juvenile delinquency, Paul Goodman defended the youth subculture that rejected adult society much as Goodman did himself, writing that youth had no business "growing up" into a world designed to process and spit them out, and that adults had better create a world of worthwhile ardor, with more meaningful work, honorable community, sexual freedom, and spiritual sustenance. Growing Up Absurd launched Goodman from the bohemian underground into a flash of idiosyncratic stardom in the twilight of his life, from lifelong impoverishment to the top tenth of American incomes, as he became a high-demand public intellectual namechecked in Annie Hall, a Dutch uncle to the counterculture and Berkeley Free Speech Movement, the philosopher of the New Left, and within only several decades, largely forgotten from American public consciousness.

Been sitting on this one while I work on other Goodman-related articles but read it again recently and I believe it's FA-worthy. It was reviewed for GA by @Tayi Arajakate in July 2021. Notices posted on relevant WikiProjects and my talk page. Let me know what you think? czar 17:33, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image is appropriately justified. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:43, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments by A. Parrot[edit]

This is an article well outside my expertise, so it's an ignorant layman review, but after a first read-through I don't notice any obvious gaps in coverage. There are several awkward bits in the prose. In some cases the meaning is clear, and I think I'll edit them myself over the next few days so as not to put too many line-by-line notes in the FAC; please revert and discuss any edits of mine that you object to. I do want to highlight a couple:

  • "…juvenile delinquents should be led to properly regard society and its goals…" I don't know exactly what "properly regard society and its goals" is intended to mean.
  • "Also significant, where his prior writing had qualities of hectoring insistence and recklessness, according to Goodman's literary executor, Growing Up Absurd tried a new style…" I think it's best to omit the opinion at the beginning, mention Stoehr by name, and put that at the beginning of the sentence ("According to Goodman's literary executor, Taylor Stoehr, Growing Up Absurd tried a new style…")

More comments later. A. Parrot (talk) 03:29, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks, @A. Parrot. I've edited those two. For any awkward bits that I've missed, please feel free to drop a {{clarify}} in the prose as you read and I'll double back to rephrase. Some of the difficulty is that Goodman himself was notoriously vague at times, so some concepts were equally vague in reviews (as "proper regard" was in Galbraith), but that's part of the challenge in why I chose this article. :) Thanks again, czar 15:09, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Hi @A. Parrot, thanks for your edits directly in the article. I wanted to see if you might be leaving additional comments, given the coordinator note below on time pressure. Appreciate your time, czar 04:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The more I read, the more prose difficulties I see. Many of them pose problems of clarity. E.g., what does "pondered his own patriotic intervention in American society" mean? In "He wanted to identify his own personal fight, which he would then supplant in the story", the word "supplant" doesn't make much sense. And Lee Vilenski is right about the awkward relationship between the article's own voice and the opinions it's describing. I'm afraid the article needs a copyedit, one that checks the article text against what the sources say. I don't have full access to Stoehr 1990 and 1994, to which much of the unclear text is cited. If you do, you might be able to supply a copyeditor with the necessary excerpts, but that kind of back-and-forth process isn't suited to the time constraints of an FAC. A. Parrot (talk) 02:37, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Many of those are features of the sourcing but I get what you're saying and am familiar enough with the material that I should be able to copy edit such instances to clarity. Happy to share any of the sourcing with anyone who requests it too. czar 12:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Coordinator note[edit]

This has been open for more than three weeks and has yet to pick up a support. Unless it attracts considerable movement towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it will have to be archived. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gog the Mild (talkcontribs) 15:12, 25 September 2022 UTC (UTC)

Comments by Lee Vilenski[edit]

I'll begin a review of this article very soon! My reviews tend to focus on prose and MOS issues, especially on the lede, but I will also comment on anything that could be improved. I'll post up some comments below over the next couple days, which you should either respond to, or ask me questions on issues you are unsure of. I'll be claiming points towards the wikicup once this review is over.

