I am nominating this for featured article because.. well, because, I guess. I've worked on it right from the beginning (6kb up to 44kb) and I think it is ready for Featured status. I've sent it through GAC and PR, correcting any issues they brought up; hopefully you won't find too many problems either. Ironholds (talk) 19:21, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:52, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Ref format comments-- Issues found with WP:REFTOOLS (copy-and-pasted).
There are duplicate refs with the same content, so a named reference should be sought instead.
Chandos (1963) p.26 Multiple refs contain this content, a named reference should be used instead
Hyde (1965) p.91 Multiple refs contain this content, a named reference should be used instead
Hyde (1965) p.135 Multiple refs contain this content, a named reference should be used instead
Hyde (1965) p.396 Multiple refs contain this content, a named reference should be used instead
Hyde (1965) p.530 Multiple refs contain this content, a named reference should be used instead
Hyde (1965) p.541 Multiple refs contain this content, a named reference should be used instead
Different references are using the same ref name, so they should be appended accordingly
h26 Multiple references are given the same name--TRUCO 22:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
All fixed; I really should have checked those, my apologies. Something to remember for next time, I guess. Ironholds (talk) 22:33, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Its cool. Ref formatting found up to speed.--TRUCO 22:45, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Support – issues resolved.--Pattont/c 13:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
I have a number of concerns I'd like to your address:
(William) Norman Birkett, 1st Baron Birkett QC PC (6 September 1883 – 10 February 1962) was a British preacher, politician, barrister, and judge who served as the alternate British judge during the Nuremberg Trials.—(Lede, first paragraph) You should remove the brackets from William and state later that he was usualyl known by his last two names.
He was born in Ulverston, Lancashire on 6 September 1883—(Early life and education, first paragraph) Who was born? Norman was born...
He went to the Wesleyan school in Ulverston until 1894—(Early life and education, first paragraph) He attended. Also, was this a primary school or a secondary school or what?
Although intelligent Birkett was not noted as a particularly academic student—(Early life and education, first paragraph) add a comma after intelligent.
it was reported in the Cambridge Review that it was "a most interesting speech".—(Early life and education, second paragraph) That tense is awkward and "it" is repeated too much. Change to "the Cambridge Review reported..."
He won the same essay again in 1910, and the same year gained a First Class in his Theological Special Examination.—(Early life and education, third paragraph) He won the same prize again. "The same" is repeated here and it sounds bad. Replace with "that year" or something else suitable.
After several attempts at securing employment for himself after he graduated to give him money to live on while he took the Bar exam, including interviews with the editors of The Guardian and The Observer, he was offered a job as the personal secretary of George Cadbury Junior, with a wage of £200 a year, which he planned to hold until he qualified as a barrister.—(Early life and education, third paragraph) Huge ass snake of a sentence, with lots of repitition of words like "after" and reduncy of phrases like "himself". Break it up and clarify. I suggest "After several attempts at securing employment to sustain him while he took the bar exam, including interviews with the editors of The Guardian and The Observer, he was offered a job as the personal secretary of George Cadbury Junior, with a wage of £200 a year. He planned to hold this job untill he qualified as a barrister" but you can use whatever suits if you want.
as London was a popular place for barristers (and therefore a difficult place for a young barrister to make his name)—(Bar career and time as a Member of Parliament, first paragraph) Change to "as London had a lot of competition" or something like that—you get the picture :-).
He was invited to be the Liberal candidate for Cambridge in 1911—(Member of Parliment, first paragraph) he was invited to become.
Birkett was involved in several notable criminal cases which helped cement his reputation as an excellent speaker in the eyes of the Bar.—(Bar work in London, first paragraph) "excellent" is a clichéd term, "outstanding" would be better, though feel free to ignore this concern as it isn't major.
Mr Dennistoun was bankrupt, and had no money with which to pay alimony—(Bar work in London, first paragraph) remove "and had no money with which" as it's redundant; replce with "...bankrupt, and could not pay the alimony".
Home Secretary Rouse admitted that he had in fact committed the murder, although he never gave a reason; it was theorised that he had done so in an attempt to fake his own death.—(Return to the Bar, first paragraph) put in an em dash (or a spaced en dash :-)) before and after "although he never gave a reason" instead of the commas and semicolon.
After retiring from the Bench Birkett continued to do work for the government—(Retirement, first paragraph) insert a comma after "bench" and remove "do" from "do work" as it's redundant.
