From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikipedia:FAC)
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  • a nomination is unprepared, after at least one reviewer has suggested it be withdrawn.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

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.


Code of Hammurabi

Nominator(s): Emqu ( talk) 21:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is for the Code of Hammurabi, which is an iconic text of the ancient Near East and the longest legal text of the period. I rewrote the page two years ago and it remains essentially unchanged. I put it through FAC back then but the process became rather bogged down in personal-preference style edits. I'd love to see it through and I look forward to hearing your views. Emqu ( talk) 21:48, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

First-time nomination

  • Hi Emqu, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as you have not yet had a nomination promoted at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check and a review for close paraphrasing to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • I found and removed some original research in the "reception outside Assyriology" section. The entire article should be checked for similar issues. ( t · c) buidhe 22:45, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Placeholder from Airship

  • Hi Emqu, I'll start the review properly this weekend, but I just wanted to comment on the lead's first two paragraphs. At the moment, they're slightly messy, as they seem to lose focus a lot and the second one is rather short (note that WP:LEAD recommends no more than four well-composed paragraphs, emphasis mine).
  • I would combine the two, saying something like: "The Code of Hammurabi is a Babylonian legal text composed c. 1755–1750 BC. Written in the Old Babylonian dialect of Akkadian, purportedly by Hammurabi, sixth king of the First Dynasty of Babylon, it is the longest, best-organised, and best-preserved legal text from the ancient Near East. The text itself was copied and studied by Mesopotamian scribes for over a millennium. The primary copy of the text is inscribed on a basalt stele 2.25 m (7 ft 4+1⁄2 in) tall, which was rediscovered in 1901 at the site of Susa in present-day Iran, where it had been taken as plunder six hundred years after its creation; it now resides in the Louvre Museum." What do you think? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk) 22:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • The first paragraph of "Mosaic, Graeco-Roman, and modern" is arranged in a confusing way. If there is a consensus as you state in the last part of the paragraph, put that first, then mention any minority views specifically attributed to their holders, not something vague like "some" or "others".
  • There are some issues with editorializing. For example, "even Van De Mieroop acknowledges"—it does not seem verifiable that his position is particularly divergent as the text suggests. There are MOS:WTW issues throughout.
  • Also, I would suggest reducing the number of quotations and mentions of different scholars to aid readability.
  • I have some skepticism about how sources are used and found some failed verification issues, which I flagged in the article. For example, a broad generalization about "all insurance" needs a more recent and stronger source than a book published in 1915. You need a different source than Wolfram von Soden to assert that Wolfram von Soden "proved" anything. Etc. I am finding these issues throughout the article so I am leaning oppose. ( t · c) buidhe 23:03, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Hey Stephen

Nominator(s): Ippantekina ( talk) 03:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about a lesser-known song by American singer-songwriter Taylor Swift, written for an album when she was 18 years old. I listened to this song after the highly publicized Taylor Swift masters controversy and I hate to admit I love the song more than I expected to. I believe this article is comprehensive, well-researched, and well-written for the bronze star. Any and all comments are very much appreciated, Ippantekina ( talk) 03:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by GPT-4-assisted Esculenta

ChatGPG-aided review
I'll give this a try; this will be a little unusual. I'm conducting this review with assistance from the recent ChatGPT incarnation, GPT-4, and will be using this to help assess adherence to FA criteria 1a, 1b, 1d, 2a, 2b, and 4. I've fed it the entire article, and have asked the bot questions about it. The article's strengths, according to GPT-4:
  • "Comprehensive coverage: The article provides a detailed account of the song's background, writing, release, performances, music and lyrics, critical reception, and personnel involved in both the original and re-recorded versions.
  • Use of sources: The article cites a variety of sources to support its claims, including interviews, reviews, and other media publications. (note: I have not specifically entered in criteria to assess reliability of sources, so take this one with a grain of salt)
  • Organization: The article is well-organized, with clear section headings and a logical flow of information.
... and weaknesses:
  • Limited critical analysis: While the article summarizes various critical opinions on the song, it does not provide an in-depth analysis or exploration of its themes or impact on the music industry.
  • Potential bias: The article predominantly focuses on positive reception and highlights of the song, which may give a skewed impression of its overall reception."

I asked it "Do you think the article meets the Wikipedia Featured Article criterion: "well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard"? Give examples to support your decision."

GTP-4: "In my opinion, the article meets the Wikipedia Featured Article criterion for being well-written, as it features engaging and professional-standard prose. The article is comprehensive, informative, and demonstrates a consistent flow, making it easy to understand and follow.
  • Examples to support this decision include:
  • The opening paragraph provides a succinct and informative summary of the song, its background, and its reception. This paragraph sets the stage for the rest of the article and provides the reader with an understanding of the song's context.
  • The "Background and writing" section details the songwriting process and inspiration behind "Hey Stephen," providing quotes from Taylor Swift herself to give a personal touch to the narrative. This section demonstrates the professional standard of the prose by weaving together both facts and direct quotes from relevant sources.
  • The "Music and lyrics" section discusses the song's musical elements, genre, and lyrical content. It provides specific examples of the instrumentation used in the song, as well as references to critical analyses that help the reader understand the song's musical and lyrical significance.
  • The "Critical reception" section presents both positive and negative reviews of the song, showcasing a balanced and unbiased perspective. It cites multiple sources and provides examples of the specific praise or criticism given by each reviewer.

I tried to get it to probe for weaknesses in prose: "Are there any sentences where the prose could be improved to be more engaging and of a professional standard? Please give examples."

GTP-4: "While the article is generally well-written, there are a few instances where the prose could be improved to be more engaging and of a professional standard. Here are some examples:
Original sentence: "It is written in the key of G major and Swift's vocals span one octave, from G3 to G4."
  • Improved sentence: "The song is composed in the key of G major, with Swift's vocals covering a range of one octave, extending from G3 to G4." In this revision, the sentence is slightly restructured to flow more smoothly and maintain a more professional tone.
Original sentence: "Stephen Barker Liles, a member of the band Love and Theft, inspired the song."
  • Improved sentence: "The song was inspired by Stephen Barker Liles, a member of the band Love and Theft." By reordering the sentence, it becomes more concise and easier to understand.
Original sentence: "The song received mostly positive reviews from critics."
  • Improved sentence: "Critics predominantly offered positive reviews for the song." This revision adds some variation to the sentence structure and makes it sound more engaging.
Remember that these improvements are subjective, and different people may have different suggestions for enhancing the prose. The overall quality of the article is already quite high, but these minor adjustments can help to further polish the text and align it with the Wikipedia Featured Article criterion for well-written prose."

Me: "Do you think the article meets the Wikipedia Featured Article criterion: "comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context"?"

GTP-4: "Based on the information provided in the article, it seems to meet the criterion of being comprehensive, as it covers major aspects of the song, including its composition, lyrics, production, and critical reception. The article also places the subject in context by discussing its inspiration, Taylor Swift's career at the time of the song's release, and its impact on her subsequent work.
The article addresses the following key aspects:
  • Background and inspiration: The article explains the circumstances surrounding the creation of the song and the real-life inspiration behind it.
  • Composition and lyrics: The article discusses the musical structure, key, tempo, and lyrical content of the song, providing an understanding of its overall composition.
  • Production and release: The article provides information on the song's production, its release as a single, and its inclusion on Taylor Swift's album "Fearless."
  • Critical reception: The article summarizes the general critical response to the song, including both positive and negative reviews.
  • Commercial performance: The article outlines the song's performance on various music charts and its certifications, highlighting its commercial success.
  • Music video: The article describes the music video for the song and its reception, offering insight into the visual interpretation of the song.
  • Impact and legacy: The article discusses the song's influence on Taylor Swift"

Me: "Do you think the lead section is appropriately concise, summarizes the topic and prepares the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections?" (i.e. criterion 2a)

GTP-4: "Yes, the lead section appears to be appropriately concise, effectively summarizing the topic and preparing the reader for the detail in the subsequent sections. It provides a brief introduction to "Blinding Lights," touching on its release, style, critical reception, and commercial success. By offering an overview of the most important aspects of the subject, the lead section sets the stage for the more detailed information found in the rest of the article."

Me: "Do you think the article stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style?" (i.e. criterion 4)

GTP-4: "Yes, the article seems to stay focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses a summary style. It presents a concise overview of the song's background, composition, production, release, reception, commercial performance, music video, and impact. The article refrains from digressing into tangential topics or providing excessive information that would detract from the primary focus. Instead, it offers readers a coherent and structured presentation of the subject, making it easy to understand and follow."

Me: "what are the drawbacks to the article and potential areas of improvement?"

GTP-4: "While the article is generally well-written and comprehensive, there are a few areas where it could potentially be improved:
  • Prose improvement: Some sentences could be rephrased to make them more engaging and professional. For example:
  • Original: "It has been widely regarded as one of the best songs of 2020." Improved: "The song has garnered widespread acclaim, with many considering it among the best songs of 2020."
  • Additional sources: The article could benefit from the inclusion of more diverse and authoritative sources to further support its claims and add depth to certain sections.
  • Impact and legacy: While the article mentions the song's critical reception and commercial success, it could delve deeper into the impact the song has had on popular culture, its influence on other artists, and any long-term effects it has had on the music industry.
  • Images and media: Including relevant images, such as the single's cover art, or embedding a video of a notable live performance, could enhance the article's visual appeal and provide additional context for readers.
By addressing these areas, the article could become even more comprehensive and engaging, further meeting the Wikipedia Featured Article criteria."

Ok, sorry for the wall of text but I thought the analysis would be interesting for other reviewers, in terms of what this (and similar) tools can do at this time. In general, the chatbot seems to like the article and thinks it meets the FA criteria it has assessed, although it suggests some possible improvements. I hope these comments are interesting and perhaps useful. Esculenta ( talk) 04:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Hi Esculenta, I appreciate your review aided by ChatGPT, but I think some comments are out of place i.e. some bits mentioning " Blinding Lights" (which is a Weeknd song?) or "It has been widely regarded as one of the best songs of 2020." (this song was released in 2008). Not sure if you could double-check the review and remove where it doesn't fit with this FAC? Much appreciated, Ippantekina ( talk) 09:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I agree. Much of it is fine, mind, but owing to the obvious drawback of AI-generated content, of course there will be ones that are confusing.
To provide examples for broader comments. "It does not provide an in-depth analysis or exploration of its themes or impact on the music industry" or "it could delve deeper into the impact the song has had on popular culture, its influence on other artists, and any long-term effects it has had on the music industry" should not be applicable points to make when discussing an album track that barely charted. The "prose improvement" comment provides no real improvement; it just makes it more wordy. Let alone saying the article discussed the key or tempo or the song had a music video, a major impact on Swift, or a single cover---all of which are nonexistent.
@ Esculenta, I noticed through your contributions that you have begun using GPT to review GANs and FACs en masse. If you were indeed to continue using it for such a purpose, I highly recommend you practice oversight with the reviews it generates by making sure they match with the article. This should be a given, because it seems you yourself seem to acknowledge that the text generator has limitations. Thank you. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
11:43, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I don't intend to add a support/oppose on any FACs, this was basically a trial run to see if there was any output that might be useful for improving the article; feel free to ignore or hat this conversation. p.s., most of the reviews are at peer review. Esculenta ( talk) 13:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


For your handy comments at my Open Arms (SZA song) GA, I want to give back and review this. Seems like it's been cooking for a while now; good job with the expansions.

  • Several words you can opt to cut:
    • "which was released" the "which was" can go.
    • "Continuing on" the "on" can go
    • "Swift chose to write songs" "chose to write" can be simplified to "wrote"
    • "could relate to her songs" can be trimmed to "relate to Fearless"
    • "Swift touring on the road" simply say "Swift's touring"
    • "starts with Swift's hums [...] the track ends with her humming" merge into "starts and ends with Swift's hums", which the Sheffield source can on its own support
    • "has her singing with girl-group-styled ad-libs" simplify to "features girl group–styled ad-libs"
  • Reword to "girl group–inspired" and "upright bass–propelled" with an en dash per MOS:SUFFIXDASH; the hyphenated versions look clunky. Ensure the necessary tweaks happen on the prose too
    • The prose also says the ad libs are girl group–inspired. You may wanna note this in the lead
  • "included 'Hey Stephen' to the set list" nitpick - on the set list, perhaps?
  • "has a face" breaks the tense consistency and can give readers whiplash. Perhaps rewrite to " had a 'face' ", enclosing in quotation marks only the word face
  • Do we need to hyphenate high school and fairy tale?
  • Include "a 2019 public" in the masters controversy wikilink so it doesn't run afoul of MOS:EASTEREGG
  • The link to masters is missing
  • Ditto MOS:SUFFIXDASH with "Big Machine–owned masters"; should probably change that to "Big Machine–owned ones" to minimise repetition
  • Speaking of repetition, "Swift's lead vocals at Swift's home studio" and "charted on singles charts"
  • MOS:NUMNOTES says "Comparable values nearby one another should be all spelled out or all in figures", so keep that in mind when listing chart peaks
  • "McBride's husband John's recording studio" clunky; "the recording studio of McBride's husband, John"
  • "such as waiting for somebody by the window[b] and rain[c]" with this structure, the implication is that waiting for somebody by the rain is one of these motifs that "Stephen" embodies, which it does not; make it the first item in the list
  • "Kelsey Barnes commented" 1) repetition and 2) WP:ELEVAR. It doesn't hurt to use "wrote" as main verbs for some of these
    • For example, "dubbed the track 'hummable pop' " -> "wrote it was 'hummable pop' "
  • "Telegram & Gazette said;" that semicolon should be a colon ( MOS:")
  • "selected the song as an example of Swift's songwriting on the album" this kind of writing works better if we're discussing this in the composition section, but this is a review we are describing
    • Suggestion: "Rosen wrote the song was exemplary of Swift's songwriting on Fearless and therefore made the album's 'peculiar charm' stand out: 'Her music...' "

This article is insanely close to FAC quality, so once again props to that! Do ping me when all the issues have been resolved/responded to. Love lots, ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
09:00, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Hi Your Power, thanks for chiming in to review this article! I have addressed all except the hyphen v. endash issue. I wrote i.e. "upright-bass-propelled groove", "girl-group-influenced drums", "high-school and fairy-tale imagery" to comply with the rule for hyphenated compound modifiers. I do agree with the endash thing on "Big Machine–owned masters" though. I stand my ground that the hyphenated compounds are the way to go, don't you agree? Ippantekina ( talk) 16:02, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by Unlimitedlead

  • Taylor Swift albums discography can be linked to "studio album".
  • "By re-recording them, Swift had full ownership of the new masters..." I would replace "had" with something like "gained".
  • Introduce Christopher Rowe before mentioning him.
  • Ditto with Serban Ghenea.
  • "Swift released a snippet of "Hey Stephen (Taylor's Version)" onto her Twitter account..." Forgive my ignorance, but would it be "onto" or "on"? I am unsure.
  • "The title character..." Change "title" to "titular".
  • Who is Kelsey Barnes? She could use an introduction.

That is all. Rather on the short side, but hey, what can we expect from a four-minute song? Unlimitedlead ( talk) 22:20, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Wood River Branch Railroad

Nominator(s): Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 14:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about a little-known shortline railroad in Rhode Island with a very interesting history. 5.6 miles in length, it opened in 1874 and connected rural Hope Valley, Rhode Island, to the national rail network at Wood River Junction, Rhode Island. In addition to shipments for local residents, the company served a number of mills, a factory, a coal dealer, and a lumbering operation; later, a grain mill became the primary customer. Passengers and mail were also carried until 1927.