  • I feel like the lede paragraph, (if not the first sentence) should include the publisher. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • youth gangs pipes to gang, so can probably just relink. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Originally offered an advance - "advance" has a lot of meanings, we should probably reword to clarify this is a financial advance. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Goodman had a contract the next day - probably should say that Random House provided a contract. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Same as gang for college campus. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • But Goodman's fame faded as quickly as it came. In later years, reviewers reproached Goodman's exclusion of women from his analysis. Many specifics of the book became dated with time. New York Review Books reissued Growing Up Absurd in 2012. - this is a weird series of small sentences that just say things but don't really tie them together. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Since advertising spurred artificial demand for useless goods,[8] corporate jobs had become abundant but were unfulfilling, without a sense of purpose or service,[5][9] and climbing to corporate power through routine, bureaucratic jobs was contrary to the ideals of purposeful vocation - this is quite the sentence. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That whole paragraph struggles saying things almost in Wikipedia's voice such as "Worse, this mechanical state of affairs was widely accepted as inescapable or the natural conditions of work", with ties such as "he writes". I feel like it could be better written to outline this paragraph is directly about what Goodman believed before making the book. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Aside from mentioning it was reprinted in 2012, there is just one mention of any information post 1980. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Additional comments

Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 11:53, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HMS Aigle (1801)[edit]

Nominator(s): Ykraps (talk) 07:50, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about a fifth-rate sailing frigate that served in the Royal Navy at the tail end of the French Revolutionary wars and throughout the Napoleonic war. She took part in some notable actions and campaigns, including the controversial Battle of Basque Roads and the disastrous Walcheren campaign. As can be seen from the edit history, I have done a not inconsiderable amount of work to the article since it became a Good Article in 2016. I have looked at the criteria for featured article and humbly believe it meets them. I am sure, however, that it can be improved and look forward to suggestions. Thanks in advance. Ykraps (talk) 07:50, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Image review[edit]

  • Suggest scaling up the map
    Done --Ykraps (talk) 09:07, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Suggest adding alt text
    Done --Ykraps (talk) 09:07, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • File:Easton_Massacre_Memorial.JPG needs a tag for the original work
    Sorry, I don't understand what tag you are referring to. Can you be more specific? Thanks. --Ykraps (talk) 09:07, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The current tag on the image reflects the copyright of the photographer. What's missing is a tag for the memorial itself - most likely reflecting copyright expiration due to age, depending on when the memorial was created, or possibly {{PD-text}}. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:20, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The memorial is in the UK which has Freedom of Panorama (a church is a public place) so copyright is irrelevant from a UK point of view but I see that the US does not enjoy this privelege. The memorial was not erected until 1978 so the image probably isn't legal in the US.--Ykraps (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    My reading of commons:Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/United_Kingdom#Freedom_of_panorama is that this would be considered a graphic work and so not covered by UK FoP. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:29, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have trouble seeing it as a graphic work; it hasn't been designed, has little artistic merit and would not require any great skill to produce. There is still the issue of whether it is PD in the US, and I would say not. It isn't a very inspiring image so I don't mind losing it.--Ykraps (talk) 20:09, 5 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    As we both seem to agree it doesn't meet the threshold of originality, a familiar concept in US copyright law, I've tagged PD-text, as you suggested.--Ykraps (talk) 05:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • File:Bombardment_of_Flushing.jpg: which James Grant is believed to be the author?
    Yes, it's from his 1880 book British Battles on Land and Sea --Ykraps (talk) 09:07, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    The author field of the image description currently links to a disambiguation page. Can the target be specified? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:20, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Done. Linked to James Grant (1822–1887).--Ykraps (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • File:Evacuation_de_Walcheren_par_les_Anglais_-_30_août_1809_-_Composition_de_PHILIPPOTEAUX.jpg: source link is dead, needs a US tag.
    I've added a US tag but can't find an alternative source link. Does that mean I can't use the image? --Ykraps (talk) 09:07, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Not automatically, but can you specify where and in what form the work was first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:20, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It is plate no. 179 in the 1870 French book, Collection de 350 gravures, dessins de Philippoteaux, etc. pour l'histoire du Consulat et de l'Empire Volume 2 by Marie-Joseph-Louis-Adolphe Thiers (OCLC = 458280134). That must have been one of its first appearances.[[1]] --Ykraps (talk) 18:22, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I've replaced the dead link on Wikimedia Commons with the book info.--Ykraps (talk) 05:42, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:55, 4 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