In 1961 he was again invited by the BBC to give a talk, this time on "six great advocates";—(Retirement, second paragraph) explain what the "six great advocates" means, I don't understand.
The content and structure are brilliant; this is one of the most fascinating articles I've ever seen. A thoroughly enjoyable read. Great work!--Pattont/c 17:50, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Done all, I believe: as for the last point the talk was titled "six great advocates". Ironholds (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Six great advocates...of what?--Pattont/c 20:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Yes. Link the word.--Pattont/c 13:34, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
File:Marshall-hall.jpg messes up the printable and PDF versions of the page as well but that's not actionable lol.--Pattont/c 20:40, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
I'm striking my oppose because most of the issues have been dealt with. I think the prose could still be improved, but it is not at the point where I would feel comfortable opposing on those grounds. No declaration. Karanacs (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
Weak oppose for now by karanacs. I thought the article was very interesting, and it seemed comprehensive (although I knew nothing about him before). I think the prose is not quite there yet, though, and recommend another good copyedit.
should the lead mention when he received his title?
Not really; peerages for retiring judges were incredibly common (still are, to some extent). Everything else I'll fix in 30 seconds or so after I've had breakfast.Ironholds (talk) 05:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Is this correct or does it need an apostrophe? drapers shops
I don't know who A.C. Benson was, or why a conversation with him would influence Birkett to to to university.
A.C Benson is linked, so do really I need to go into much detail about who he is? Ironholds (talk) 05:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Much detail, no. A brief description, yes. Something along the lines of A C Benson, a ...., would do. Karanacs (talk) 15:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
What a long sentence! He befriended Arnold McNair, at the time Secretary of the Union, and he agreed to put Birkett's name on the electoral papers for election to the Union Committee; he came sixth and failed to get in, but ran again in 1910 and was elected Secretary of the Union by a margin of only six votes - Can this be broken up/reworded a bit?
This seems like an opinion that probably ought to be attributed to whoever said it in the text rather than just the citation "no speaker more sure of pleasing the house",
Is Birmingham 1914 a place or is there a missing word?
I'm not sure what this means - "was a competence place for young barristers"
Overall, the prose seems pretty wordy. I think it could be rewritten and tightened and/or flow better. There are a lot of really long sentences and a lot of "and"s connecting thoughts that may or may not need to be connected that way.
quotations need a citation at the end of the sentence, even if that means subsequent sentences have duplicate citations
Watch for agreement in sentences. For example, Although he was initially hesitant, saying that "competition in London is on quite a different scale, and if I failed there, I would have lost everything I have built up here", but a case he took in 1920 changed the situation. - with the "Although", the "but" should not be there.
Watch for clause placement. For example, in this sentence many Liberal Members of Parliament lost their seats to the Conservative candidates, including Birkett, we're including Birkett as a Conservative candidate, when that's not what is meant.
Righto, I've corrected all of the (direct) points you've raised; I'll try and find someone to shiny it up and get rid of wordy prose. Ironholds (talk) 05:24, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
My apologies for the delayed response (illness and computer issues kept me away from wiki for some time). I'll read through the article again probably tomorrow or the next day so that my comments can be updated before Sandy promotes/archives over the weekend. Karanacs (talk) 21:11, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:45, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
Support""" all my concerns have been addressed. Slight oppose
Need to expand the "QC" and "PC" links in the lead.
"... his speech against a private bill in 1962..." Private bill? What's that?
"He attended the Wesleyan primary school..." probably need to link/explain Wesleyan for the non-initiated.
"... and seeing that he was not likely to become a good draper, his father allowed him to leave the business..." that first part seems awkward to me. Can we reword?
Did they ever figure out who the person killed inthe Blazing Car case was?
Need a direct cite for "to inquire into the prevalence of abortion, and the law relating thereto, and to consider what steps can be taken by more effective enforcement of the law" in the "return to the bar" section.