Money was always short, and the railroad had some very interesting events as a result - one man became president in 1904 to make sure the railroad kept running so his mother wouldn't be isolated at her Hope Valley home. The railroad was almost abandoned after major flooding in 1927, but a deal was worked out where Southern New England's dominant railroad, the New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad, intervened to keep the line going. In 1937, grain mill owner and former speaker of the Rhode Island House of Representatives Roy Rawlings bought the railroad for $301 (not a typo). The company finally came to its end in 1947 when the grain mill and several other buildings were consumed by a series of fires. A few remnants of the line can still be found today. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 14:27, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

I forgot to mention I intend to claim this nomination for WikiCup points. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 14:28, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
    Alt text added for all images. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 14:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • File:Wood_River_Branch_Wincheck.jpg: when and where was this first published?
    Uncertain, other than in the United States. That's why I used the license for presumed copyright expired where copyright term is life +70 years and the date of author's death is unknown. I do have a beginning and end year for when this photo could have been taken, and the latest possible year is 1896, 127 years ago, when the locomotive was reported as inoperable and never ran again. I cannot envision any scenario where this image is copyrighted still in the United States. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    The life term is not an issue, but the tag also indicates a publication before 1928? Nikkimaria ( talk) 00:31, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    That's an inherent part of the template on Commons: [1]. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 01:25, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    And I'm an idiot and just realized there's another template without the published before 1928 part. I've swapped to that template now. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 01:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    There is, but a US tag is needed in addition to that one. Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:06, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Ugh, I wish I could definitively say when it was first published... this is a bit of a pain. Would PD-US-unpublished work? Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 13:21, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    @ Trainsandotherthings: Are you certain it wasn't published before? If not, you cannot apply above license. A09 ( talk) 14:07, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    No, I don't know for certain when it was first published. But I maintain that there's almost no way a >127 year old photograph originally taken in the United States can remain copyrighted to this day. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 14:23, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • File:Islandora_16068-Hope_Valley_engine_house_OBJ.jpg is tagged as requiring restoration. Nikkimaria ( talk) 21:55, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Someone else added that tag unilaterally after I uploaded the image. I don't think it's really in need of restoration, it's not a perfect image but you can clearly see the subject (the engine house). Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 23:36, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by Lee Vilenski

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) 14:28, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by Cyclonebiskit

Placeholder for future review. This kind of article is outside my wheelhouse so some of my comments will WP:AGF on styling and information. ~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 18:43, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Made a minor correction per MOS:GEOCOMMA.
  • owner of a grain mill that was the line's biggest customer. – is this referring to the mill or the business owner? If the latter it should be whom not that
  • Little of the line remains today. – A specific date is strongly preferred per MOS:RELTIME. The last year mentioned in the body is 2017.
    2017 is the date Karr published the second edition of his book. Kennedy published her book in 2018, so I will use that as it's more recent by a year. I'll make the change later today. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 20:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Formation and construction
  • Residents in the Hope Valley area first asked the Stonington – are you referring to "the Stonington" as a company? I didn't see mention of a company/operator up to this point. You seem to go back and forth referring to "the Stonington" as the line and an entity throughout the article.
Early operations
  • While upon opening the line quickly began to show a significant operating profit... – The wording feels a bit clunky. Maybe change part of it to "...the line quickly showed a significant..."
The Waltrus years
  • He recalled one instance when he gave a New Haven Railroad executive intent on abandoning the line "some doughnuts, a glass of milk, and let him talk to my mother ... we decided not to abandon it". – The second half of the quote doesn't flow with the first part. I'd suggest rewording to not have it be part of the quote.
  • The Wood River Branch Railroad was temporarily placed under the control of the United States Railroad Administration with the rest of the nation's railroads in 1917 – Is there a reason why this happened? I'm guessing it's due to World War 1 but this needs to be made more clear if so.
End of passenger operations
  • The floods mentioned can be linked to Great Vermont Flood of 1927 (which itself requires a lot of work). I found a USGS report that provides an overview that could be of use, it's not necessary though.
    The problem is that article only discusses Vermont, but it was clearly a region-wide event (I ran into this previously for a different flood and had to create 1936 Northeastern United States flood because no central article existed). I'd much prefer linking to a similar article for this flood event, linking to the Vermont one will confuse readers. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 20:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • ...and also asked Richmond and Hopkinton to cancel the railroad's taxes if it could be reopened. – Is Richmond and Hopkinton a company, rail line, two people, or two towns? I'm assuming towns based on later text but it should be made clear here.
    Your assumption is correct, and I've made it clearer in the prose. Trainsandotherthings ( talk)
  • ...the Plymouth locomotive (numbered A100)... – is this the gas locomotive leased by New Haven?
    Owned by the New Haven. The Wood River Branch couldn't afford to buy it, so the New Haven bought it for them and leased it to the Branch. That's why it was taken back when the railroad closed. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 20:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Demise and legacy
  • ...which paid the company $26,558,75 for the right to salvage the line... – I'm assuming the typo that needs fixing is for $26,558.75 and not $26,558,750?
    Yes, typo on my part. Fixed. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 20:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Little of the Wood River Branch Railroad remains. Portions of its right-of-way remain extant as of 2017... – restructure to specify the year first before describing its state per WP:RELTIME
  • Originally built in 1872, by 1898 Wincheck was irreparable. – was this from wear and tear or accidents?
    Will take a closer look at Kennedy later today, but likely wear and tear; Wincheck was not new when the railroad acquired it. The Hope Valley Advertiser says that in 1898 Wincheck was "in a state of innocuous disuetude, and fit for the scrap heap, these many months" [2]. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 20:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • The section only details five locomotives but indicates there were ten. I also don't see mention of the A100/1872.
    The funny thing is the numbers weren't consecutive and some were skipped. Cinderella was 6, and then became 9 (allegedly the number was repainted upside down by a painter who had a reference that was also upside down). Gardner Nichols was 1, Wincheck was 2, and Polly was 5. 3, 4, 7, and 8 were never assigned to any locomotives. From 1919 until the 1927 flood the New Haven routinely assigned several different 4-4-0 locomotives it owned to the line as well, with numbers in the 1500 to 1700 range. I will add a paragraph for the Plymouth locomotive today with some details I didn't want to include in the main section of the article. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 20:34, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Station listing
  • I went ahead and reformatted the table to adhere to WP:MOS. I swapped the distance and station listing to improve contextual understanding of the table.

Those are my initial comments on the article. It was a fun read. ~ Cyclonebiskit ( chat) 20:01, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Shooting of Stephen Waldorf

Nominator(s): Harry Mitchell ( talk)

London. 1983. A police task force is hunting a dangerous escaped criminal. Thinking they've got their man, they follow a car through the West End. When the car grinds to a halt in traffic, an armed officer moves in to confirm their suspect's identity. Apparently believing his quarry has recognised him, the officer opens fire without warning. Two more armed officers join in the shooting and, having run out of ammunition, the first officer begins clubbing the man with the butt of his revolver. Only afterwards do the officers realise that the man, who survived but suffered five bullet wounds and a broken skull, is not the escaped criminal David Martin but a 26-year-old film editor named Stephen Waldorf. There was considerable outcry in the public and the press. Two police officers were charged with (but acquitted of) attempted murder and the British government rapidly initiated reforms to police firearms policy.

I've essentially rewritten the article from scratch over a few months as part of a project on British police shootings and the development of police firearms policy. It's had a peer review, where @ Tim riley, SchroCat, and Mujinga: offered some valuable suggestions, and now I think it's ready for its bronze star but I'm always happy to hear more feedback. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 13:40, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Whoop, whoop, this is the sound of the police. I was in Madam Tussauds with my nan when this happened! Now, how about a map? SN54129 13:55, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    I wasn't even conceived! ;) Do you think a map would be helpful? A bit like my reply to SchroCat's comment in the PR that the article doesn't focus much on Wadorf—it wouldn't really have mattered if his John Smith and he was shot in Dulwich because it's the action of the police officers and the reforms that followed that make the incident noteworthy. Still, I can try and dig up a map if you think it would be useful. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:32, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Heh :) I was thinking os one showing their respective routes, and where the police joined in, but perhaps we don't have that level of detail? SN54129 12:08, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Source review - spotchecks not done

  • Don't mix templated and untemplated entries in Bibliography
  • Worpole or Warpole? Nikkimaria ( talk) 14:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Hi Nikki, Worpole fixed. The bibliography is all cite book and cite journal; the only non-templated bit is Waddington's chapter, which is the same way I referenced a chapter on Bennerley Viaduct, or have I missed something? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Is there a reason to not use a template for that as well? Nikkimaria ( talk) 23:22, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Image review

No licensing issues found ( t · c) buidhe 16:05, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support from Tim riley

If we're trading in ages, I was 31 at the time, so a little more respect from you youngsters, if you please! I could find very little to carp about at the peer review, and after a further perusal I can find no more, except to repeat that in my view the images at the top of the article should be put in reverse order so that Waldorf − the subject of the article − has his picture before that of David Martin. I don't press the point and am entirely happy to support. Tim riley talk 15:00, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Support I was also happy at PR and another readthrough shows this is a strong article that meets all the criteria of the FAC. An excellent piece of work. - SchroCat ( talk) 15:13, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Support I suspect I'm the only one that didn't have to pay to get into M. Tussaud's then  :) fine article. Think I agree with Tim re. pic placement, except I might suggest arranging them vertically rather than horizontally. Cheers! SN54129 15:37, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "When the car stopped in traffic, Detective Constable Finch" - as this is his first mention, should his forename be given?
  • "a third officer, Detective Constable Jardine" - and here?
  • "He had served a nine-year prison sentence, starting in 1973 for a series of frauds and burglaries" - I would say this should be either "He had served a nine-year prison sentence, starting in 1973, for a series of frauds and burglaries" or "He had served a nine-year prison sentence starting in 1973 for a series of frauds and burglaries" but not what is there currently
  • "Martin escaped his cell and escaped" - maybe change the second "escaped" to "fled"?
  • I note that the police officers' forenames also aren't given in the body and they are only referred to as "DC [name]". This seems oddly deferential. I would suggest that their full names be given the first time they are mentioned (assuming we have reliable sources for them).
  • "An article in The Independent ten years after the incident, described it" - don't think that comma is needed
  • That's what I got. Oh, and as it appears mandatory to declare it, I was ten years old at the time. By the look of things I watched Tales of the Gold Monkey after my tea that evening :-) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 15:57, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by Unlimitedlead

I shall never reveal my age, but I can disclose that this event took place at least ten years before I was even conceived. Comments to follow soon, I suppose Face-smile.svg Unlimitedlead ( talk) 22:52, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • "The shooting caused a public outcry..." Perhaps this is British English or a personal shortcoming, but the grammar sounds strange to me. I would say "caused public outcry" instead.
  • Do we know Detective Constable Finch's real first name?
  • "Finch, an armed officer, incorrectly believed that Waldorf was Martin and that he had been recognised" This long sentence can be condensed to be more concise. You could try something like: "Finch, an armed officer, incorrectly discerned Waldorf to be Martin."
  • Also do we know Detective Constable Jardine's first name?
  • "The shooting caused an outcry..." Ditto with my first comment.
  • "(Martin was known to carry two guns)" You have already said this previously.
  • "The investigation found that the officers had fired a total of 14 shots" I would add "subsequent" before investigation for clarity.
  • Link parliament to Parliament of the United Kingdom?
  • What are AFOs? This needs to be stated.
  • "In a 2023 book chapter..." I think the book should be named, rather than vaguely referring to it as "a 2023 book".
  • Peter Waddington is linked twice in the Bibliography section.
  • Do we know more about Stephen Waldorf's life? What did he do after the incident?

That's all... Unlimitedlead ( talk) 21:29, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Battle of the Trebia

Nominator(s): Gog the Mild ( talk) 13:11, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Another article on a battle from the Second Punic War. Yes, I am getting a bit fixated on these; I will probably get bored soon and do something different. Meanwhile, here is Hannibal's first pitched battle against the Romans. A mid-winter battle against an over-confident Roman general turned out about how you might expect. I took the article through GAN in 2020 and have been doing bits and pieces to it since. In particular Harrias has just completed a beautiful set of maps illustrating how the fighting went. Hopefully it is up to FAC-standard, but in respect of any areas where it is not, please let me know. Gog the Mild ( talk) 13:11, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • File:2018_05_11_Rivalta_Trebbia,_mémorial_bataille_de_la_Trebbia.jpg is missing a tag for the original work
  • File:Map_of_Rome_and_Carthage_at_the_start_of_the_Second_Punic_War_Modified.svg: see MOS:COLOUR
  • File:Mommsen_p265_(cropped).jpg is missing a US tag and author date of death for the photo
  • File:Balearic_Slinger.jpg: what is the basis for the accuracy of this illustration?
That's a really good question, and one I feared I wouldn't be able to answer to a HQ standard. But I got lucky and found it in the third source I checked. Added.

Nikkimaria ( talk) 13:37, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support by Unlimitedlead

  • "...which encouraged it to resist future Roman demands" Would "enabled" be more appropriate here, or is that not accurate? I just find the usage of the word "encouraged" strange here.
While I am not wedded to it, "encouraged" seems to me to capture the nuance fairly precisely. "enabled": well, one is always able to resist, it is really a question of how sensible or realistic that is.
  • "Hannibal left his brother Hasdrubal Barca in charge of Carthaginian interests in Iberia" Was Hasdrubal Barca given any title/position at this time?
Not that we know of.
  • Not sure if it is just me, but the following sentence reads weirdly: "The Carthaginians needed to obtain supplies of food, as they had exhausted theirs during their journey, and obtain allies among the north-Italian Gallic tribes from which they could recruit, in order to build up their army to a size which would enable it to effectively take on the Romans"
Not sure I get it, but I have recast as 'The Carthaginians needed to obtain supplies of food, as they had exhausted theirs during their journey. They also wanted to obtain allies among the north-Italian Gallic tribes from which they could recruit, in order to build up their army to a size which would enable it to effectively take on the Romans.' Is that better?
  • Is " valley of the Po" Po Valley? If so, I would link.
It is. Done. Ta.
  • "Hannibal is reported to have stressed to his troops that they had to win..." Do we know according to whom?
We do. But in Wikipedia it is usual to put accepted facts in Wikipedia's voice and cite them, rather than attribute everything in line. Where there are differences of opinion, especially when there is no consensus at all, one might name the modern sources in line. (Quotations have a different rule again.)
It is deliberate. The MoS says "Generally, a link should appear only once in an article, but it may be repeated if helpful for readers ...". Rather than expect readers to recall the first passing mention early in the article, or to labour the point in line, it seemed one of those rare occasions to invoke "generally". Happy to debate other approaches and/or changing it.
  • File:Sacred Band cavalryman.png does not have alt text.
How odd. I thought I had cut and pasted it. Done. Thank you. Well spotted.
  • Neither does File:Relieve de Osuna (M.A.N. Madrid) 03.jpg.
It also has px not "upright". I have had a bad day there. Thank you again. Sorted.

More comments to follow. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 20:05, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Good stuff. Thank you. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:06, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "Rome's other consul, Sempronius Longus, was meanwhile assembling an army in western Sicily, with which it was planned to invade Africa the following year.[25] Shocked by Hannibal's arrival and Scipio's setback, the Senate ordered this army to move north to assist Scipio." Sounds like by this time, the army had been in the making for quite some time, which makes me wonder if the first sentence should read: "Rome's other consul, Sempronius Longus, had been meanwhile assembling an army in western Sicily..."
Quite right. Tweaked.
  • "...Hannibal came to believe some of the Gauls in the immediate area were communicating with the Romans" Why did he think that?
We don't really know. Using Goldsworthy purely as an example "Hannibal became suspicious .. Perhaps the Gauls were genuinely duplicitous ... [perhaps] different leaders had approached each side."
  • "when the new consuls took up their positions" As this phrase refers to a future event, I would suggest "when the new consuls would take up their positions"
Good point. Done.
  • "...especially among the troops of the Carthaginian general Hannibal" Since Hannibal has been mentioned numerous times before in this article, I would delete "the Carthaginian general".
Very tactful. Done.
Again. D'oh!
  • "In addition there were an unknown number of elephants – the survivors of the 37 with which he had left Iberia" This has previously been mentioned above in the Carthage invades Italy section. I would pick one location to have this information.
Ho hum. I take your point, but also feel it needs mentioning in both places. I mean, I mention the number of infantry and cavalry in both and you haven't objected. Let me think on't.
Ok. I have tweaked both, to avoid the obvious repetition. See what you think.
  • "The Romans were met by the Carthaginian light infantry; behind them the entire Carthaginian army forming up for battle" The grammar in the second phrase sounds off to me; maybe add "was" before "forming", or replaced "forming" with "formed".
You are correct, it is. Fixed.
  • "Richard Miles says that "many" not in this group were killed;[93] although Nigel Bagnall writes that this was only a minority of the Roman cavalry.[94]" Why the "although"? These ideas do not seem to contrast to me.
They do to me, but the although is entirely optional and so pouf!

A wonderful (and surprisingly comma-filled, I might add) effort.

Thank you. Logically that would suggest that either I am using more commas, or ...