HF - support[edit]

Ping me if I haven't started by Thursday. Hog Farm Talk 00:39, 13 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • "Her sister, HMS Resistance, following later in 1800" - does this work in British English? I don't think it's grammatical in AmEng
    It doesn’t work as a separate sentence, no; it should run on from the previous one: Aigle was the first of two.. her sister following in 1800. Is that what you meant?--Ykraps (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes. I've made a slight copy edit to the sentence here; revert if you don't like it. Hog Farm Talk 19:12, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, I'm happy with that.--Ykraps (talk) 17:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "and a depth in the hold of 13 ft 0 in (4.0 m)" - is this depth of hold?
    It is. I’ve added a link.--Ykraps (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Sail plan from the infobox isn't mentioned in the body or really cited anywhere
    All frigates of the period were ship-rigged. I've added to main body and sourced.--Ykraps (talk) 17:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • " Naidad managed to capture two enemy vessels" - Is Naidad an alternate name for Naiad or just a typo?
    Nope, it’s a typo. Fixed.--Ykraps (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Two Chasse-marées" - not sure that chasse-marées should be capitalized here - we wouldn't capitalize frigate or schooner in this context. Same with Lugger later in the article.
    Agreed. I’ve downgraded to lowercase although several sources do use caps.--Ykraps (talk) 17:56, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Ready for the action off Groix; will get back to this soon. Hog Farm Talk 04:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

No rush. I am away this weekend and may not be able to attend to this promptly but will as soon as I return. Thanks for taking the trouble to review.--Ykraps (talk) 15:39, 15 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I'm not sure that note 4 about Imperieuse is really directly relevant to this article
    Removed - At the time of writing, there was no article for Imperieuse.--Ykraps (talk) 06:50, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • So what exactly did it do after Walcheren? I'm assuming some sort of commerce raiding or anti-privateer work, but the capture of Phoenix just pops up out of nowhere.
    I think she joined the Channel Fleet but there is no record of this. I accept what you say as popping up out of nowhere so have moved it to the Prizes section as a footnote.--Ykraps (talk) 06:50, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Aigle and Curacoa used" - what type of ship is Curacoa?
    Same as Aigle. Added.--Ykraps (talk) 07:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Recommend combining the postwar and fate sections, as they're both so short.
    Done.--Ykraps (talk) 07:02, 19 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I think that's all from me. Hog Farm Talk 03:21, 18 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Gog the Mild[edit]

Recusing to review.