It's got a cite now but it's broken. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:08, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Same for "did not desire to hurt people's feelings" in Judicial work
Same for "The country owes much to him for vindicating our conceptions of an impartial trial under the rule of law" in Nuremburg trials
Need to explain a bit what LLD is, not jsut link it
You've got a broken ref in big red text
I'll be happy to support when the above are addressed. Ealdgyth - Talk 21:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Okie-dokes; I'll work them out on monday, my internet connection here is rather slow and I'm using a netbook. Would linking it as Doctor of Law or something count as an explanation? Ironholds (talk) 21:12, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
If you piped the link, yeah. Right now it's just the bare abbreviation, which leaves one kinda going "huh?" Ealdgyth - Talk 21:39, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
Righto. Additional queries:
Expand QC and PC Links in the Lead; you mean the ones immediately after the name? Its standard to leave them as piped links because you're giving his full name and title (Norman Birkett, 1st Baron Birkett, QC PC, although in real life it would be The Right Honourable Norman Baron Birkett of Ulverston in the County of Lancashire, QC PC, don't get me started on my opinion on WP naming conventions)Ironholds (talk) 01:54, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
But it's utterly incomprehensible to anyone just casually reading the article. What it encourages is people HAVING to click on the link to understand the very first sentence in the article. But you're telling me I'm tilting at windmills here, huh? Ealdgyth - Talk 01:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
If I knew what that meant then possibly :P. I'll search around for a link to an MoS section detailing it, give me ten minutes (MoS=long), I was all set to clear up your concerns immediately and all until I realised that not only were my main machine and decent internet connection at uni but so were my sources. Ironholds (talk) 02:00, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Oh right, I get you; I was searching my brains "collection of regional phrases" database rather than its "play/book/film phrases" database, my apologies :P. Found the little bastard: this, particularly "Writers should remember that the meaning of the most obvious (to them) post-nominal initials will not be obvious to some readers. When post-nominal initials are used the meaning should be readily available to the reader. This is most easily done with a piped link to an article with the appropriate title". Ironholds (talk) 02:07, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
Righto, fixed all your points. Ironholds (talk) 11:19, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Ref error fixed, sorry about that. Ironholds (talk) 14:32, 9 March 2009 (UTC)
Query Hi Ironholds "In 1924 the Campbell Case brought down the Labour-led coalition government and forced a general election." I thought it was a Labour Minority government not a coalition.WereSpielChequers 00:21, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
Gah, you're right. Fixed, my apologies. Ironholds (talk) 05:58, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
No probs. 1931 gets more complicated. Ramsay Mac lead a National government with a small part of Labour the Tories and initially most liberals. From the mentions of John Simon one would think Birkett was a Simonite (or National Liberal) but the article also mentions dissatisfaction with the convergence with the Tories which could imply that he went off with Herbert Samuel. But in WWII he was offered a post by Simon not Sinclair A messy period but worth rereading your sources and explaining where he fitted in - obviously not with David Lloyd George! Also where did he stand in the Coupon election? WereSpielChequers 19:15, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
The 20s-30s were generally a confusing period in British political history; the changeover between the Liberals and Labour as the main "left-wing" party meant that hung parliaments were a regular occurrence. I've added in the stuff about the Coupon election, the rest of the information is not really mentioned in the sources. Note that he was offered a judicial position by Simon, who was Lord Chancellor at the time. Sinclair never served as Lord Chancellor, so it isn't surprising that he didn't offer Birkett a job. Ironholds (talk) 00:37, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Images checked and are okpotential improvements/problems Haven't done this before so someone will probably need to check, feel free to completely amend. There are 6 images. They mainly seem okay, though:
File:Birkett.jpg - it's tagged, "This image is in the public domain because its copyright has expired in the United States and those countries with a copyright term of no more than the life of the author plus 100 years." There is no date for the photo and he was 26 in 1909, he looks as though he could be older than 26 in the photo. Don't we need a date for the photo if that tag is used?
I had my pet pencilmonkey tidy it up a bit; the original can be found  here. He looks youthful thanks to the photoshop "smooth" button rather than any copyright issues. Ironholds (talk) 00:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
thanks, how do we know the photo is over 100 years old? Tom B (talk) 11:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
No idea :S. I was putting trust in the uploader, who seems to have retired (so no use poking him). I have a load of circumstantial evidence which I'll put up here as soon as the relevant website stops resolving as "this document has no data". Ironholds (talk) 13:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Hmm. It seems that it may not be PD; the image stuff says it was taken by Elliott and Fry, but all their negatives went to the National Portrait Gallery, who seem to be saying that the earliest E&F photograph they have of Birkett was 1951. Fair use, methinks? Ironholds (talk) 13:41, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
the uploader  appeared to think it was taken in 1930. Tom B (talk) 18:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Great, silly uploaders saying stuff they don't mean. Shall I retag it as fair use? It should pass, Birkett in the 1930s is probably the time he was most.. iconic.Ironholds (talk) 22:04, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Fair use would seem to be the only way to go, Tom B (talk) 12:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
A bit overexposed to my eyes. Anyone wish to mediate, as it were? Ironholds (talk) 00:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
It's going to look different on everybody's computer anyhow, so I wouldn't worry about it. --Der Wohltempierte Fuchs (talk) 13:35, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
File:Nuremberg judges.jpg - I think you would have to put a fair use for the Birkett article, currently the fair use is only for the Nuremberg article. Birkett's eyes are whited out but there are probably not many public domain photos of him available and this was an important event in his life so I'm guessing it's still worth including.