Unlimitedlead ( talk) 22:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

A prompt and helpful review. Thank you. Responses above. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:59, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thanks for the replies, Gog. I'll support this nomination. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 23:17, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Al-Walid I

Nominator(s): Al Ameer ( talk) 03:52, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about the sixth Umayyad caliph, al-Walid I, whose decade-long reign represented the zenith of Umayyad power and prosperity, though his direct role in its successes is unclear. His reign is often deemed by historians to be the fruit of his father and predecessor, Abd al-Malik's, long, hard work. Started editing this article in Feb 2019, it passed GAN in July of that year, and I have been working on it periodically since. I believe it is finally ready for FA consideration. Al Ameer ( talk) 03:52, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • Some images are missing alt text
  • File:Gold_dinar_of_al-Walid_707-708_CE.jpg is missing a US tag for the coin
  • File:Coin_minted_during_the_reign_of_al-Walid_I_ibn_'Abd_al-Malik_in_Istakhr.jpg is missing tagging for the original work.
  • Ditto File:Syria,_Damascus,_The_Umayyad_Mosque.jpg

Comments by Borsoka

  • Indicate the years when Marwan I reigned.
  • ...he gradually restored the dynasty's rule in Syria and Egypt Could the sentence be more specific instead of using "gradually" (for i{xtnstance, "by the end of his reign" or "by [year]/by around [year]")?
  • ...with its eastern dependencies... Consider specifying the territories or deleting the uninformative text.
  • Do we know why he abandoned speaking the classical Arabic?
  • Unlike his father, al-Walid heavily depended on al-Hajjaj... vs Al-Hajjaj's prominence was such that he is discussed more frequently in the medieval Muslim sources than al-Walid or Abd al-Malik... Contradiction?
  • Not necessarily, but I could see what you mean. Decided to scrap the second sentence. Part of it is more pertinent to the article about al-Hajjaj and the rest is somewhat redundant with the Assessment section. Al Ameer ( talk) 03:44, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • ...a desire to install one of his own loyalists, his katib (scribe), Qurra ibn Sharik of the Banu Abs Perhpas "to install his loyal katib (scribe), Qurra ibn Sharik of the Banu Abs"?
  • ...the mistreatment of Medina's pious residents by Abd al-Malik's appointed governor to the Hejaz, Hisham ibn Isma'il al-Makhzumi Only the pious residents were mistreated? If yes, how or why?
  • Will look into this further and elaborate. From memory, he persecuted pious men like Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib who criticized the Umayyad caliphs, etc.
  • "The Qaysi" or "the Qays"?
  • Who are Blankinship and Hawting?
  • Indicate the years when Yazid III, Yazdegerd III, al-Walid II, Ibrahim reigned. Borsoka ( talk) 16:42, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Added. Thanks for the review so far. Will address the two remaining points in short order. Please let me know if any other suggestions. Al Ameer ( talk) 03:44, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Why al-Walid instead of Al-Walid at the beginning of the first sentence of the lead?
  • Introduce Musa ibn Nusayr as al-Walid's governor in North Africa in the lead.
  • The al-Aqsa is attributed to his father by some sources, according to the main text.
  • When did his reign end? The infobox says that 25 January or 11 March although he is said to have died on 23 February.
  • The infobox says that he was buried in Bab al-Saghir, while the main text mentions an other possible place of burial as well.
  • Wallada bint al-Abbas ibn al-Jaz (main text) or Wallāda bint al-ʿAbbās ibn al-Jazʾ al-ʿAbsīyya (infobox)? Borsoka ( talk) 03:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • I'll have a look soon. FunkMonk ( talk) 11:51, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • The German map stands out as a bit of an oddity, due to the language and because it cuts out part of the Maghreb. Are there any English, less cropped alternatives?

Portland Spy Ring

Nominator(s): SchroCat ( talk) 06:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

The Portland spy ring was one of the controversies in the Macmillan government at the start of the 1960s. It was one of a series of spy scandals that rocked the British establishment throughout the decade (it was uncovered between the scandals of Burgess/Maclean and George Blake), and a coup for the Soviets, providing their submarine fleet with details of British technological advances that they copied. Any constructive criticism welcome. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 06:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Support Looks fine to me. A couple of quibbles to prove that I read it:
    • Bell (2007) is not used.
    • Could you eliminate the two-letter abbreviations for American states? ([Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Abbreviations]])
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:39, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Many thanks Hawkeye. Both your points addressed. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 21:36, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comment it's not immediately evident which Portland is being talked about here, since the lede never mentions which country it is in. (I think it needs to be explicitly mentioned because there are two prominent Portlands across the pond)— indopug ( talk) 20:35, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
    • ~Sigh~... Every flaming time I forget to do this. I swear it's not deliberate! Now added.- SchroCat ( talk) 10:04, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Suggest scaling up the map
  • File:Konon_Molody_1961.jpg: source link is dead. Ditto File:Morris_Cohen_spy.jpg, File:Rab_Butler.png, File:Lona_and_Morris_Cohen_1969.jpg
    • OK, These now have updated and archived links - SchroCat ( talk) 10:18, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
      • Hmm. The first two of these have a UPI credit statement on the back, and the last credits AP. Are we certain these were not copyrighted by those agencies? Nikkimaria ( talk) 13:17, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • File:Portland_Spy_-_Talc_tin_with_hidden_compartments.jpg needs a more elaborate purpose of use statement in the FUR. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:37, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • Will do a full review later, but one thing that jumped out: "obtained classified research documents [plural] and passed it [singular] to the Soviet Union." -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 08:07, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • ~Sigh~ Sometimes I wonder if my brain actually works...! Thanks for picking that one up - and I look forward to any further comments. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:51, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "because of the nuclear-power from the reactor" - don't think that hyphen is needed
  • "he was given a Minox" => "he was given a Minox camera"?
  • "were giving the US the information they obliged to under their NATO commitments" => "were giving the US the information they were obliged to under their NATO commitments"
  • "set in a wooden bowel" - a wooden bowel? Unless there's an obscure alternate meaning of that word of which I am unaware, I don't think this is right
  • "a battery with a removable top, containing $6,000 and the radio transmitter concealed beneath the kitchen floor" => "a battery with a removable top, containing $6,000, and the radio transmitter concealed beneath the kitchen floor". Also, could you clarify which $ this sum is in? US dollars seems a bit random, although I guess it could be correct.
  • "Lonsdale was removed from Winston Green prison" - the correct spelling is Winson Green
  • "the Portland Spy Ring and its aftermath has been described" => "the Portland Spy Ring and its aftermath have been described"
  • "$6,000 in 1960 equates the equivalent to" => "$6,000 in 1960 equates to"
  • Think that's it :-) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 20:47, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • Many thanks Chris - All covered now. Thanks very much for your comments - they are all much appreciated. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 09:26, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 16:21, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Under the Cohens, second para, I'd suggest inserting a (some?) date there. This is because atm the reader has to click away to find out when the Verona project started in 1943. There's then a gap of 13 years in which they don't do any thing? I guess if they don't do anything related to the PSR, that's fair enough, but a date to anchor the leaving UIS, etc, would be useful. SN54129 13:35, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • Thanks SN54129. I've added the date they left the US. There's still a gap in their biographies, but it should (hopefully) be enough for this article. Thanks - SchroCat ( talk) 09:39, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • Yeah, that's the ticket! SN54129 12:11, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "the Polish spy Michael Goleniewski about a spy in the Admiralty" - seems a shame to repeat spy like that; "a leak in the admiralty" or something?
  • " MI5 surveillance " - to clarify who the beggars are for the first time, introduce them as domestic intelligence or something.
  • "In the early 1950s" - it rather sounds as though it would read better at the beginning of the para rather than the end: i.e. what they experimented on in the 50s resulted in the Dreadnought and its radar in the 60s.
  • Congratulations are certainly due to Molody on his being recruited by an organisation that would not come into existence for another 14 years... the KGB  ;) (ditto 1st chief directorate)
    • That was rather sloppy! Both by source in merging the two organisations and me for not picking up on it! - SchroCat ( talk) 14:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Any idea how much the Renault cost? Somewhere between the £20 on booze and %150 on the radio, but its relative worth would be interesting to know.
  • Might be worth adding in "to Katrina" ("Before his marriage broke up"), as she hasn't been mentioned for a while. Or perhaps "Katrina, thinking it could".
  • A seventy five meter tall mast in Ruislip?! And no-one noticed! Any idea how they pulled that one off?
    • 75 metre long, not high! I suspect it was wound round the attic a couple of times, but the various sources just deal with the length, rather than the set up. - SchroCat ( talk) 14:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • The radio under the kitchen floor, is this the same radio that was under the cellar floor earlier?
  • Compare the sentence, "he was an illegal—a member of a foreign government working in London under an operational cover" with that of the Molody section: "an illegal agent—a spy working undercover in a foreign territory with no diplomatic immunity". They're extremely similarly phrased, but also, illegal links to two different places in both?
  • "deciphering them using copies of the one-time pads from the bank" - H'mmm, well of course, one-time pads were just that-use once. Was he receiving monthly replacemts? (I guess, but!)
    • It's not covered. I presume he was getting resupplied when he went on his European trips or maybe in London, but there's no mention of it. - SchroCat ( talk) 14:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "In the bag Gee had been carrying" - In McGee's bag?
  • Any idea why Houghton "didn't dare" tell the full story in court? One might have thought it would have been to his advantage.
    • I think much of it would have made it worse for him, but he doesn't really expand on the point in his rather whiny autobiography. - SchroCat ( talk) 14:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • No conclusions 1-4?! Perhaps an explanatory note a lá "after making four points regarding..." whatever.
  • Nicely attended to  :) and a really interesting article. Almost disappointed in the mundanity of the arial though - I liked the idea of some sort of Eiffel Ruislip that no-one ever noticed. Russell T Davies, eat your heart out! Anyway, happy to support this fine article for promotion to featured status. SN54129 15:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by Wehwalt

Just a few things.
  • I might wiki link caravan, as the word's not the same meaning in AmEng.
  • "one-time pads and map references." Could this be better explained?
  • "He was honoured by the Russian government in 1990 by appearing on a stamp." Would you rather stick to "Soviet"?
  • " Wynne had been the subject of a show trial in May 1963" Probably "was" for "had been". Do we need to say "show trial" if we're saying in Wikipedia's voice that he was guilty? Also I imagine the Soviets conducted the trial as I see from Wynne's article he was held in the Lubyanka?
  • The source refers to it as a show trial too. I think the term can be applied even if the party is guilty - it's the propaganda value that makes it a show trial (Gary Powers was certainly guilty of spying and his trial is also widely described as such). I've added that it was held in Moscow - is that enough to cover the Soviet angle? - SchroCat ( talk) 15:08, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
That's it.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:03, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thanks Wehwalt - I'm much obliged as always. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 15:08, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Support Wehwalt ( talk) 15:40, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Source review by Hawkeye7 - pass

  • All the references are nicely formatted.
  • Speller (2005) Page numbers? Also: use title case for book title
  • Siddique (2019) Access date?
  • Spot checks: 7, 21, 22, 77, 90, 93, 108 - all okay

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks Hawkeye7 - both points addressed. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 19:38, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Hungarian nobility

Nominator(s): Borsoka ( talk) 06:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about a privileged group of people in the Kingdom of Hungary. Between c. 1000 and 1944, mainly noblemen were appointed to the highest offices in the kingdom but the Hungarian aristocrats never formed a uniform class. The wealthiest noblemen held more than one-third of all lands in the kingdom, but tens of thousands of peasant-nobles had no more than a single plot. Furthermore, there was a sharp legal distinction between "true nobles" and " conditional nobles" (such as the " nobles of the Church"). Although nobility was officially abolished in Hungary in 1947, Hungarian noble families still live in Hungary and the neighboring countries. I highly appreciate all comments and suggestions from the reviewers. Borsoka ( talk) 06:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by Unlimitedlead

Saving my place here. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 17:14, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • "especially their tax-exemption and the limitation of their military obligations": I think this phrase can go without "their".
  • Done.
  • "Louis I of Hungary introduced...": Seeing as this entire article is about Hungary, I think "of Hungary" is superfluous.
  • Done.
  • "Actually" is a strange word to use. I would delete it for better prose.
  • Done.
  • "The monarchs granted hereditary titles and the poorest nobles lost their tax-exemption from the middle of the 15th century" Two seemingly unrelated topics. Can you either split the sentence or rephrase it?
  • Done.
  • Done.
  • Done.

More to follow. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 19:18, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

@ Borsoka Have you seen these? Unlimitedlead ( talk) 21:15, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Yes, I did (and I thanked them to you :)). I think I addressed all of them ( [3]). Borsoka ( talk) 03:14, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "Neither of these two theories are universally accepted" If these theories are not accepted, then the preceding sentence(s) should read something like "According to some scholarly theories".
  • Done.
  • I find it strange that Constantine VII is referred to as Constantine Porphyrogenitus. I am aware that it is a common name, but I still find it odd.
  • Done. (Although, according to my experiences, he is mainly referred to as Constantine Porphyrogenitus when his works are mentioned.)
  • Can we use a death template in place of the (d. 959)?
  • Sorry, I do not know that template.
  • Carrying on with that point about Porphyrogenitus, I do not believe Porphyrogenitus can be considered a surname. As such, if you keep on referring to Constantine as such, I would suggest sticking with Constantine.
  • Alternative solution.
  • "...two centuries later literary sources mention tents still in use" You have not states previously that tents were used.
  • Rephrased.
  • In addition to saying when the Gesta Hungarorum was compiled, I would also briefly say that it was.
  • Done.
  • Personally, I find that the Origins section does not actually discuss much about the Hungarians' origins. A good majority of the section is about other information, such as lodgings and burial practices. As such, I would find another place to move that to or simply create a subsection.
  • The section is not about the origin of the Hungarians, but about the origin of the Hungarian nobility. Consequently, the section adds information about the Magyar leaders and their way of life before the establishment of the feudal kingdom. Borsoka ( talk) 01:57, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

More to follow. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 13:02, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • Maps are illegible at current size, and see MOS:COLOUR
  • I resized them. Sorry, I do not understand and do not want to understand MOS:COLOUR because I cannot edit maps, pictures, etc. Do you still suggest that any of the two maps should be deleted?
  • File:HetVezer-ChroniconPictum.jpg: source link is inaccessible
  • Changed.
  • File:Hungary_13th_cent.png is tagged for factual accuracy and the source appears questionable - it seems to have copied the image from somewhere (which would make the tagging incorrect) but not clear from where
  • Deleted and a new map added.
  • The source for this new map also appears questionable. Where is it taken from? Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:25, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • I think it is a reliable source ("taneszközök" means "material for teaching" in Hungarian) Borsoka ( talk) 05:35, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Added two more sources. Borsoka ( talk) 06:14, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • File:Hunedoara_castle.jpg needs a tag for the original work.
  • Changed. I do not understand your reference to "a tag for the original work". Could you add a link to such tags?
  • Ditto File:PM_139782_RO_Kemeny.jpg
  • I do not understand your reference to "a tag for the original work".
  • This is a photograph of a architectural work. The image has a tag reflecting the copyright of the photograph, but is missing one for the architectural work. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:25, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • I deleted the picture. I am unable to deal with these issues with photographs and architectural works. Borsoka ( talk) 05:45, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • This applies also to File:Castelul_Huniazilor_-_panoramio.jpg. Nikkimaria ( talk) 13:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • @ Nikkimaria: where can I find the tag reflecting the copyright for the architectural work here ( [4]), and here ( [5]) (both from recently promoted articles)? Borsoka ( talk) 03:44, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • This is only a requirement for places like Romania which do not have freedom of panorama; in places like the UK, conversely, their FOP laws mean that only the photographic copyright needs to be considered. This is why I did not request such a tag for File:Lockenhaus_-_Burg_(2).JPG in this article: it is located in Austria which has FOP for architecture. Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:49, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • What about this picture ( [6])? It is one of the "Winners of Wiki Loves Monuments 2013 in Romania". Borsoka ( talk) 04:04, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Should you wish to use that image in this candidate, it will also need tagging improvements. Nikkimaria ( talk) 04:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • In this case, I do not want to use it. That the winner of a wikipedia competition cannot be used in wikipedia indicates that something is basically wrong with the competition. I added new pictures ( [7], [8], [9], and [10]) Borsoka ( talk) 05:39, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • The second and third of these will need date/place of publication. Nikkimaria ( talk) 13:31, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • The second case is fully addressed. The date of publication of the third picture is mentioned in the file. I added a source for the picture. Borsoka ( talk) 15:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • I don't see a publication mentioned in either source - can you elaborate on where these were published? Nikkimaria ( talk) 23:28, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • The place and date of publication is mentioned on the second picture. The date of publication is mentioned in the file of the third picture (c. 1915). Borsoka ( talk) 02:34, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • In the first case (Batthyányi) yes, the picture itself. In the second case (Almásy), no, I do not have source, but it is quite obvious that Almásy is younger than 30, so the picture must have been taken before 1925. I added two new pictures ( [11], [12]) Borsoka ( talk) 04:42, 27 March 2023 (UTC) And added a third picture ( [13]) as well. Borsoka ( talk) 04:53, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • You can look at the picture itself and use markers such as the apparent age of the subject to make assumptions about when the picture was created. This is not the same as being able to say when it was published. Images can be published long after they were taken, or not published at all. Can you identify publication of those two images? File:Baroness_Emma_Orczy_by_Bassano.jpg will need that as well, and per the tag on it "please specify in the image description the research you have carried out to find who the author was". Nikkimaria ( talk) 21:48, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • 1. Inscriptions on Batthyány's picture say that it was published by Károly Ostermann (Kiadja Osterman Károly) and printed by the Brothers Pollák in Pest 1867 (Nyomt. Pollák testvérek Pesten 1867-Nyomt. is an abbreviation for Nyomtatva /"printed"/) . 2. The source link at Emma Orczy's picture says that it was taken at Bassano Ltd but does not name the photographer. The same link also informs us that the picture was given by Bassano Ltd to the National Portrait Gallery in 1974. Can we conclude that 1974 is the year of publishing? The link also indicates that the picture can be used and shared. Borsoka ( talk) 02:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • File:Stibor.jpg: which tag is believed to apply to the photo?
  • Sorry, I do not understand your note, so I deleted the picture.