  • "HMS Aigle was a 36-gun, fifth-rate frigate of the Royal Navy." 'British' needs to be in there somewhere; there were several navies which were royal.
    Added, although it seems unnecessary as other royal navies aren't called Royal Navy. I wouldn't expect to see Nederlands added to Koninklijke Marine, which by logical extension should be the case. Also, strictly speaking, the Royal Navy isn't British, it belongs to the Crown.--Ykraps (talk) 07:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "in April 1803 to press recruits." What is your basis for using "press" as a verb?
    It's both a noun and a verb, [[2]] and routinely used as such in sources: " deliberately press men" [[3]], " press any Englishman" [[4]], " press the people" [[5]] --Ykraps (talk) 07:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "patrolling the English Channel for enemy warships and merchant vessels." "for" seems a bit unclear; at first reading it suggests 'on behalf of'. Possibly state what Aigle was actually doing?
    Done. Changed to "trying to keep the English Channel free of enemy warships and merchant vessels". --Ykraps (talk) 07:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "forcing the other ashore." into a harbour or wrecking it?
    It usually means to force aground but yeah, I get it sounds ambiguous. Changed to 'forcing the other onto the shore'.--Ykraps (talk) 07:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "Aigle fought the Battle of Basque Roads in 1809" → 'Aigle fought at the Battle of Basque Roads in 1809'.
    Done.--Ykraps (talk) 07:52, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "the Battle of Basque Roads in 1809". Is the precise date known?
    It was a series of actions which occurred between 11–24 April. Added April. --Ykraps (talk) 08:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "the fireships". Usually "the" is only used about something which has already been properly introduced. Also, the current phrasing conveys little or no information to a reader. Consider either deleting or expanding.
    Added a bit more. [[6]] --Ykraps (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "then forcing the surrender of the stranded French ships, Varsovie and Aquilon." It may be me, but that comma looks odd.
    I don't think it's wrong in British English but may be a little old fashioned.--Ykraps (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "the Battle of Basque Roads and the Walcheren Campaign: perhaps mention where, geographically, each took place? Maybe mention that one was naval battle and the other a land campaign. Maybe mention who won the former, as you do the latter?
    Done. --Ykraps (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "the British forces withdrew in September". This only really makes sense if a reader has already been informed that it was an amphibious operation.
    Not sure I agree; one can withdraw from land and naval battles. --Ykraps (talk) 08:14, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "From 1852, she became a coal hulk" → 'In 1852, she became a coal hulk'.
    Done. --Ykraps (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "then a receiving ship". 1. When did this happen? 2. What is a receiving ship?
    1. Sources don't say. 2. A ship for receiving new recruits. - I've added a link.--Ykraps (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "she became a coal hulk, then a receiving ship". This is not reflected in the main article.
    It's in the second paragraph of the Post war and fate section. --Ykraps (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "before being used as a target for torpedoes". The main article mentions a singular torpedo.
    It didn't when the lead was written. I've rewritten the corresponding article text. --Ykraps (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:44, 23 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thanks for this thus far. --Ykraps (talk) 08:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Gog the Mild: Are you still intending to add to this? Thanks. --Ykraps (talk) 17:40, 27 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Once you have responded to all of my comments I will go through your responses, which may or may not lead to further comments from me. Once we have settled those I will do another read through which again may or may not lead to further comments. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]


  • "Aigle was the first of two Aigle-class frigates". Any chance of an in line explanation of what a frigate is, per MOS:NOFORCELINK? ("as far as possible do not force a reader to use that link to understand the sentence. The text needs to make sense to readers who cannot follow links.")
    There already is a description in the section, which I've now moved nearer the start. --Ykraps (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "her sister, HMS Resistance, followed later in 1800." By "followed", do you mean ordered, laid down, launched or commissioned?
    I've settled on ordered. --Ykraps (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Consider deleting "were not wildly innovative and". I assume there were very many things his designs were not.
    Okay, done. --Ykraps (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Optionally, a sentence or so on the pros and cons of cannon v carronades might be helpful.
  • Why is 18lb converted to kg to one decimal place and 32lb to none?
    Fixed. --Ykraps (talk) 17:18, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • "13 ft 0 in (4.0 m)". Suggest → '13 ft 0 in (4 m)', or even '13 ft (4 m)'.
    My previous FA experience of that is that others will then ask, "Why are the other dimensions to one decimal place...?" --Ykraps (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Is it known why she was named Aigle?
    There was another HMS Aigle which sank the year before this one was ordered. I strongly suspect the latter was named after the former as this was common practice. However, there are no sources which say that. Aigle is French for eagle but I assume you know that and that's not what you're asking. --Ykraps (talk) 17:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • A brief in line explanation of what a press gang was?
  • "and discovered Aigle's crew battling a flotilla". Perhaps "crew" → 'boats'? Crew implies the whole crew, and when I first read it I thought that you meant that Aigle herself was engaged.
  • "Aigle picked up Gertrude′s crew." All of them, or just the survivors?
  • "which had since left the port". Since when?
  • "Commander-in-Chief". Why the upper case initial letters? See WP:JOBTITLES.
  • "For an hour she had to endure their fire". Is it known how the Spanish were able to manoeuvre to attack when there was no wind?
  • "in a cutting-out expedition". Could there be a brief in line explanation?
  • "At 15:45, two French frigates to the south-east were simultaneously seen ...". Perhaps 'At 15:45, the two French frigates were simultaneously seen to the south-east ...'?
  • "the five British returned to the island" → 'the five British ships returned to the island'.
  • "Aigle was part of the fleet under Admiral James Gambier". Is the name of the fleet known?
  • "when on 11 April Lord Cochrane led". Cochrane's military rather than civilian title may be more appropriate.
  • "The British ships anchored, with springs". I much doubt that what most readers will visualise here is what you would like them to.
  • "both of which struck at around 17:30". Struck what? A shoal?
  • "there being insufficient water for the British frigates." → 'there being insufficient depth of water for the British frigates.'
  • "prize money". What is this?
  • "the forts there having already been deserted". Does "already" add anything?
  • "Aigle's crew received a share of the spoils". Via prize money, or more informally?
  • "Four merchant vessels and the cargoes of 15 others were ... After driving the 20-strong convoy ashore". Four plus 15 ≠ 20.
  • "In accordance with Surveyor of the Navy, Robert Seppings". Why the comma?
  • "only went to sea after as armée en flute or store-ship". I am not entirely sure that I follow this. Also it seems to suggest that armée en flute is the same thing as a store-ship.
  • "Does not include shares for property captured during the Walcheren Campaign." What are shares in this context?