Like you said I doubt we'll be able to find another one; seems fine to me. Ironholds (talk) 00:27, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
I'm sure it would still need a specific fair use rationale for this article, Tom B (talk) 11:17, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
Good point: not an image expert, I'm afraid. I know most of the policies, but tags and suchlike are beyond me. Ironholds (talk) 13:12, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
further on images
File:Birkett.jpg. If you're arguing it's PD, you need to explain why; unfortunately we can't rely on the intentions of a nominator. The image needs at the very least a date.
"Although refused ..." (reverse ellipsis will avoid two "he"s). Then there's a forward "he" ellipsis opportunity in the subsequent sentence.
"... served long enough to draw a pension." Cynical! I guess it's not POV from a source.
Overuse of "he/his". "a private bill in 1962 saw the bill defeated by 70 votes to 36, two days before he died on 10 February 1962" --> before his death on. And avoid bill ... bill by using "its". There's a theme of close repetitions and overusage. Can you sift through the whole text on that basis?
An "also" needs weeding out at the end of the lead; downgrades the status of the "also" statement, as well as being redundant.
Unspaced en dashes in the infobox; see WP:MOSDASH.
It's OK only. Could do with shining up, and not just on the matters I've raised here; someone fresh to the text would be good. Not opposing. Tony(talk) 11:54, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
I've fixed all your points except the spaced dashes; I'm not quite sure how to fix them, I assume it'd involve fiddling with the infobox code. I'm not really one to be trawling the article for errors since if I could recognise that they were grammatical errors I'd have corrected them. Ironholds (talk) 14:58, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Support besides minor things that are being taken care of, I don't see any reason not to support. Ottava Rima (talk) 14:39, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment: Please add ISBN or OCLC numbers to the two references so that the sources can be validated. --RelHistBuff (talk) 21:46, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Check the dates on them; texts published pre-1966 don't have either. Ironholds (talk) 21:55, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
OCLC numbers exist for books into the 19th century. You have to look up the entry on worldcat.org and compare with the book that you have. For example: http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/270810328 is for a book published in 1855 and the OCLC number is 270810328. --RelHistBuff (talk) 23:40, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
Gotcha. How do I enter them? Just in the standard ISBN field or is there a specific OCLC field built into the template? Ironholds (talk) 05:35, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Wait never mind, some nice bloke took care of it. Ironholds (talk) 05:37, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Support: Just one minor issue as a comment. You may want to expand, merge, or restructure the one-sentence paragraph under "Bar work in London". --RelHistBuff (talk) 11:45, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the support; that was added at the advice of a reviewer who indicated that the paragraphs were too long and it would be nice to give a sort of introduction. Can't please everybody whatever I do, heh :P. Ironholds (talk) 13:11, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Image concerns as follow:
File:Ramsay MacDonald rightfacing.29588.jpg: per MOS:IMAGES—However, images should not be reversed simply to resolve a conflict between these guidelines; doing so misinforms the reader for the sake of our layout preferences. If an image is reversed or otherwise substantially altered, there should be a clear advantage to the reader in doing so (for example, cropping a work of art to focus on a detail that is the subject of commentary), and the alteration must be noted in the caption. Please explain why his portrait is presented in this manner.
I don't see how it misinforms the reader; the subject is the same, it isn't like reversing a piece of art. It was done to confirm with guidelines about image orientation. Ironholds (talk) 23:16, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
Neither a man's face nor body is symmetrical. Flipping it horizontally does not give the accurate portrayal, especially if birthmarks and such come into play. Guidelines for image orientation do not ask us to manipulate portraits. The guideline in full: "It is often preferable to place images of faces so that the face or eyes look toward the text. Multiple images in the same article can be staggered right-and-left (for example: Timpani). However, images should not be reversed simply to resolve a conflict between these guidelines; doing so misinforms the reader for the sake of our layout preferences." Jappalang (talk) 00:33, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Alrighty, left-facing one used. Ironholds (talk) 00:47, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
File:Cambridge Emmanuel.JPG: "Taken by a friend"—who is the friend, where is the OTRS that he or she has allowed this photo to be GFDL?