&File:Paul_I,_1st_Prince_Esterházy_of_Galántha.jpg: when and where was this first published?

  • File:Emperor_Franz_Joseph_I-Gyula_Benczur-1896.jpg: source link is dead; when and where was this first published?
  • Changed.
  • File:István_Bethlen,_Tibor_Kállay,_1923.jpg: where was this published and what is the author's date of death? Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:11, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • File:Andrássy.jpg: when and where was this first published?
  • In 1865 (added).

Comments by Ceoil

Given the article is 9308 words long and has a +1000 year span, this might be a long review/FAC but it appears a very worthwhile one. The article is very well written, so this review will mostly be about clarity ... via word reduction and removing the few extraneous aside have seen so far. Ceoil ( talk) 23:58, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • Your FAC blurb is far less confusing that the three lead opening sentences.
    I would put "c. 1000 and 1944" in the opening sentance. Ceoil ( talk) 17:27, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • but the kings could promote "a daughter to a son" - rephrase maybe as "...under the Hungarian royal prerogative of prefection the kings could promote "a daughter to a son"
  • Most parts of medieval Hungary were integrated into the Habsburg monarchy in the 1690s. Monarchs The Habsburgs confirmed the nobles' privileges several times"

*We have Habsburg dynasty (article mentions the early modern period) and Habsburg monarchy (article mentions after the 1690s). The House of Habsburg article claims that the held "the throne of the Holy Roman Empire...continuously from 1440". I understand the difference, but maybe explain.

  • Don't like "all noblemen's equality" - equality between the [as outlined above its a very complex strata, not sure of the proper division terminology] classes of nobility. Is "maintained" (passive) right - should it be "reinforced" (active)? Ceoil ( talk) 00:38, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • Masses of Magyars?
  • Around 950, Constantine Porphyrogenitus (d. 959) recorded the Hungarians were organized - wrote that the Hungarians were...?
  • Historians who say - "claim"
  • I would avoid "claim" because it would lead to heated edit warrings. I would say "are convinced". Borsoka ( talk) 06:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Ceoil Louis II drowned in a stream while he was fleeing from the battlefield at Mohács (in response to your edit summary [16]). Borsoka ( talk) 03:23, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Order of Brothelyngham

Nominator(s): SN54129 18:52, 22 March 2023‎ (UTC) Reply reply

A bunch of men pretending to be actors? Check.

A bunch of men actually indulging in "games, madness [and] obscene debauchery"? Check.

Men beaten, goods stolen, a town terrorised? Check.

A hapless bishop writing letters but achieving little else? Check.

Welcome to 14th-century England—again! Another curious gem displaying the past through an alternative lens, this reached GA-level some years ago and then got forgotten about, which is a shame. Having undergone an expansion, polish and update in scholarship, I thought it was worth presenting here. Thanks in advance, all. SN54129 18:52, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • For the Exeter map, I'd actually suggest the alt text is better suited to be the caption than the current caption
Right, swapped em out.
  • File:Miniature_Fête_des_Fous.jpg: what's the original source of this? Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
14th-century guy, dead famous in the illustrated manuscripts world (although probably not to anyone else!), so have added some provenance to the commons page.
SN54129 14:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • "The Order of Brothelyngham was a group of men, who" - don't think that comma is needed
  • "The group appears [singular] to have named themselves [plural]" - any way to avoid this apparent conflict?
Can never remember whether this is an AmBritEng thing ior just my crappy brain, but singularized the latter.
  • "The Church had waged a campaign against theatrical ludi" - could we explain what "ludi" are/were?
Made a short intra-dashes explanation and a slightly fuller background in a new footnote.
  • "the medievalist Lawrence M. Clopper, suggests" - no reason for that comma either
  • "such practices by the laity, in this case, expressed by the Brothelynham Order" - there's a G missing here
  • "This group comprised, as were English monasteries during the period, solely of men" => "This group was comprised, as were English monasteries during the period, solely of men"
Done, although I wonder Tim riley hasn't raised an eyebrow at that yet!
  • "in lieu of the sacrifices emphasized" - UK subject so UK spelling should be used
I know—i'm there! But my bloody auto-refill-whatever, thinks it's in South bloody Dakota or somewhere! I try and catch it where I can, but.
  • "that group should be stigmatized by Christians" - same again, also I believe the word "the" is missing before "group" -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 16:10, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Agree again.
  • Thanks, ChrisTheDude, very much for looking in,; all your points, for now, both appreciated and addressed-even the most embarrassing! Cheers, SN54129 16:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments from Smalljim

Thanks for this great piece of research. A few suggestions:

  • Would the second sentence "...which by now was commonly perceived as corrupt." be better as "...which by then was..."?
  • Probably-done.
  • I think I'm right in that the entry in Bishop Grandisson's Register is the only contemporary (or near contemporary) source - that important fact should be mentioned prominently.
  • I think I can dig out a source which backs this this specifiv=c claim)-I'd certainly like too, and it shouldn't be too difficult.
  • Why "Grandison" rather than the far more commonly used "Grandisson" (even in our own article John Grandisson)? I note it's how ODNB spells it, but it's unclear why Audrey Erskine went against the trend.
  • It was a 50/50; I was going to wait and see who had complained the loudest by the close of play!
  • To aim a possible spanner in the heart of your work (sorry!), I'm not sure if all of your sources rely on Hingeston-Randolph's 19th-century transcription and Chope's translation of 1921, but there is another source: Records of Early English Drama – Devon, Ed. John M. Wasson. University of Toronto Press (1986), that provides more recent versions of both. The book is downloadable as a pdf from the Internet Archive here, but there's no preview (not here anyway). It appears to be a fine piece of scholarship which, on pp. 9–10, contains a newer transcription of the Latin in the Grandisson Register, and there is a new translation by Abigail Young (per p. [vii]) on pp. 323–4. Both differ in a number of points from Hingeston-Randolph's and Chope's work. For instance H-R's quin pocius erroris, translated by Chope as "or rather the Error" becomes quin pocius orroris, translated as "– nay, rather, the horror –". I think we should always prefer later translations over older ones, unless they are clearly inferior. There are a number of places where use of this more modern translation may be preferable, e.g. in the quote box aside "Historiography".
  • No, it's an excellent source, and I'll certainly mine the secondary aspects of it deeply! There just aren't enough of them, unfortunately. The new translation, I will make the primary use of in quotes and put Chope etc, in a footnote etc., again, for the reader to GoCompare if they so wish.
  • Done.
  • Under "Activities in Exeter" - "Name", last sentence, Mortimer doesn't say that Sempringham was the only abbey in the country to house both monks and nuns under the same roof. Mortimer doesn't seem to be too reliable here either: he says Sempringham was Premonstratensian, but it was clearly in the Gilbertine Order at the time.
  • To square the circle, I've omitted his Order error and replaced part of the claim with a similar source. I think he's reliable for small claims such as these.
  • Under "Riotousness", first sentence of second para, Wasson has quendam, not quemdam.
  • My eyes. Done.
  • Under "Later events", H-R and Wasson both show the ludum noxium register entry as being in 1352, not '53.
  • Added a secondary source confirming what you say.
  • In the bibliography, Frodsham, Henisch and Salisbury are out of alphabetical order.
  • Rejigged.
  • This is an old problem to which I haven't found a satisfactory result. The obvious example is Shakespeare of course: imagine having a cite to {{sfn|Shakespeare|2023}}! So the way around it is to let |ref={{whatever}}.That way, we can quote the recent(ish) translation than the original primary source. It's a pain, but IO rely on others' template knowledge in matters of these!
  • Hmm. I'm certainly not an expert, but I don't see this as a problem: look at the FA Hamlet#Editions of Hamlet for instance - there are a number of editions of the play listed there and none of them shows Shakespeare as the author. Couldn't you just omit |last1=Grandisson |first1=J. from the cite book template?  — Small jim  21:18, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

I hope some of this is helpful. I rarely comment at FACs, but this grabbed my attention!  — Small jim  16:37, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Hi Smalljim Thanks for this-if you check my latest edits I've addressed all your points, except of course, the New Source. I've started on that but will get stuck in further tomorrow. I'm creating a table of that historiography quote box so the reader can compare between Chope etc and Wasson, which should be interesting. As I said above, I'll make Wasson and his 1986 commentary the primary source, shunting H-R etc, into the background, somewhat.
    Thanks for looking in, these are all great points! SN54129 19:45, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Happy I can help a little. I've commented further under the last bullet point above, and may have a few more after another read through (if you can bear that!). In your next editing session you'll spot the wonderful invented word 'Grandissonam' that's crept in :)))  — Small jim  21:18, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Thanks for the help, Smalljim, and the technical know-how for |ref=editor- rather than author-so easy I can't believe it! Instead of all that messing about with templates etc. Anyway, I've done that throughout, so we know just have H-R in 1897, bibliographically. The other main thing-the newer source is also appreciated. I've used it on all major quotes, comparing them to Chopes' trans, letting the reader find out for themselves that Grandisson was even more of a hardnut than he has probably been given credit for! By the way, you're right about emphasising the limited and so biased, nature of the source, so I merged most of the discussion into its own source-hopefully that clarifies things for further along. Thanks for Grandissonam; that must be the accusative of To Grandisson...? ;)
  • Also, let me know if you do have further thoughts, of course. SN54129 17:32, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments Support from Tim riley

First few after a quick canter through looking for typos etc. More on actual content later. You might like to revisit:

  • "They also practiced extortion" – unless they were American I suggest they practised it.
  • "gladitorial shows" – "gladiatorial"?
  • "a termination which in devon everyone would understand" – capitalise?

More anon. Tim riley talk 18:24, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

First lot of general comments
  • "Bearing their 'Abbot' aloft" – double quotes, please (MoS).
  • Done.
  • "Martha Bayless has calculate that" – past tense seems wanted
  • Done.
  • "only 10%" – the MoS suggests "per cent" rather than "%" in prose.
  • Done.
  • "of poplar theatrical satires were not attacking the Church" – "popular"?
  • Done.
  • in re the above two points, "only ten per cent were not"" – seems an odd way of saying "ninety per cent were"
  • Indeed! Reversed.
  • "The Order of Brothelyngham is … They were treated" – confusion of singular and plural
  • Done.
  • "dressed in the robes of a Bishop" – capital letter necessary?
  • Done.
  • "was a European phenomenon" – meaning Continental Europe?
  • So "was a continental phenomenon..."?
  • Fine with me. But note that the OED capitalises Continental when used in this context. Tim riley talk 14:00, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "while wearing masque" – I can find nothing in the OED to suggest that "masque" is a costume. Perhaps "wearing masque costume" or some such?
  • Good catch. Done.
  • "and hiding one's identity" – "one's"?
  • Their.
  • "their tormentors receive rewards" – past tense wanted here?
  • Done.
  • "was commissioned by his Bishop" – not sure the job title needs a capital letter here or elsewhere when used generically
  • Of course!
  • "letters of the Bishop to his staff, the Order's avowed opponent" – his staff was the avowed opponent?
  • Corrected, courtesy of em-dashes  :).
  • "comments that that methodology, however, "limited the historical value of his scheme" – we could advantageously lose the "however"
  • Done.
  • "often due to translation or interpretative differences" – In AmE "due to" is accepted as a compound preposition on a par with "owing to", but in BrE it is not universally so regarded. "Owing to" or, better, "because of" is safer.
  • Thanks, done.

More to come. Tim riley talk 22:10, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • "This group was comprised" – the group comprised (i.e. consisted of) and was not comprised of.
  • Done. Schoolboy error. Never fall for it.Err...
    Be aware there's a chap here who runs a script changing instances of comprising to -ised of, because they prefer it that way.
  • Evidently not a speaker of the King's English or a reader of Fowler. If I have time I'll seek out his/her solecisms in other articles and correct them. Tim riley talk 14:00, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "per Wasson" – per? Prefer good English to bad Latin.
  • According to?
  • Me. And the chap whose name I forget who insisted that the Tube should have signs saying Way Out rather than Exit.
  • Oh, on rereading I see what you meant. Yes "according to" looks fine to me. Tim riley talk 14:16, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "preversion" – what?
  • Ah, that bloke in Dr Strangelove? (Meant 'perversions', but social ills describes it better.)
  • "as medievalist John Tydeman argues … scholar J. Kestell Young describes it" – two clunky false titles.
  • The's done.
  • "The leader of the Order" – you need to make up your mind whether or not to capitalise "the order". At the moment you sometimes do and sometimes don't.
  • Well spotted!
  • "approbrium" – should this be "opprobrium"?
  • Done.
  • "they suspected the religeuse" – a word unknown to the Oxford English Dictionary. Perhaps you mean "religieuse", though that applies only to nuns and other pious females. (Not quite true: it also applies to a pastry consisting of a small profiterole placed on top of a larger profiterole and decorated with cream and icing, but I doubt if that is relevant here.)
  • Sounds gorgeous! The profiteroles on top each other, not the nuns on top of each other  ;)

Those are my few queries. On a purely stylistic point I found your use of the construction "So-and-so and such and such, says Fred Smith" rather than the more usual "Fred Smith says So-and-so and such and such" rather tiresome on repetition, but others may disagree with me. Tim riley talk 09:15, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Have gone through and adjust a couple of quotes; see what you think.
  • Thanks again, Tim, I appreciate the detailed review! Cheers, SN54129 13:06, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I'll have a further rereading and come back here to sign off my comments. Tim riley talk 14:00, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Righto Tim, in your own time; I forgot to explain about 'preversions', amusingly, but have done so now  ;) SN54129 14:50, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Happy to support. Meets the FA criteria in my view. A most interesting read – I had no idea there were such goings-on. Should be a box-office hit on the front page. – Tim riley talk 13:52, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks very much for your input and support Tim, it's appreciated. Yes, look out next year for the... Brothelyngham Tapes, or some such  :) SN54129 13:57, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Further comments from Smalljim

Thanks for dealing with my first batch so promptly and efficiently. I've had another read through this evening, and come up with some more red ink, I'm afraid :(

  • In the lead: the caption to the lead image states that Grandisson launched his attack from here. OK, the cathedral was the seat of his power, but he wrote from Chudleigh, as the adjacent sentence confirms. And perhaps "verbal attack" might be clearer.
Clarified that it was his officials who were at the cathedral.
  • 1st para "courtesy of a grand theatrical stage" - no! Even Chope (1921) doubted this.
Or a throne of course. Clarified.
  • Who first used the term "Brothelynghamites"?
I've removed it now, but as far as I can tell, in reliable secondary independent sources, it was Daniel Frankforter.
  • In "Background": 'They were also known as an "abbeys of misrule"' Omit 'an'?
  • 2nd para "debacchationes obscoenas". In both H-R and Wasson it's debacaciones obscenas.
  • Young quote - no need for the two identical references
  • In "Source material": this still sounds as if more than one of the Bishop's letters mentions the Order - I believe that it is only mentioned in the letter of 11 July 1348.
  • I don't get "Furthermore, he would only record events that in his eyes breached canon law." That restriction may be worth mentioning, but what is it furthermore to?
Tweaked, th\t there was more than one available offence open to prosecution.
  • H-R didn't restrict himself to indexing the registers in calendar form, as you state. Although North, writing in the ODNB, says "He restricted himself largely to indexing the contents of the registers" - that's clearly not what he did with Grandisson - he provided (sparsely) annotated transcriptions.
  • Chope published his translation in 1921 in D&C N&Q, not in Transactions of the Devon Assoc (it's correct in the bibliography).
Done. Good spot!
  • In "Activities in Exeter": "understood the word to have meant...", might perhaps be better as "to include the element...", and omit "just" before "a bawdy house" (the point is that the word 'brothel' has dramatically changed its meaning since that time.
Done, absolutely agree.
  • You're missing an "n" from "Gradisson's Registrum", and why suddenly use the Latin word for Register?
  • You have that H-R suggested that Grandisson himself invented the name for the group, followed by 'In his indignation that people so worthless "guiltily laughs at Holy Religion", as he put it[29]'. Yes H-R's footnote does make that suggestion, but he doesn't use your quote (guiltily laughs...) - that is in Chope's translation (not comment), though it's garbled: Chope has "...guiltily laughs Holy Religion to scorn...". Whatever - it needs tidying!
Reworked. Hopefully ungarbled and tidied  :)
  • You state that Sempringham ... was known humorously as Simplingham, cited to Chope. Chope doesn't say humorously.
Removed; not sure where that came from (even Mortimer doesn't use it...)
  • In "Riotousness": you have several times provided two (or more) different translations (Chope and Wasson). I don't think that giving multiple translations that only vary slightly actually helps the reader's understanding of the topic. Maybe such examples should be restricted to the Historiography section? As I said earlier, I think we should prefer a later translation unless it's clearly inferior. Also, the translations in the REED volume, edited by Wasson, were provided by Abigail Young (see comment in my first batch above) - is it important to note that? I don't know.
Removed superfluous translations. Used later translations now and throughout. Acknowledged and sourced Young as translator in the Sources section.
  • The phrase "...with strong Sabbatarian tendencies.[25]" should be attributed so it doesn't appear that it's what Erskine says (she doesn't).
  • In the next paragraph we have Latin (Quendam lunaticum...) and four translations. Surely not necessary here.
Quite. Redux.
  • In the last para you refer to "a contemporary record" - what is it? It seems to be cited to H-R, 1897 p. 1684. but there's no such page in this book.
It was an odd way of phrasing "...his letter". Tweaked.
  • "They were certainly disobedient, and either of which would be sufficient to ensure the Bishop's ire.[44]" I don't understand this sentence.
  • "He subsequently excommunicated the Order". Can you confirm this? Is there another contemporary record?
Dunno, but the relevant, reliable independent secondary source is Julian M. Luxford.
  • In "Historiography": The Chope translation appears twice, and the one in Wasson is missing many spaces between words.
Yes a shame, but got rid of the quote box and spaced some of the letters out. Bizarre! SN54129 16:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "...celebrate the investiture of their abbot with horns". May be better as "by sounding horns" or similar, in case there's confusion over something to do with Viking helmets :)
  • In "Notes: 4. Chope only provides one or two examples.
  • The word "lieu" has a superfluous "e" on the end ...
  • ... as does Hingeston in Note 8.
  • In "Bibliography": Davis is out of alpha order.

