Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George Washington/archive5

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 31 August 2023 [1].

George Washington

Nominator(s): Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about George Washington, the first President of the United States and the Commander-in-Chief of American forces during the American Revolutionary War. The article has been recently heavily edited and, in my opinion, is now much improved which is why I have nominated it as a candidate for "Featured Article" status. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 21:41, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. I participated in some of the recent editing, and I agree it is now much improved. However, in my opinion it still would require significant work to meet the FA criteria. Specifically:

Multiple citations are missing page numbers, needed for verification

Many citations are inconsistently formatted

Some of the sources are of questionable reliability (eg WorldAtlas)

Previous reviews noted issues with material failing verification. Spotchecking indicates that remains an issue here. For example:

"The family moved to Little Hunting Creek in 1735. In 1738, they moved to Ferry Farm" does not appear to be supported by either of the cited sources

The pages cited for "In his pursuit of admiration, status, and power, his writing displayed little wit or humor" speak to his military career rather than his writing

"Washington contracted smallpox during that trip, which left his face slightly scarred": the given source supports that he got smallpox but doesn't mention scarring

"Meaning "town destroyer", the name had been given to his great-grandfather...". The given source mentions that nickname but not this translation

Given these issues, a more comprehensive edit focusing on verifiability and sourcing is needed. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:26, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

While I did find some citation issues and changed them during editing, I was not aware that there were more issues with citations. I will take a closer look at it. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:33, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So, I went through it. I did change a few references - removed some as well - but I can't find any missing pages from books cited in the article. Can you guide me on that a bit? -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 13:44, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Examples as of this timestamp include footnotes 249, 254, 255, and 256. One of the references added (History.com) is also of questionable reliability - see WP:RSP. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'll check it out. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 09:40, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

Given the call above for a more comprehensive edit re. verifiability and sourcing I think this nom is premature and further work should take place outside the FAC process, so I'll be archiving it shortly. An article like this really should go through Peer Review before coming to FAC and I strongly recommend that as the next stop before a future nom here. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:57, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 09:58, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I will do so. This was my first ever attempt at this so I wasn't entirely sure what to do. -- Omnis Scientia (talk) 10:13, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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