File:Birkett.jpg: can a crop from this photo (taken also by Charles Alexander) not be used as the identifying image for Birkett? If resized to 150%, it is still viewable (although artifacts appear at 200%).
When you say "viewable" do you mean "not an unholy mess of pixels"? Because it does look as if sizing it up to a point where it would be usable is going to cause quality problems. Ironholds (talk) 13:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
The picture on the right is what I meant. It is not unusable, correct? Jappalang (talk) 16:02, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
Well it is just about usable, but size it up like I did here and it looks thoroughly unprofessional; not for a featured article at all. Ironholds (talk) 16:06, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
You need not upsize it. Would [ this version of the article] suffice? Note that while the MOS recommends a portrait to look to the text, it does not stop us from adding such a portrait if circumstances cannot be avoided. In this case, policy (public domain image) and practicality (Infobox cannot be placed on the left) trumps guideline (recommendation that photos look toward the text). Jappalang (talk) 07:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
On another note, where did this photo come from (where did Fys obtain it)? It might not be in the NPG collection. I would recommend going to a library and borrowing Harford Montgomery Hyde's Norman Birkett: The Life of Lord Birkett of Ulverston (illustrated biography) or Lord Justice: The Life and Times of Lord Birkett of Ulverston to investigate if the photo is published in them. Jappalang (talk) 03:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)
Images used in the article as of this version are verifiably in the public domain or appropriately licensed. Jappalang (talk) 14:48, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Support I peer reviewed this and find it has improved to meet the FAC criteria since. I think the lead image should be the fair use image, not the small crop - the crop is too small and he is looking right, away from the text, when the MOS says images should face the text. I am OK with the free Nuremberg trial judges image. Nice job, Ruhrfisch><>°° 17:34, 14 March 2009 (UTC)
oppose No need for copyrighted image File:Birkett.jpg, as a free image of teh subject already used in the article Fasach Nua (talk) 21:53, 17 March 2009 (UTC)
To quote the Fair Use policy (found at WP:NFC) point one: Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose. Where possible, non-free content is transformed into free material instead of using a fair-use defense, or replaced with a freer alternative if one of acceptable quality is available; "acceptable quality" means a quality sufficient to serve the encyclopedic purpose. (As a quick test, before adding non-free content requiring a rationale, ask yourself: "Can this non-free content be replaced by a free version that has the same effect?" and "Could the subject be adequately conveyed by text without using the non-free content at all?"
The quality is not acceptable; sizing it up the the required level produces an unholy mess of pixels; I made an example diff here for what it would look like. The quality doesn't really make it acceptable; I'm not asking for an image where we can tell from his teeth what he had for breakfast, but being able to work out he has teeth would be nice. Ironholds (talk) 05:43, 18 March 2009 (UTC)
The Infobox contains a imagesize parameter that can stop the "blowing up" of images. Jappalang (talk) 07:18, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
And I note the image still looks manky at that size. Ironholds (talk) 07:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
It is certainly not worthless (inferior quality to the non-free image? Yes, but definitely not worthless). His features are clearly identifiable; one would recognize him in the 1940s on the streets from the photo. One might not be able to identify his moles, pores and crowfeet (if any), but the structure of the face, hairstyle, and poise with his glasses are evident. Jappalang (talk) 08:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
If that is what you believe I am willing to run with it. It certainly isn't the quality I'd expect for a Featured Article, but then that isn't the criteria US copyright applies to the use of fair use images. Ironholds (talk) 14:38, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
Oppose, 1a. It's not bad, but it's not up to standard either. Below are some sample issues you can fix, but please extrapolate and check the whole article for similar issues, especially the amibigous "this" and MoS problems. Also, please heed Tony's advice above about getting someone to revise some of the "close repitition and overusage".
I don't know, I don't like the looks of that infobox image. I'd rather have no image than a blurry one.
"He gained a Second Class in the initial History Tripos ..." This phrase had me making a frantic detour through other articles to understand what you are writing about, but I still found it difficult. Now I get what a "Second Class" and "Tripos" are, but what does "initial" mean here? The first of many? Why do you later wikilink First Class, but not Second Class here? Confusing.
"He won the same essay again in 1910" What is the word "again" doing? Also, didn't he win a "contest" or similar, rather than an "essay"?