Sorry!  — Small jim  23:39, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

No worries, Smalljim, it's what you're here for  :) see what you think as to the changes I've made in response; I think I've addressed nearly everything you raised. Cheers! SN54129 16:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Diodorus scytobrachion

Nominator(s): FunkMonk ( talk) 17:52, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This is the first FAC about a silesaurid, a member of a group of strange dinosaur-relatives, which may actually be dinosaurs themselves according to the latest research. This particular genus isn't known by much, so the article covers everything that has been published about it, and gives a bit of a wider look at its group for context. FunkMonk ( talk) 17:52, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
Added. FunkMonk ( talk) 14:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Pinging the artist, Fanboyphilosopher. FunkMonk ( talk) 08:43, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I've now cited the source I consulted when creating the diagram. As for color, I am of the opinion that color-coding a skull diagram is much more useful for the purpose of visually presenting information on the size, shape, and relationships between individual bones. A black-and-white diagram would not be as immediately impactful for that purpose. For the sake of color-blind readers, I've investigated my coloration style in a color blindness simulator ( [17]). Most colors can still be discriminated in dichromatic views, and even when there are exceptions the diagram is still useful thanks to the context afforded by the legend (top-to-bottom and left-to-right in the columns correspond to front-to-back in the skull). Fanboyphilosopher ( talk) 15:17, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
The legend doesn't say that, so if a reader is unable to distinguish colours how would they understand that context? Nikkimaria ( talk) 00:10, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
In that case I will add that information to the description. Fanboyphilosopher ( talk) 02:34, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Note a new size diagram image has been added to the article, if you want to review it too: [18] FunkMonk ( talk) 14:28, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
And another diagram has also been added: [19] FunkMonk ( talk) 16:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Not, precisely, a review, but I checked for Lint errors and duplinks, and found none. That said, the map & cladogram (I assume meant to be side-by-side?) in the Classification section are instead a map with massive whitespace on the left, followed by a cladogram with massive whitespace on the right. Could another arrangement be found, that doesn't leave so much whitespace? -- SilverTiger12 ( talk) 14:43, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Interesting, doesn't look like that to me, must be different settings. Could you show a screenshot? FunkMonk ( talk) 14:47, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Now fixed by SilverTiger shrinking the map. FunkMonk ( talk) 16:43, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


As a lifelong dinosaur fan, I'll take a look at this later this week. Hog Farm Talk 13:51, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Sonic the Hedgehog 2

Nominator(s): JOE BRO 64 17:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This 1992 Sega Genesis game needs no introduction, but I'll do my best to try: while Sonic the Hedgehog's success proved that Sega could compete with the behemoth that was Nintendo, Sonic the Hedgehog 2 proved that success wasn't a fluke. It established Sonic as a major franchise and made the Blue Blur an industry icon. It wasn't all fun and games behind the scenes, though—development was rife with cultural clashes between the Japanese Sonic Team alumni led by Yuji Naka and Mark Cerny's American Sega Technical Institute staff. Despite considerable reductions in scope, Sonic 2 shipped on time and is still widely considered one of Sonic's best outings.

I began rewriting this article all the way back in 2020 but finally got around to finishing it recently. I believe it's the most comprehensive resource for the game on the internet and it's been a while since Sonic's paid FAC a visit—I hope you enjoy the article! JOE BRO 64 17:34, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • Given the number of non-free screenshots, each will need a stronger justification. Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:47, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
@ Nikkimaria: added alt text and strengthened the FURs—if it needs more work just let me know. JOE BRO 64 16:07, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Guitar Songs

Nominator(s): ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
12:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC)
Reply reply

After months away from FAC, I am back with more Billie Eilish; that is, if you disregard this blip. Today we set our sights on a EP---a quirky one, for it has only two tracks. But despite the brevity, these two tracks are confessional and pensive enough to leave a lasting impression. One "explores the topics of abandonment issues and a desire for numbness as a distraction from the problems that plague the world", and the other is a very detailed chronicling of a car accident experienced by Eilish's very close friend. Ready for any and all comments. :^)

A little aside: @ Indopug, since you opposed the last FAC, you might interest yourself reviewing the parent article now, but of course you are in no way obligated to comment again. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
12:05, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image and media review

  • File:Billie Eilish - Guitar Songs.png has a clearly defined purpose within the article. The WP:FUR is complete, and I appreciate the archived version of the source link being included. There is also clear and appropriate WP:ALT text.
  • Everything looks solid with File:BillieEilishO2160622 (44 of 45) (52152978743) (cropped).jpg, but I think it would be beneficial to include in the image caption what year the photo was taken to provide a fuller context to readers. This is not necessarily required though, and it is more of an encouragement on my part.
    • I chose not to include the year because I feel readers can glean from the prose anyway roughly when it was taken; it makes the caption clunkier as well.
  • I have a question about File:Billie Eilish - The 30th song sample.ogg. The caption and the WP:FUR are focused on the song, but from my understanding, if an editor is using an audio sample for an album (or an EP in this case), it should be restricted to something that is representative of the release as a whole and not just an individual song. While I do understand the EP is only two songs, I think it should be remembered that it is encouraged to keep non-free usage to a minimal, and the caption and the WP:FUR seem better suited to justify the sample's inclusion in an article about the song not the EP. Would there be any way to reframe this as being representative of the EP and less about the song as an individual release?
    • This should be done
      • That looks much better to me. Thank you for addressing this point. Aoba47 ( talk) 03:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Everything looks appropriate with File:Cloud Forest, Gardens by the Bay, Singapore.jpg, and I will assume good faith that it really is the uploader's original work.

I hope this review was helpful. Everything is solid with the images, but I do have a concern and a question about the appropriateness of the audio sample for this particular article. Please let me know if you have any questions and I hope you are having a great end to your week! Aoba47 ( talk) 23:02, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thank you, @ Aoba47, and likewise! I'm off to see a therapist appointment later in the day, so my mood's particularly up this weekend. Hope life is treating you well. ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
02:03, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you for the very prompt responses. I hope you have a solid and productive therapy appointment. It is always good to be in a good mood. I plan on being productive and using this weekend to hunker down and get a lot of off-Wiki work done. At least hopefully. Anyway, this passes my image and media review. Aoba47 ( talk) 03:29, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Made You Look (Meghan Trainor song)

Nominator(s): N Ø 05:10, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about Meghan Trainor's song "Made You Look". After years of experimenting with different genres to little to no commercial returns, Trainor returned to her doo-wop roots and delivered a shocking comeback with this global top-10 single. Although not her most acclaimed release, it appealed to TikTok users and the rest is history. I would like to give special thanks to Aoba47 and SNUGGUMS for their help with the prose and media during this article's peer review. Thanks a lot to everyone who will take the time to give their feedback here.-- N Ø 05:10, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Support my concerns were already addressed during the peer review (where I assessed files used so media review passes as problem-free in my eyes). SNUGGUMS ( talk / edits) 12:16, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • "She struggled while creating her third one" => "She struggled while creating her third album"
  • "rewriting it four times as an attempt of "adapting to"" => "rewriting it four times in an attempt to "[adapt] to""
  • "She stated the elevated emotions" => "She stated that the elevated emotions"
  • "Trainor reprised the song at the eighth season" => "Trainor reprised the song during the eighth season" -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 12:41, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Just addressed these comments, ChrisTheDude! Thank you so much for the review :)-- N Ø 12:50, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Pseud 14

  • Suggest linking "trend" to viral phenomenon
  • Trainor wrote "Made You Look" alongside songwriter Sean Douglas -- co-wrote consistent with the lead
  • Now wrote in both places.
  • attained viral popularity -- same as above, perhaps should be linked to Viral phenomenon instead
  • Piper Westrom thought harken back to the sound of Title. -- per WP:NOTSIMPLE, perhaps something a little simpler than "harken back"
  • it achieved a correct balance between -- achieved a right balance IMO is more appropriate

That's all from me, great work overall. As a note, I have not read other editors' comments so apologies if there are overlaps. Pseud 14 ( talk) 15:01, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Thank you so much for the swift review, Pseud 14! I believe it should all be addressed now.-- N Ø 15:42, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Thanks for the prompt response. Happy to support on prose -- Pseud 14 ( talk) 16:03, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support by Unlimitedlead

Fun! I remember reviewing this at DYK, and now it is finally here at FA.

  • Briefly introduce Sean Douglas (you can say "the songwriter Sean Douglas")
  • ALT for File:DarylSabara2022.png could be more descriptive.
  • Likewise introduce Sean Douglas in the body.
  • You mention in the lead that Federico Vindver was a producer but he is not referred to as such at first mention in the body.
  • "Her body image insecurities after pregnancy and an exercise where her therapist asked her to look at herself naked for five minutes inspired the song" This sentence is rather long and awkward; I suggest rewording it.
  • "Trainor came up with the lines "I'll make you double take / Soon as I walk away / Call up your chiropractor just in case your neck break", a reference to how Trainor's husband..." Suggest: "Trainor came up with the lines "I'll make you double take / Soon as I walk away / Call up your chiropractor just in case your neck break", as a reference to how Trainor's husband..."
  • "Petras adds new ad libs and high notes during her verse..." I believe it should be "added", not "adds", especially since the following sentence (also about Petras) is in the past tense.
  • "The lyrics and flirtatious approach of "Made You Look" were discussed by critics" Can we have a reference for this statement?
  • This is a summary statement to transition readers between the paragraphs so it's not directly stated in one secondary source but sourced by the following sentences.
  • Ditto with "'Made You Look' debuted at number 95 on the US Billboard Hot 100 issued dated November 5, 2022"
  • "Additionally, the song charted within the top 20, at number 11 in Hungary": if we know that it debuted at number 11, is it really necessary to say that it was top 20?

Unlimitedlead ( talk) 16:05, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article's DYK had the most views any of my hooks have ever gotten, if I remember correctly. Thank you so much for that and for coming back to review this for FAC, Unlimitedlead! All the comments should be addressed now :) -- N Ø 19:29, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I will support this nomination. Thanks for getting back to me so quickly. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 19:39, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. I participated in the peer review process for this article, and all of my concerns were already addressed there. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 ( talk) 18:06, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


Source review

  • What makes Renowned for Sound, Riff, and Plugged In high-quality reliable sources?
  • Renowned for Sound was launched by an editor who now has 20 years of industry experience. Riff has an extensive editorial team and is ran by Daniel Willis according to their About page, who has contributed to LA Times, The Atlantic, and several other reputed publications. I believe Plugged In is not a great source for anything controversial but another user at a noticeboard suggested it should be incorporated to represent diverse critical opinions about the song. I would be willing to remove this one if you insist.
  • Has Riff been cited by any other publications, or does the author of the article (Piper Westrom) have any credentials of her own?
  • The Plugged In author is listed as an intern, and while it is good to have diverse critical opinions, this website does not seem like a high-quality source for music criticism so I would remove it
  • I'm not sure how to check citations but Riff has been recognized with three awards by the San Francisco Press Club and the author in question has written for Newsbreak. They have an extensive editorial team and there doesn't seem to be any oversight problem. I have now removed Plugged In.
  • Do note that News Break is deprecated per WP:RSPSS. I'm just trying to get at why we care about their opinion as the author seemingly hasn't written for any other publication of a higher notability. Upon searching on ProQuest, it appears that Riff Magazine has been quoted/cited a couple of times. I would personally not include it, but I'll leave it up to you.
  • Italian radio refs should use Template:Cite press release; the second is missing author
  • "Meghan Trainor Chart History (Billboard Vietnam Hot 100)" → Billboard Vietnam Hot 100
  • link
  • "as the second single from Takin' It Back (2022)" → not supported by All Access ref

This passes the source review. Heartfox ( talk) 23:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Prose review

  • "An online dance challenge choreographed by TikTok users Brookie and Jessie set to "Made You Look" became a trend on the platform, following which around two million user-generated videos also used the song." → this is confusingly situated between a sentence discussing the a capella version release and one discussing the other remixes
  • the commercial performance section should have an intro sentence saying it was one her highest-charting songs in years
  • likewise for the performances paragraph, an intro sentence like "Trainor promoted the song with appearances on several television shows" would help distinguish the paragraph topic
  • what order are names in the credits section listed in?
  • Just the liner notes order I believe, which goes: producer, songwriters, instruments, and mix/master.
  • Some of the quotations could be paraphrased to be more understandable because Trainor doesn't seem that eloquent discussing the song. For example:
    ""[adapt] to what's going on in the music industry" → could be paraphrased "respond to market shifts in the music industry"
    "Everything I write I'm like 'Yo, TikTok's gonna eat this up,' like I truly um am focused on like, my fans on TikTok, [...] that's my home and I'm writing for TikTok."
    "I knew for this music video that I wanted it to be bright, fun colors. That's my thing, always ... but I wanted this to feel like (an) elevated (version of 'All About That) Bass,' more saturated"

Once these comments are addressed, I will be happy to support promotion and pass the source review :) Heartfox ( talk) 02:55, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks a lot for the source and prose reviews. I believe the above comments should be addressed.-- N Ø 15:12, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support. Heartfox ( talk) 23:24, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Chilean cruiser Esmeralda (1883)

Nominator(s): Ed  [talk]  [majestic titan] 01:47, 18 March 2023 (UTC), Muwatallis II ( talk) 17:36, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Hey folks, this article is about the Chilean cruiser Esmeralda, a warship that marked an important milestone in naval design—albeit a short-lived one. This was the world's first protected cruiser, a type that made Esmeralda's builder a lot of money. The soundness of Esmeralda's design has been debated both then and now, but given the rapidly improving naval technology of the time, it was in any case destined to be quickly surpassed by new warships. Little more than a decade after Esmeralda entered service, Chile sold it to Japan to help fund a newer and larger vessel. My thanks in advance to everyone who takes a look through this article! Ed  [talk]  [majestic titan] 01:47, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Bombardeodeiquique.png needs a US tag
  • File:Tsushima_battle_map-en.svg would benefit from a legend, and what's the source of the data presented?
  • File:Japanese_cruiser_Izumi_at_Sasebo_1908.jpg: when and where was this first published? Nikkimaria ( talk) 04:14, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • Hello Nikkimaria! I've added a US-PD_expired tag and swapped the second image for a regular map. For alt text, I think only one image needs it + the captions serve well enough for the others. Please let me know if you disagree. For the third image, a publishing date is not required per Japanese copyright law, which for this time period needs a publishing or creation date to prove something is in the public domain. I have a longstanding unresolved talk page message related to how the publishing requirement was added to the template. Ed  [talk]  [majestic titan] 05:25, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments from Mike Christie

Good to see you back at FAC.