And that's it for a first pass. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:22, 28 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Aliens (film)[edit]

Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 20:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about the 1986 science fiction action film Aliens directed by James Cameron and starring Sigourney Weaver, in what would be the first of the two trendsetting sequels he made. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 20:39, 2 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comment from Lankyant[edit]

  • Within Plot and Cast it calls the colony Hadleys Hope but in every source I can find it is Hadley's Hope, with the apostrophe. It also makes more grammatical sense with the apostrophe.
  • In the lead I would change 'troop' to 'unit', however, if kept as troop I would wikilink it.
  • In plot, the sentence "descending into alien-secretion-covered corridors." seems clunky. I suggest "descending into corridors covered in alien secretion."

That's it for now, will go through the rest of the article when I get chance :) Lankyant (talk) 01:40, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Thank you Lankyant, all changed Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 14:12, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support and Comments from ErnestKrause[edit]

Some comments about this well-written article which I've just noticed to get things started.

(1) There is an odd redirect to this film page from "M56 Smart Gun" even though there is no article for "M56 Smart Gun"; it just seems to redirect to the top of the Aliens film article with no explanation.

(2) In the lead section, you do mention this is the second film in the franchise, which is accurate. Given the strength of your Sequels section at the end of this article, it seems like it would be useful to state how large the franchise is in the lead section. For example, 'it is the second film in the 12 films in the Alien franchise', or, 'it is the second film in the two dozen films in the Alien franchise.' I'm not sure of the exact number but you might know it from memory.

(3) In the Plot summary, my memory is that the weapons and guns in this film received a good deal of screen time when I watched it. There are the scenes where the Marines are drilling with their M56A2 Smart Guns as if preparing for battle, and doing prepatory weapons drills, etc. Also there is the prominent scene of some extended length featuring the UA 571-C Sentry Guns which takes on the swarm of attacking Aliens. Can these be mentioned or added in some way into the Plot section since they were prominently featured in the film? (One link for the M56 is here [7], and one link for the Sentry Gun in here [8].)

(4) You did give some information about the German origin of the Smart Gun in the next sections, though you do not cover the Sentry Gun. Could this be added? My thoughts are that once you add some of the details about the Smart Gun and the Sentry Gun used in the film, that this would be the better place to link the re-direct of the M56 I mentioned above in my note #1 with an indexed link to this new section, rather than an unindexed link to the article as a whole.

(5) My recollection is that there was a novelization made for this film, separately from the graphic novels which you already mention in this article. Possibly you can find this on one of the book seller websites on the internet with its author and publisher.

Its a short list for now to get things started. ErnestKrause (talk) 18:26, 3 September 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  • I fixed the redirect