"Birkett took the second of the Law Tripos in 1911" Here you use "Tripos" as a plural, but I think it's "triposes" according to what I read.
"cementing his reputation as a speaker by holding the attention of more than a thousand people for an hour." Bothersome. Why not "as an effective speaker" or similar? And was this one occasion? Consider tacking "on one occasion" to the end, or even indulging us in when/where/who.
"Birkett befriended Ruth 'Billy' Nilsson" MoS violation. Please check for others.
"Birkett avoided this as he was declared medically unfit." Avoid the amiguous "this".
"He acted as a junior for the prosecution ..." Legal jargon "junior", no idea.
"He had no connections with the solicitors in London, and the clerk at his new chambers got around this ..." Another ambiguous "this"
Violation of logical punctuation in a quotation found and fixed. Please check for others.
I've fixed all the individual points you've brought up except the one about Nilsson. Would you mind explaining the MoS violation to me? It is a rather large document, and I don't have time to scour the entire thing, particularly when I don't even know what I am searching for. Ironholds (talk) 19:05, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
You don't use single quotes unless they're inside double quotes. I don't mean any offense, but why are you nominating an article for FA that you don't have time to scour? I gave you examples of what to look for. If you don't have time to fix it, then withdraw it until you do. --Laser brain(talk) 19:38, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
I would never put an article at FAC if I didn't have time to scour it. Luckily, I'm not putting the MoS up for FA, am I? I meant that I didn't have time to search through the entire MoS to find paragraph seven subparagraph four clause twelve, which mentioned the issue you had with Nilsson, especially when I didn't even know what the issue was. Ironholds (talk) 19:50, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Ah, my apologies. Apparently I need to call it a day already, hm? :) --Laser brain(talk) 19:57, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
My fault entirely, mate; I should have phrased it better. Ambiguous sentence structure is the problem that got us into this discussion in the first place anyway :P. Ironholds (talk) 20:10, 20 March 2009 (UTC)
Comment - I revisited today and am still finding problems. For example, you aren't consistently using a comma after a "In <year>" phrase. There are also continued inconsistencies with logical punctuation. MoS states you may place the period inside the closing quotation mark on a sentence fragment if the fragment expresses a complete sentence; you have done this in some places and not in others. I wish you would move past "fixing the examples" and audit the entire text, or get someone new to look it over. I can't in good conscience support yet. --Laser brain(talk) 23:14, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
Just to clarify; should it go "In <year> comma" every time "in year" appears, or when it appears at the beginning of a sentence? Ironholds (talk) 23:28, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
I believe it's largely down to personal preference (my own is to use the comma); however, only one style should be used throughout the article, so whichever you go for, change the others to match. SteveT • C 20:49, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Never mind, I misread the question; I believe Laser Brain is referring to instances that begin sentences. The others depend, of course, on context within the sentence. SteveT • C 21:04, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Support. The prose is OK; I share Laser Brain's concern to a certain extent, but not enough to warrant opposition, as what issues there are tend to be isolated statements here and there. But it would be a shame if the article didn't have another run through to eliminate several overlong sentences, redundant statements and ambiguities. Some examples only, picked at random:
"They had two children, a daughter, Linnea Birkett on 27 June 1923, and a son Michael Birkett on 22 October 1929." Commas used where colons or semi-colons would be more appropriate to eliminate the ambiguities from the list-like presentation (and perhaps render the sentence less of a chore to read, what with all those speedbumps).
"Birkett returned to Northampton East to campaign for his re-election, facing a much more difficult job than in 1923, because the Conservative candidate was much stronger than in the previous election and the left-wing vote was split because he was also campaigning against Tom Mann, a noted communist."
Section "Bar work in London": Not a fan of the single-sentence paragraph.
"although the bill passed because of the Liberal Party abstaining." The gerund requires the use of "Liberal Party's" (you wouldn't say "me abstaining", but "my abstaining"). You may not like the result; if so, rephrase to avoid either .
Otherwise, an interesting read. SteveT • C 21:48, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
Based on Laser's and Steve's comments, I'll probably go ahead and promote this, but do hope the nominator will recruit another copyeditor to run through one more time. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:16, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
I'll search around for a bit; hopefully I'll have something within a couple of days. Sorry this has turned into such a hassle; I'll try and make sure to neaten any future FACs up to save people time and effort when they get here. Thanks to all for the helpful comments. Ironholds (talk) 23:12, 29 March 2009 (UTC)