  • "Constructed by the British shipbuilder Armstrong Mitchell in the early 1880s, the company's founder ...": needs rephrasing; the founder was not constructed by Armstrong Mitchell.
  • The lead says Esmerelda showed the flag and conducted gunboat diplomacy during the Panama crisis of 1885. The body has "the Chilean government sent the ship on an unusual and statement-making voyage to Panama, where it showed the Chilean flag alongside the great powers" with no more details about what Esmerelda (or the Chilean government) did there. Do we need both "show the flag" and "gunboat diplomacy" in the lead?
  • Suggest linking to "Navy_Directory#Background" instead of to wiktionary for "stricken"; the wiktionary sense is hard to spot on that page. You have another link near the end of the article; if you do want the duplicate link I would make the same change there. Are "struck" and "stricken" synonyms in this usage?
  • In the "Background" section I think it would be worth giving the date of the end of the War of the Pacific (presumably April 4, 1884, when the Treaty of Valparaiso was signed), and the date of Esmerelda's completion, making it clearer that she never participated in that war.
  • I initially read "developed it from the Japanese cruiser Tsukushi" as meaning that the ship that became Esmerelda was originally destined to become Tsukushi. The next sentence clarifies the situation, but how about "who based the design on that of the Japanese cruiser Tsukushi" or something similar?
  • "Nathaniel Barnaby, the Director of Naval Construction for the British Admiralty, (the department in charge of Britain's Royal Navy), would later write that ...": don't use both parentheses and parenthetical commas.
  • Per MOS:TYPOFIX you can correct "Chili" to "Chile", unless you feel it's significant in some way.
  • "This perspective was part of a larger effort to draw attention to the underfunded and under-equipped state of the United States Navy." Does this mean that the quote just before this should not be taken at face value?
  • We say it "lacked a proper conning tower", but later that "the conning tower was provided with its own 1-inch armor".
  • "While the British government upheld its neutrality through the active prevention of warship deliveries to the countries involved in the War of the Pacific, Esmeralda was finished after the conclusion of the conflict and arrived in Chile on 16 October 1884." Presumably the Chileans knew about the British policy. If they knew they would not be able to take delivery till the War of the Pacific was over, I think that should be clearer in the "Background" section where the war is discussed as an incentive for the order.
  • "She did not find them, although Abtao would later join the rebels." Suggest "and" instead of "although"; there's no contradiction here.
  • "which bombarded the positions of the Presidential troops until they finally capitulated": I think you can drop "finally".
  • "fired three shots to alert the Presidential forces of the arrival of the Congressionalists": I think it should be "to the arrival", not "of", but why would Esmeralda want to alert the enemy?
  • "with a successful result": a bit vague -- what actually happened?
  • "Renamed Izumi, the Japanese Navy": needs to be rephrased; the Japanese Navy was not renamed. Perhaps "It was renamed Izumi and employed by the Japanese Navy in ...".

All fairly minor points; looks good overall. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 14:19, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Hey Mike Christie! I didn't even have a chance to leave you a talk page message before you caught this. :-) Thanks so much for this review. I've tried to address all of your thoughts, and some specific points follow:
    • "Struck" and "stricken" are synonyms in naval parlance. I've added a more specific links to wikt:stricken#Adjective, as I'm looking to give the definition of the word. Does that work?
    • The Background section: I added "Esmeralda was the most capable of these ships, and although British neutrality meant that it could not be delivered until after the war's conclusion, the Chileans ordered it with the intention of gaining naval superiority over their neighbors", citing Grant's Rulers, Guns, and Money. I haven't added the requested dates for the end of the War of the Pacific/Esmeralda's completion, but I can if this change is not enough to satisfy your point.
    • The conning tower point is tricky. It had a conning tower in the sense that the position was used like one, but unusually it was not one of the best-protected areas on the ship -- it was only protected against rifle fire. I've added the rifle fire bit to the article, and could swap "proper" for "full-fledged" if that makes more sense?
    • Three shots: that's an excellent catch. I went back to the source and clarified that the ship's crew was alerting the Congressionalists to their arrival. Ed  [talk]  [majestic titan] 21:13, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
The fixes all look good. Re the conning tower, how about saying it lacked a "fully-armored conning tower", if that was the main shortcoming? And one more point I just noticed: you refer to Esmerelda almost throughout as "it", but in the "Chilean Civil War" section you twice use "she", which I assume is an oversight. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 15:36, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
@ Mike Christie: I've gone with "thickly armored," if that works? From the descriptions in sources, it sounds fully armored... just not against naval guns. :-) I've also added an explanatory note in the article for that + addressed your second point. Ed  [talk]  [majestic titan] 02:48, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support. Changes all look good. Perhaps "heavily-armored" instead of "thickly-armored"? But either is fine. Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 10:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

1894–95 New Brompton F.C. season

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude ( talk) 22:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Following my 21 previous successful nominations of seasons from the history of my beloved Gillingham F.C., I thought I would challenge myself and delve back almost to the beginning of the club's history in the far-off days of the Victorian era. As ever, feedback will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 22:01, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Drive by comments

Steelkamp ( talk) 00:25, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

@ Steelkamp: - done -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 08:17, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
The Daily News is still linked to a dab page. It seems it should link to The Daily News (UK). Steelkamp ( talk) 08:32, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
@ Steelkamp: - done (someone else got there before me :-)) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 08:47, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Accessibility review – The 1st, 3rd, and 4th tables are missing integrated captions and the 5th table is missing row scopes per MOS:DTAB. You can also add alt text to the infobox image using the alt1= parameter. Heartfox ( talk) 03:23, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

@ Heartfox: - done :-) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 08:36, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • "The New Brompton club had been formed in May 1893" => "The New Brompton club was formed in May 1893"
  • "The club was invited to join and allocated a place in Division Two, the lower of the new league's two divisions" => "The club was invited to join and allocated a place in Division Two, the lower one of the new league's two divisions"
  • "Ahead of the new season, New Brompton played a friendly against Barking Swifts" => "Ahead of the new season, New Brompton played a friendly match against Barking Swifts"
  • "having been signed by the club after he impressed in an inter-county match between teams representing Kent and Sussex" => "having been signed by the club after he impressed them in an inter-county match between teams representing Kent and Sussex" -- N Ø 13:07, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • @ MaranoFan: - all done apart from the second one, which is not how it would ever be expressed in British English -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 13:12, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Support -- N Ø 13:27, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Saving Private Ryan

Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 22:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about the 1998 war film Saving Private Ryan, a highly influential film about a troop of soldiers tasked with recovering a single man and the last surviving son of the Ryan family, James Ryan, and getting him out of World War II alive. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 22:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • File:Niland_brothers.jpg: when and where was this first published?
  • File:Matt_Damon_TIFF_2015.jpg: the source link includes a ND license, and the photo ID link for NASA is dead. Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:53, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Hi Nikkimaria, I removed the tag from the Matt Damon one as I searched the site and it appears to have been removed. I wouldn't know where to find the original release date of the Niland brothers image but I know it's prior to 1945 since three of them were dead by that point. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 18:14, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
On Damon, now we're left with a problem: the NASA tag states their stuff is not copyrighted unless noted, and now our only source link asserts copyright (the ND license). On Niland: that supports that the image was created before 1945, but the given tagging is based on publication. If we can't demonstrate a publication from that era, we can't use that tag. Nikkimaria ( talk) 00:05, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Morning Nikkimaria, so I have replaced the Matt Damon pic with File:Matt Damon 2014 3.jpg and I have found this page here with a newspaper clipping using the image of the Nilands. Is that any good? Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 09:16, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
That gets us halfway there - it demonstrates this was probably published in the 40s. But any idea what that publication is? We'd need to confirm lack of copyright renewal for the current tag. Nikkimaria ( talk) 00:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
So searching the article title on via our library gives me this, which probably won't load for you unless you go through the library. This was printed in The Buffalo News, June 9, 1944 . Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 16:36, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Great. So if you can add that information to the image description page, this should be good to go. Nikkimaria ( talk) 22:03, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Done Nikkimaria Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 22:46, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Serial# emerges from pill box

Saw this the other day as it happens, so count me in. The main question is, without having read the article yet, whether it's true that the opening scene is what most people remember of it.... SN54129 12:01, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Hi Serial Number 54129, sorry was that not a rhetorical question? The opening scene is definitely the most memorable part, probably followed by what happens to Miller. IMO anyway, the sources only talk about the opening scene. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 22:19, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments from SNUGGUMS

  • If you can find out for certain what the total budget was (instead of giving a range), then I'd go with a specific number.
  • "The cast includes"..... I'd recommend "Other cast members" or "The cast also include" or something like that when we've already mentioned Tom Hanks and Matt Damon who are also part of the cast, contrary to what the current phrasing suggests.
  • By "most involved scene", do you mean the one used most for filming?
  • "Despite concerns about releasing a serious war drama in a season normally reserved for escapist entertainment" is a trivial concern you can safely scrap; just focus more on the actual results
  • "had an important impact on" → "impacted"
  • "three of four brothers"..... we should add "Ryan" in there to better establish a family connection
  • The plot section should make a distinction between James Francis Ryan (the one being sought) and James Frederick Ryan (who he got temporarily mixed up with) as the middle name discrepancy was how John Miller and his crew realize they initially went after the wrong guy
  • Try to avoid having super-short paragraphs with just one or two sentences as that makes the flow of text feel choppy
  • Under "Cast", you should adjust "Saving Private Ryan's cast includes" per my earlier comments for cast listings within the lead
  • Using "Frank" for "Frank performed rewrites" is confusing when Frank Darabont and Scott Frank are both being discussed shortly beforehand
  • It seems like "found this a 'a mentally demoralizing experience' because the cast started together" has an extra "a". One of them should be deleted.
  • The entire "Context" subsection is superfluous, and most of it focuses on other irrelevant films. Speculation over how much this movie would earn also isn't nearly as important as the official gross.
  • Don't presume all readers will know what publications the critics are writing for; we should name more of these than just (which I'm not fully sure is trustworthy)
  • "Best Director (Spielberg) and Best Actor (Hanks) at the Empire Awards ." has a stray space before the period
  • "Best Casting (Casting Society of America, Denise Chamian)" is missing a comma between the ending parenthetical and its accompanying citation
  • The New York Observer needs italics for "While the Observer found the German characters" (and should use the paper's full name)
  • "now considered one of the greatest war films ever made"..... see WP:RELTIME
  • "anchored by another winning performance" should have "anchored" start with an upper-case "A"
  • "Notes" are a separate entity from "References" and thus shouldn't be lumped under the same heading as them

Once these get fixed, you should be up to par. SNUGGUMS ( talk / edits) 02:15, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

I've done these, I'm sure we've had this discussion about Context sections on a previous FA but I do disagree on them being superfluous, I find them quite interesting and it sets up expectations vs reality which i think, especially for films 20, 30, or 40 years ago, helps establish what the films were competing against, provides natural internal links to these films, and helps us understand where things predicted to do well failed and things thought to be limited end up overperforming. I have, however, trimmed it down a bit. Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 21:53, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Following the compromise of a trim and all other points being addressed, I give my support to the nomination. SNUGGUMS ( talk / edits) 23:50, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thank you SNUGGUMS! Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 08:51, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Accessibility review – The infobox image is missing alt text. Heartfox ( talk) 03:28, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Heartfox am I missing something? The infobox has an alt field that is filled in. Did you mean the infobox? Darkwarriorblake / Vote for something that matters 21:54, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
It was added by Vaughan J. Heartfox ( talk) 00:31, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Telephone (song)

Nominator(s): FrB.TG ( talk) 12:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Get ready to be dialed into Lady Gaga's world with " Telephone", where she delivers a phone-tastic performance that's sure to ring in your ears long after the song ends. Another FAC on a Gaga song by me, have at it. FrB.TG ( talk) 12:09, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review - pass

  • All of the images appear to be appropriately licensed.
  • Usage of the non-free music video screenshot is amply justified by the detailed caption.
  • File:Beyonce.jpg is in use on several websites so it is hard to establish who took the picture but assuming good faith that it is the uploader's own work as claimed.-- N Ø 14:00, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • The source link for File:Lady Gaga Telephone cover.png is dead (at least on my end).
  • In the lead's first paragraph, there are two sentences that start with the song's title, i.e. ( "Telephone" metaphorically represents) and (Musically, "Telephone" consists), and I think it would be better to vary one instance to avoid repetition.
  • Apologies for being super nitpick-y, but I do not think the word "guests" works in this instance (they go to a diner and poison the guests' breakfast). I would consider people eating at a diner to be more customers than guests. I have not just never seen "guests" applied in this context.
  • This is a random suggestion so apologies again. I vaguely remember the Kidz Bop cover of this song having something weird, and after doing some research, I found a few sources ( The 25 Most Ridiculous and Confusing Kidz Bop Lyric Changes, 7 song lyrics that were rewritten to avoid the censors, and The 13 Most Awkwardly Altered Lyrics On Kidz Bop 18) that focus on how the cover changes lyrics to be more kid-friendly. It might be notable enough to mention in the "Other versions" section.
  • For the captions for the Britney Spears, Beyoncé, and Tyrese Gibson images, I would include the years that they were taken to provide a clearer and fuller context to readers without having them click on the image.
  • I have a clarification question about this part (but Spears rejected it). I was curious if we knew for certain if Spears was the one to reject it, as she was under her conservatorship and it seemed like a majority of the creative decisions were handled by others and less by her. Have any sources discussed this? I tried to look it up, but all the sources I found attributed the rejection to Spears so it could just be me speculating, but I still wanted to ask you anyway.
All the sources I found related to it only said that Spears rejected it. I didn't see someone else influenced this decision.
That is what I thought too. It is unlikely that we will ever know the exact nature of how this song was rejected (or how songs in general are rejected as a lot of coverage seemingly links these decisions to the artist when it could be the label, the artist's team, etc.). Thank you for the clarification. Aoba47 ( talk) 16:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • I believe that all of the song's credits not only need to be listed in a separate section, but also need to be incorporated into the actual prose. I did a spot check to judge this, and I only see Paul Foley and Gene Grimaldi mentioned in the "Credits and personnel" section and not in the prose.
  • Quentin Tarantino is linked twice in the article.

I hope this review is helpful so far. My above comments cover the lead and the "Background and release" section, and I will read through the rest of the article later in the week. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 ( talk) 17:07, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thank you for your comments, Aoba. I have resolved them in parts and will get to the rest soon. FrB.TG ( talk) 16:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you for the response. Take as much time as you need. I will read through the article more and post further comments when you are done addressing everything. I hope you are having an enjoyable week so far! Aoba47 ( talk) 19:55, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Okay, they all should be done now except for where I have left a reply. I hope you're enjoying your week so far, too. :) FrB.TG ( talk) 15:45, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you for the kind words! Aoba47 ( talk) 16:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • For this sentence (It was called an album highlight by Nicki Escuerdo from Phoenix New Times, Michael Hubbard from MusicOMH and Evan Sawdey from PopMatters.), I would put the citations in numeric order. I would encourage you to check the article for other instances of this.
I actually put that in order that the publications are listed.
  • I would shorten the start of this sentence (Media outlets The Guardian, Rolling Stone, Belfast Telegraph, Billboard, Vulture and Uproxx ranked "Telephone" as one of Gaga's best songs.) to just Media outlets as I do not think it is necessary to list all of the music publications in the prose.
  • Tanner Stransky should be linked in the article and in the citation.
  • I find this sentence, (Director Jonas Åkerlund and cinematographer Pär Ekberg had to finish filming in two days that involved multiple locations, dance numbers, many extras and busy schedules of Gaga and Beyoncé.), to be awkwardly constructed. I get the meaning, but I think the information could be conveyed better. For instance, when reading it aloud, I found the "two days that involed" a bit awkward. Plus it was unclear on why there was a two-day limit until the end when the performers's busy schedules were mentioned.
  • The cast of Queer Eye did a lip sync performance of "Telephone" on Lip Sync Battle, and it has appeared to have received enough coverage from various sources ( Billboard, E! Online, Los Angeles Blade, Out for some examples) to warrant a mention in this article in my opinion.
  • "Telephone" was a lip sync song in the season 14 of RuPaul's Drag Race. Did it get enough coverage to be considered notable enough to be mentioned here? I could not find any real coverage on this, but I only did a superficial look.
Unfortunately, I couldn't find anything on this either.
  • Around the time that "Telephone" was released, Lady Gaga and Beyoncé had a separate and similar collaboration with a " Video Phone" remix. The "Video Phone" Wikipedia article brings up how critics compared the two songs and music videos, but this article does not address any of that. I would think that would be notable enough to mention in some capacity.

This should be all of my comments, but I will take time over the weekend to read through the article a few more times just to make sure I complete my due diligence as a reviewer and make sure I have not missed anything. Aoba47 ( talk) 16:20, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thank you for your thorough review as always. I think I have incorporated them all unless stated otherwise, and look forward to your rereading of the article. FrB.TG ( talk) 20:56, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • I would find a way to better incorporate this sentence ( Nicola Formichetti outfitted the video, which includes fashion pieces by Thierry Mugler and Atsuko Kudo, as well as Gaga's own creative team, Haus of Gaga.) into the section as I am not sure putting it as its own separate paragraph is the best choice.
I have included this in plot subsection following a sentence which talks about the designer of an outfit. Not sure it goes there but I couldn't think of anywhere else where it works.
  • I remember speculation on a sequel to the "Telephone" music video with " Aura" being a popular pick. Gaga teased a follow-up, and it was here and here and here. Have any media outlets further discussed this sequel. To be clear, I am unsure if this should be added to the article. I personally do not see enough coverage even with the three sources I've linked above, but my hesitation is primarily with not wanting to adding speculation or teases that ultimately did not result in anything. With that being said, I still wanted to get your opinion on it either way.
Yeah, I remember that as well but as you said, those were merely speculations, and I don't think this warrants a mention.

These are my last comments. Thank you for your patience with my review and I hope it is not too much of a pain. I had a lot of fun reading through this article. It gave me a lot of nostalgia and memories. It's wild to think that this song was released over a decade ago lol. Aoba47 ( talk) 17:28, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thank you again, Aoba. Your review was definitely not a pain and was very helpful as always. I'm glad you enjoyed reading it; I also had a lot fun researching the different analyses. It really is strange to think the song/video is now 13 years old; it feels like yesterday when I first listened to it but then again I started listening to Gaga much later. Back then, I was far too young for her stuff and would've been traumatized for life LOL. FrB.TG ( talk) 11:35, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you for addressing everything! The responses above make sense, and I agree that mere speculations should not be included in the article. I was in high school when this song was released so it makes me feel crazy old lol. I support this FAC for promotion and best of luck with it. Aoba47 ( talk) 17:01, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


Have you ever considered splitting the music video into its own article à la " We Found Love"? Granted it is connected to the song, but I'm just wondering what your thoughts are given that it includes five subsections which is essentially an article within an article. Heartfox ( talk) 21:46, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

@ Heartfox: I've thought about it and also considered it for Alejandro (song) back when I expanded its music video section but at nearly 5k words, I think this article's size is pretty manageable. The WFL article is already at nearly 6k words even with a separate music video article (3k words) so a song article of 9k words would have been far too big. FrB.TG ( talk) 16:13, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


Saving a spot ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
04:51, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • There is inconsistency with the way you italicize certain italicizable terms in the sources (LA times has the album title italicized, but the MusicOMH one doesn't, for example)
  • Some of these references lead to deadlinks, like the MTV source used in the background and the Popmatters review
  • Some points for consistency re. lead and body.
    • You use "with additional songwriting by LaShawn Daniels, Lazonate Franklin and Beyoncé" in the prose, but the lead has a more wordy version. It would be nice to make the lead word-for-word to condense it.
    • Is there a reason why "suffocation" is in quotation marks in the body but not in the lead?
  • Re. the "fear of suffocation" bit
    • You write in the lead that the song is about her fear of suffocation "from the media", but I think it's a slightly off summary of what she said ("Paparazzi" acts as a better metaphor for this). With "Telephone", Gaga was simply fearing that she could not find time for fun given all her work as an artist, media scrutiny or not
    • You can paraphrase the quotations here to avoid repeating the phrase "fear of suffocation" by describing it as
      • "fear of not finding time for fun given the increasing pressure for her to work harder as an artist" in the lead.
      • "fear of not finding enough time for fun because of her work life. She described it as a feeling of suffocation: 'something...' " in the background.
Music and lyrics
  • Is there a reason why we are repeating the Personnel subsection here? Seems a little redundant. IMO I'd just stick to mentioning the songwriters, moving that part to the tailend of the succeeding paragraph.
  • "Musically, 'Telephone' has been described as dance-pop." by whom? Also, if there are other sources that describe the genre and none of them contradict what your initial source says, I'd remove the attribution; it seems way too convoluted for what should be a simple declaration of genre.
  • "appears ... in a rapid fire way".
    • Perhaps you mean Bey delivers her verse in a rapid fire way?
    • Shouldn't this be hyphenated? And I feel like this isn't a really encyclopedic term; if this is quoted from the cited source, I'd add the quotation marks.
  • is not a reliable source for chord progressions and such.
  • What are Colton's credentials?
Critical reception
  • Wood's comment is less of praise and more of an analysis of the lyrics that you can include in the prior section. If you go through with moving this, I'd split the Colton analysis into its own paragraph
  • You can add onto the MusicOMH commentary
    • The source also praises Bey's rapping part in the bridge apart from the bridge itself + the ending, so you may wanna include that too
    • After that, you can add onto the sentence: "saying it was 'briliant [and] maddeningly great'."
  • "believing that the track exudes an excitement that suggests potential derailment" what does this mean? The "most fundamental" bit from the Independent could also use clearer wording
  • You might want to consider mentioning that Independent ranked "Telephone" as Gaga's 7th best song; makes the commentary you mention in the article more valuable
  • "Melanie Bertoldi from Billboard..." this is a lengthy quotation, and the only thing worth including here is the "Gaga and Beyoncé have left the listener with just one option: surrender to the dancefloor" bit. Which you can easily paraphrase, e.g. "Sawdey wrote that this elevated the song [...] Billboard's Melanie Bertolodi wrote that this chemistry creates an atmosphere catchy enough to elicit some dancing from the listener."
Music video
  • Perhaps links for "original negative", "contrast", and "grain" as used in the article would be beneficial given they're technical film terms that the average reader of song articles isn't really expected to know
  • I synthesized some comments there by merging them into the first sentence of the reception section. Feel free to revert if you wish.
    • You can also add in a footnote which critic from which publication made those comments, to keep it consistent with the prose which lists the authors instead of just the publications.
  • Everything in the first paragraph starting from "Matt Donnelly from the LA Times" fits better into its own paragraph.
  • I don't think Ganz's comments on the feminism count as praise ? Would it be better to make the opening paragraph "Some critics commentated on the video's feminist themes."
    • I also feel like it works better as a second sentence given the "is certainly cinematic and oddly feminist" bit
  • Sandy Rios is a talk host for the oh-so-conservative Fox News, and they aren't exactly what I would call respectable music critics ... I'd remove this.
  • "Yebra wrote that Gaga is criminalized although she is a victim of domestic abuse." I assume his analysis means to say "not only is Gaga a victim of domestic abuse, she has to find herself shackled by the prison system" ? I'd rewrite the sentence as such if that's the case
  • "authors Lori Burns and Marc Lafrance" ditto wrt credentials
Accolades / live performances
  • Looks good to me
Other versions
  • "He denied leaking it despite demands" what does this mean?
  • Pempengco is deadnamed; please change his name to Jake Zyrus.
  • Per WP:SONGTRIVIA take good care of including "usage in media" type sentences here. Look at Shake It Off for a good example. Reese Witherspoon's Sing cover has been discussed in depth by multiple RS, and Lupita Nyong'o reached out to TS herself to get approval to use the song (which she attributes to getting her out of a career slump) for a film, a fact also widely covered in media. Which makes these "usage in media" coverage worth nothing in the article. Now, let's look at the "Telephone" one
    • For the Kidz Bop one: the E! ranking is interesting, and it does provide some foundation for possibly including this factoid, being considered a ridiculous lyric change and all. But apart from Idolator, this lyric change is not really covered much, so I'm giving you the choice to remove it or not. I personally prefer removing it because of the scarcity in sources, quite unlike the examples I mentioned.
    • Little Mix. I doubt unofficial poll results from a third-party website regarding the X Factor week count as proper coverage for this cover. There has to be more to this than just a passing "so-and-so covered it". Being released as a single does not make it notable either. Please remove.
    • The one for Glee is definitely worth mentioning here, however.
      • Look at this ABS-CBN piece that summarizes critical and celebrity response to Zyrus's and Michele's cover. There are also some additional details on the commercial performance. If you need some Filipino phrases here translated, just ask me.
      • Here's a BBC piece summarizing how Zyrus introduced his debut appearance in Glee.
      • And another article of a similar nature, this time from GMA.
      • And a Philippine Star article that summarizes how the episode went down, plus more critical response to the episode. (You got LA Times, Billboard, and EW dishing out takes on Zyrus's performance, so definitely worth using this.)
    • Apart from the Glee cover, the one in Queer Eye is the only one here that warrants mentioning IMO. Apart from the Billboard reference, which has some opinions to say about it. You have Entertainment Weekly, Out, Gay Times, PinkNews, and ET Canada that provide you with supple commentary about the cover. Use them to their fullest potential; include details on the performance apart from just saying it existed, and include reactions to the looks, the showmanship, the singing.
  • In summation, I would advise not mentioning how Little Mix and Kidz Bop covered the song and instead focus on fleshing out Glee's and Queer Eye's attempts to do so.
To wrap

I have thoroughly copyedited the article in full to address some minor issues in the prose - primarily cohesion, concision, flow, redundancy, and clarity. Nothing about the content has been changed in a major way, which I hope should be fine with you. Feel free to revert any changes with which you disagree.

Those are all the comments I have. Sorry that I've said a lot lol. It's already a pretty solid article; most of it involves tweaking with the prose, anyway. Once all of my comments are addressed, I'll take a look at the article again and see if it merits my support.

And if you have the time and energy, I would appreciate a review of my current FAC, but as always, you are in no circumstances under any obligation to do so. I hope Wiki-life and off-wiki life are treating you well, FrB.TG. Have a nice week ahead! ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
04:56, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Battle of the Great Plains

Nominator(s): Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is another from the Second Punic War, as the Carthaginian war effort falls apart. A certain lack of esprit de corps may be detected in this battle. The article shares many features with the immediately preceding battle of Utica. The article was overhauled and went through GAN in January. I hope that it will be favourably received here, if so I hope to shortly be bringing you the battle of Zama. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:06, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support by Unlimitedlead

You know the drill, Gog. Comments to follow over the next few days. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 18:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • The ALT for the lead image doesn't seem to match the actual photograph?
I have removed "black and white".
  • Instead of template formatting like {{c.}} 30,000, can we have {{circa|30,000}}?
  • Was Polybius more favourable to the Roman or Carthaginian side? This would change the meaning of the sentence "The near-contemporary historian Polybius considered this act of bad faith by the Romans to be the single greatest cause of war with Carthage..."
Nope. As Primary sources says "Polybius's work is considered broadly objective and largely neutral as between Carthaginian and Roman points of view."
  • "In 210 BC Roman reinforcements stabilised the situation;[23] later that year Publius Cornelius Scipio,[note 3] arrived with further Roman reinforcements to take command in Iberia" Superfluous comma before note 3?
I am going for a little lie down.
I try not to make the same mistakes too many times. Instead I find new ones to make.
  • "He was elected to the senior position of consul in early 205 BC, despite not meeting the age requirement" Do we know how old he was? That might be useful to briefly mention here.
Good point. Done.
  • Is there anything about Hanno on Wikipedia? Or shall it remain linkless?
There is nothing more about him anywhere. Linkless he shall remain.
  • You should be consistent with your usage of the Oxford comma: for instance, I see "here was also extensive fighting in Iberia, Sicily, Sardinia and North Africa", but then I see "Scipio assembled a vast quantity of food and materiel, merchant ships to transport it and his troops, and warships to escort the transports"
In the case you cite the commas are all needed for clarity. Eg, removing the last one has the merchant ships transporting their escorts.
  • "When word of the defeat reached Carthage there was panic, with some wanting to renew the peace negotiations" Do we know if "some" refers to general citizens, or was it lawmakers/government officials?
Senators. Added and sourced.
  • Do any sources state what "Africanus" means? As in, what does it translate to?
Of the first six I checked which mention it, no. The only one which says anything about it is Lazenby "... the first Roman general to be known by a name derived from the scene of his victories". The fact that no later sources seem to repeat this explicit claim makes me a little twitchy.
  • The title of Rawlings (1996) is not capitalised.
Oops. Fixed.

I think I've spotted more frequent comma usage in this article!

There is no need to be insulting.

By the way, I've recently spoken with my dear English professor, who informed me that my methods of commaisation, while not incorrect, are quite antiquated. I don't dare to ask how old you are, Gog, but certainly you write like a young person!

Lol. I imagine that I am older than you are.

Wonderful work on yet another Punic War article. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 19:37, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks ULL, all good points and all addressed. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:57, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Then I shall be glad to extend a support. Keep up the good work, lad. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 22:29, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you. You are starting t sound very British. Gog the Mild ( talk) 23:08, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Really, now? I must being hanging around too many Brits... (looks at you and Dudley)
Wait. How did you know I was American? Unlimitedlead ( talk) 23:12, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
*smug smiley*


  • A while since I got to one of yours in time, so marking my spot. FunkMonk ( talk) 21:03, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "battle at Cirta, and again defeated" in the intro are both links to the same article.
Bleh, fixed.
  • Link names in captions?
I don't usually as I consider it dup linking. But if you prefer it, I will. Could you clarify what you mean by "names"?
I'd link Scipio, Second Punic War, and battle of Zama, to make it easy for the readers skimming the article to get an overview. FunkMonk ( talk) 17:37, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thanks for dropping by Funk, appreciated. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "The near-contemporary historian Polybius considered" As I've repeated a couple of times, could be nice to note that he was Greek, to show impartiality.
I don't see how that would establish impartiality. Plenty of Greeks of the time disliked the Romans. Often for good reason. And I don't see how this would communicate what you think it would to the average reader. But added.
You agreed with the rationale when I brought it up long ago, the assumption being that being neither Roman nor Carthaginian, he would he would have less of an interest in . FunkMonk ( talk) 21:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "and equipped legion provided by their Latin allies; allied legions" This confused me a bit. By Latin allies, do we mean Latin-speaking people outside Rome proper, wouldn't they already be considered Romans due to being part of the empire?
There was no Empire. This was the Republic. There was a very sharp distinction between Romans and non-Roman ethnic Latins. Most of whom probably but not certainly spoke some dialect of Latin.
Makes sense, I'm not too strong on Roman chronology. FunkMonk ( talk) 21:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • " who were not Carthaginian citizens. (Which was largely reserved for inhabitants of the city of Carthage.)" Shouldn't the period of the main sentence come after the parenthesis, and the first word in the parenthesis be de-capitalised? Probably a style variation I just don't know of.
To me that would look really odd. And it looks standard as it is. Given that the same phrase has gone through 11 FACs unchallenged, I think it's a style variation.
  • "close combat. (The latter were usually Numidians.)" Same, but pardon me if it's only sheer ignorance that I haven't seen this style before.
I had a similar issue with Unlimitedlead and we both ended up confused with the other's approach. Perhaps we could ask the scholar and guru of all things stylish Mr Riley to arbitrate? Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:38, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Could still be interesting to hear Tim out. FunkMonk ( talk) 21:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Link "Libyans" to something?
Linked to something.
  • "Aged 31 was elected to the senior position of consul in early 205 BC" Missing "he" before "elected?
Bleh again. Sorry.
  • "But Roman commitment was less than wholehearted, Scipio could not conscript troops for his consular army" Missing "and" after the common, to show it is the result of the first part of the sentence?
In my use of English "and" would mean that the second part of the sentence was something additional to (and) and implicitly separate to the first. (Eg, ham and egg.) But it is easy enough to tweak. Does 'But Roman commitment was less than wholehearted: Scipio was not allowed to conscript troops for his consular army, as was usual, but could only call for volunteers.' work for you?
Yeah. FunkMonk ( talk) 21:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "Livy gives totals" Introduce him as Roman historian?
Apologies. I forgot I wasn't using an introductory sources section. Done.
Good stuff. Thanks FunkMonk, looking forward to the rest. Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:38, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Support - couldn't find more issues in the rest of the article. FunkMonk ( talk) 21:44, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thanks Funk, appreciated as ever. I think I have covered everything outstanding from above. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:51, 22 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support from Tim riley

Splendidly clear and readable article. It is my usual practice to put any article I review through a spell-checker, and I am enchanted to find that your "Hasdrubal Gisgo and Syphax" should be "Hasdrubal Gismo and Syphon". Or not. Be that as it may, here are a few quibbles, none consequential enough to prevent me from adding my support:

  • "Most male Roman citizens were eligible for military service" – "eligible" sounds like a privilege. Perhaps they saw it that way − Dulce et decorum est and all that − but speaking as a proud holder of The Queen's Award for Cowardice I see them as "liable" rather than eligible. I do not press the point.
I have used the word in 17 prior FACs and it has not been picked up. But you are quite right. Changed.
  • "less than whole hearted" – the OED makes "wholehearted" a single word.
Hmm. Wholed.
Your "Hmm" sent me to the other dictionaries on my shelf. The Bloomsbury is with the OED, Collins ditto but admits a hyphenated alternative and Chambers hyphenates the word, but whatever way it ain't two separate words. Tim riley talk 16:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "Scipio could not conscript troops for his consular army, as was usual, only call for volunteers" – "only" is not a conjunction: you could do with a "but" in front of it.
  • "more than 90% were infantry" – I may be out of date – it is in fact my default position – but when last I looked, the MoS recommended "per cent" rather than "%" in the prose.
Which bit are you looking at? I was relying on "Write 3%, three percent, or three per cent".
Blimey! You're on your own there, laddie! I leave it to you. Tim riley talk 16:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
That was from the MoS. Delving a little deeper [!] Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers says "In the body of non-scientific/non-technical articles, percent (American English) or per cent (British English) are commonly used". "commonly used" huh? Ah well, changed. Serves me right for delving.
  • "individual centuries - the basic Roman army manoeuvre unit of 80 men - to exercises …" – you want spaced en-dashes rather than hyphens here.
Good grief! I don't know what came over me.
  • "Hanno and 1,000 of his men were killed or taken prisoner" – Hanno was killed or taken prisoner? Surely you know which?
I believe that he was in a SchroCatian state of indeterminacy. This has now collapsed.
  • "The size of both of these armies … have been questioned" – singular noun "size" wants a singular verb, "has"
  • "stripped them of all of their overseas territories" – is the second "of" necessary?

Pray consider these minor carpings, but I am happy to support the article for FA. It is clear, highly readable, balanced, evidently comprehensive without going on at length, well and widely referenced and well illustrated, even though Scipio has got no nose. Quomodo olet? Malodorus est. – Tim riley talk 14:52, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thank you as ever Tim for keeping me on the straight and narrow. All of your comments addressed. The % one with a query. Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:38, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Splendid stuff! Sorry to have raised and then dropped the % point. Would it be intolerably feline to ask if you are thinking about changing the "eligible" in the 17 articles you mention? Be assured I shall not pursue the point. Onwards and upwards to further top-notch Punic War articles. Tim riley talk 16:07, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I am going to have to. Or else you will bring it up at every future Punic War review. % also changed, see above. Gog the Mild ( talk) 16:23, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Excellent. Happy to leave my support clearly displayed so that the co-ordinators (you know what they're like) don't miss it. Tim riley talk 21:35, 16 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review - pass

Not too many images.

All good. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 00:18, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support Comments by JennyOz

Placeholder for now JennyOz ( talk) 08:59, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Hi Gog, only some minor questions from me...

info box

  • Medjerda River - this name not mentioned in prose, change to Bagradas River per elsewhere?
  • image - I'm confused. Why is it named bust of Sulla? Is it another photo of same bust as that on Sulla which is captioned "Bust formerly thought to be of Sulla"? If it's Scipio, should it be renamed on commons? Do the refs in the infobox explain it?


Wikipedia is a notoriously unreliable source. Personally I never believe anything I read on it. And don't get me started about Commons. Yes, the cites nail down as firmly as anything from 2,000 years ago is ever likely to be that it is Scipio. I hate putting cites in captions, but have had so many - entirely reasonable - queries on this that I have gone with them. Why an image "formerly thought to be of Sulla" is considered to be appropriate for the Sulla article I really would not like to say.
Agree, a weird one JennyOz ( talk) 15:08, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Gisgo spelling but Gisco elsewhere
  • After a disastrous Roman setback in 210 BC (ie Baetis) but later "In 211 BC the Romans suffered a severe reverse at the battle of the Upper Baetis"
Hmm. I hadn't realised it could be read that way. Slightly rephrased to be less ambiguous.

Opposing forces

  • tightly-packed formation - no hyphen
Ah, "-ly". Removed.
  • if the other commander was - if one commander was?
Gone with "if either of the commanders".


  • while the Numidian cavalry under Masanissa were - Masinissa
*eye roll* I thought I had got all of those.
  • the battle opened with the cavalry on each flank charged - what does "charged" mean, ready to fight?
Sorry. Tjhat got mangled somewhere in the copy editing. Should read "the battle opened when the cavalry on each flank charged"


  • ...not Carthaginian citizens. (Which was largely reserved for inhabitants of the city of Carthage.) - Punc, ie not a sentence?
Ah. Nice spot.
  • Masinissa also married Syphax's wife, Sophonisba, Hasdrubal's daughter. - Bigamy normal? Had Syphax been killed after capture?
No, he died in captivity a year later. The sources don't directly comment on that aspect, but the founder of Rome (Romulus) married the already married woman Hersilia in the wake of the "rape of the Sabine women", so there seem to be traditional precedents which raised few eyebrows.

That's all from me, JennyOz ( talk) 11:33, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Wonderful stuff. Just when you think you have nailed down all the corners, Jenny comes along and spots all of your silly errors. Thank you. Gog the Mild ( talk) 12:11, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
All good thanks Gog, very happy to s'port. JennyOz ( talk) 15:08, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Source review - pass

  • All sources are of high quality. All are from the last thirty years, which is unusual for an article of this type.
  • Sources are well-formatted.
  • Spot checks: 55, 58, 61, 88 - okay

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:49, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Cheers Hawkeye7, appreciated. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:52, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Query for the co-ordinators

@ WP:FAC coordinators: Please sirs, can I have another one? Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:57, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

More...?! Oh all right. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:56, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Marshfield station

Nominator(s): –  John M Wolfson ( talk •  contribs) 17:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about the most complicated junction on the Chicago "L", and the station that served it. The Metropolitan West Side Elevated Railroad had a trunk line reaching west from downtown to Marshfield, where it split in three to serve all throughout Chicago's west side. It chose Marshfield Avenue, a minor street next to the much more prominent Ashland Avenue, to serve as this junction point, which actually contained two junctions; a crossover east of the station, and a another one west of it. Even more crazily, it served an interurban (essentially a light form of commuter rail) known as the Chicago Aurora and Elgin Railroad (CA&E) for much of its existence. Alas (or, really, fortunately for residents), a new line and subway to go downtown was constructed removing the northern part of the junction and, eventually, the station itself. The western part of the junction has a spiritual successor that still exists, but not the station.

Major thanks to Steelkamp for GA reviewing this article and helping me sort out and arrange the loads of information on the topic; this was not your neighborhood "L" stop. I would like this review to conclude by the end of April for WikiCup purposes, but I am well aware how little control anyone has on that. –  John M Wolfson ( talk •  contribs) 17:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Nom pinging

It makes me slightly nervous that this has not received any feedback after a whole week and has no watchers other than myself, so I'm silently (re-)pinging certain users here. Thanks! –  John M Wolfson ( talk •  contribs) 16:09, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

No problem @ John M Wolfson. I can review this nomination soon. – Epicgenius ( talk) 16:26, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I have not forgotten about this nomination. I'll take a look tomorrow. – Epicgenius ( talk) 23:29, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Passing comment by Richard Nevell

  • I like the use of a chart to illustrate ridership data. At 1000px it is a touch wide; in preview mode 500px seems to work pretty well, and while I think you'd still need to scroll on mobile it does reduce how much. Richard Nevell ( talk) 19:35, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • @ Richard Nevell: I tried to make the graph like a science paper (which is also why the caption is on top and the graph is separated from the text, unlike the images) but it appears that graphs don't allow for sizing relative to the page width. 500px is quite better for mobile users, thankfully. –  John M Wolfson ( talk •  contribs) 21:25, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

David Bentley Hart

Nominator(s): Jjhake ( talk) 02:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about a living American writer, philosopher, religious studies scholar, critic, and Eastern Orthodox theologian born in 1965 noted for his Baroque prose and provocative rhetoric. He has translated the New Testament for Yale University Press and been criticized by other Christian thinkers who consider him heterodox in a variety of ways. Jjhake ( talk) 02:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

First-time nomination

  • Hi Jjhake, and welcome to FAC. Just noting that as a first time nominator at FAC, this article will need to pass a source to text integrity spot check to be considered for promotion. Good luck with the nomination. Gog the Mild ( talk) 13:48, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Thank you. Is the source to text integrity spot check something that someone else will complete automatically, or is it something that another Wikipedia editor needs to complete as they have time and interest? Three other editors provided reviews recently: two peer reviews and one GA review. I could ask some of them if they would be willing to complete a source to text integrity spot check if that would be helpful. Jjhake ( talk) 13:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • File:David_Bentley_Hart_3_Nov_2022_Interview_cropped.png is described as an interview crop - where is it cropped from?
  • File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg: has the permission been verified by VRT? Nikkimaria ( talk) 03:18, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  1. I recorded this interview with Hart and posted the video content in two places. Most of it is on a video course subscription service where I am the director. A little of it, I posted to my personal YouTube account. Hart shared links to both of these from his Substack newsletter here.
  2. No, I'm not familiar with VRT, should I send them a copy of the email that Hart sent releasing the David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg image into public domain? Jjhake ( talk) 11:55, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Update: In case helpful here, I've just sent a note to that included a full copy of the emails between Hart and myself in which Hart released File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg into the public domain. Jjhake ( talk) 13:29, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Further update regarding Roland image (File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg): Alfred Neumann, a volunteer with with Wikimedia Commons, does not consider my request to David Hart (that he "release this image into the public domain") to be adequate, and I have put David Hart directly in contact with Alfred Neumann in the hopes of getting this verified by VRT. -- Jjhake ( talk) 17:47, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    David Hart forwarded me Ticket#2023031410014384 that he got in response as he wrote separately to Wikimedia Common about releasing this David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg image file. I'll hope to be able to confirm soon. -- Jjhake ( talk) 22:28, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    @ Nikkimaria: Thank you the note about the need for VRT verification for File:David_Bentley_Hart_and_Roland.jpg. This is now in place. -- Jjhake ( talk) 12:22, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Oppose I took a quick spin through (not even an in-depth review), and saw the following problems:

  • "writer, philosopher, religious studies scholar, critic, and Eastern Orthodox theologian": too long and involved
  • "noted for", "known for": these are a jarring way to provide information
  • "Born and raised in Howard County, Maryland": Way too detailed for the lead
  • "a 2nd edition": second, not 2nd
  • The lead overall comes across as a bit hagiographic
  • WP:LQ is something you need to take note of (as well as sorting out the curly quotes that appear frequently)
  • One sentence paragraphs are not good
  • blockquote are for quotes longer than c. 40 words
  • Do we really need to know his wife "owned a soft toy sheep whom she named Beauchamp Cholmondeley Featherstonhaugh." – and if we do, why is this a quote?
  • WP:ELLIPSES is also something you need to take note of
  • some odd capitalisation

I'm going to suggest withdrawing and giving it a good copy edit prior to trying again - SchroCat ( talk) 19:30, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

@ SchroCat: Extremely helpful feedback. Thank you. This doesn't sound like copy edit work that would require much time. I agree with and could implement the bulk of what you note fairly quickly. This has recently had a GA review and two peer reviews, including by User:Gerda Arendt with some FAC experience. With a little help from these other editors, I think this could be cleaned up shortly. However, I'm new to FAC, and if withdrawing and coming back when cleaned up is best, I'm obviously glad to follow whatever path is prescribed as the best practice. -- Jjhake ( talk) 20:14, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
When you say that it won’t take much time, I’ll stress that my comments were from a quick spin, not a full review. Others may differ in their opinion, but this is mine. - SchroCat ( talk) 21:08, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Well, as other's weigh in and as I have the time, I'll start working through the feedback here that seems most straight-forward to me. More of a full review would be a great help as well, of course, regardless of the FAC status. Thank you. Jjhake ( talk) 21:28, 17 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
@ SchroCat: I've made an effort to address the very helpful list of issues from you. Regardless of this FAC process, if you or anyone that you might recommend can give a more complete critique and edit, it would be a great help. Thank you. Jjhake ( talk) 11:18, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I do have a specific question and let me know if this is not the place. Ed Simon writing for the Los Angeles Review of Books in 2022 said that Hart has "thousands of essays, reviews, and papers", and I use this in the lead while only citing further down within the article body. I'd estimate that Hart has well over one thousand essays, reviews, and papers, but "thousands" seems like an exaggeration. What’s the best solution? Cut this specific from the lead? Jjhake ( talk) 11:41, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

2007 World Cup of Pool

Nominator(s): Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 17:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about the 2007 edition of the World Cup of Pool. This is a doubles event played every year. An exciting event that came down to the very last couple of balls. I've only promoted one previous pool event ( 2019 WPA World Ten-ball Championship) so I'd appreciate any comments you might have about this article Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 17:01, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • Will do a full review later, but one drive-by comment on the lead - you have "deciding rack" linked to Glossary of cue sports terms#deciding_rack, but as no such anchor exists on that article it just takes me to the top. Scrolling down to D reveals that there isn't even a listing for "deciding rack", unless it's the same as "deciding frame"........? -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 09:51, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Oh, yeah. They are the same thing (a rack is the same as a frame). I'll fix that. Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 11:26, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

More comments

  • Name of the venue is different in the lead to the infobox and first para of the body
  • "with players taking shots alternatively" - think you mean "alternately". "Alternatively" means something quite different
  • Any reason for italics on alternative breaks?
  • "play alternating shots in scotch doubles style" - no need to link for a second time
  • "played from 25 to 27 September as a race to eight" - earlier you had hyphens in "race-to-[whatever]"
  • "The pair met the Dutch B team; and won six racks" - don't think that semi-colon is needed
  • "The defending champions Filipino pair" - don't think this works grammatically
  • "The other semi-final match was played between China, seeded 8th and the unseeded Japanese team" => "The other semi-final match was played between China, seeded 8th, and the unseeded Japanese team"
  • "The final had a lot of dry breaks, with six in the first 15 racks, having had just ten in the rest of the tournament" => "The final had a lot of dry breaks, with six in the first 15 racks, there having been just ten in the rest of the tournament"
  • "Below is the results" => "Below are the results"
  • Think that's it! -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 21:22, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Sorry for the delay ChrisTheDude. I've done the above Lee Vilenski ( talkcontribs) 21:21, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Support -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 16:23, 27 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments from TAOT

  • You have a space in "SBS 6", but the article in question consistently uses "SBS6" with no space.
  • The first round of the event was played from 25 to 27 September as a race-to-eight racks contradicts the format section, which states Matches were played as a race-to-nine racks until the final.
  • Link deciding rack as the first mention in the body.
  • You have Taiwan as "Chinese Taipei" in the results bracket, but as "Taiwan" elsewhere. This could cause confusion.
  • Any possibility of adding more photos?
  • The prize funding table is confusing, as the other listed amounts do not add up to $250,000. I suggest noting which award amounts were given to more than one team to make this clear. Trainsandotherthings ( talk) 15:08, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


Nominator(s): Constantine 12:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about the ninth Fatimid caliph, whose rise to the throne in 1094 was due to the machinations of the powerful vizier al-Afdal Shahanshah, and caused a major rift in the Isma'ili branch of Shi'a Islam. Al-Musta'li remained under the thumb of his vizier for the duration of his relatively short caliphate, and his reign is mostly a record of al-Afdal's actions. The article is a pendant to Nizar ibn al-Mustansir, al-Musta'li's elder brother, who was likely the legitimate successor. For the initial sections on the disputed succession and Nizar's revolt, there is considerable overlap between the two. Both articles were heavily rewritten, effectively from scratch, in 2020. Al-Musta'li passed GA in March 2022, while Nizar's article became FA in May 2022. As usual, I am looking forward to any comments and suggestions for further improvement. Constantine 12:16, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review


  • "when learning of al-Mustansir's passing" => "when learning of al-Mustansir's death"
    • Done.
  • Is there not more to say about al-Musta'li himself? The "reign" section, for example, barely mentions him
    • Unfortunately, no. As a younger son, he was not in line for the succession, and would have been a mere name, if that, in the footnotes of history. As caliph, he was a puppet ruler, and even on affairs concerning the Isma'ili da'wa, it is unknown whether it was al-Musta'li showing agency or whether, as figurehead, events were attributed to him. All historical and modern sources on his life focus on two things: the disputed succession, and then the events of his reign, which saw the arrival of the Crusaders. I have also given only a brief overview of these events, and not gone into as much detail as I could, since they properly belong to the article on al-Afdal, who actually was responsible for the government.
  • That's it..... -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 22:29, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
@ ChrisTheDude: comments addressed. If I may ask, did you find the article easy to understand? Or is there more context/detailed explanation that can be added somewhere? Constantine 09:07, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


Will do a naive non-expert review soon. — Kusma ( talk) 13:59, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Lead: is "youngest of the sons" definite enough to be stated like that?
    • That appears to be the consensus. In the main article text, I was a bit more cautious given Walker's comments, but most sources don't hesitate in calling him that (e.g. Gibb and Özkuyumcu). Halm, as you point out, is an exception. I have rephrased it, however, to make clear that he at any rate wasn't the oldest.
  • I am wondering whether it is worth giving a little bit of historical context about the Fatimid Caliphate and where al-Musta'li stands within its history. (According to that article, the Fatimid Caliphate was in decline at this time and ruled only over Egypt). The capital was in Cairo?
    • Excellent point, done.
      • Much better. However, "Life" is no longer a very descriptive section header (and not all of the life is covered here).
        • Added a new subheader.
          • You could perhaps even drop the "Life" now (it is a biography, after all) and upgrade the Level 3 to Level 2 headings.
  • CE dates seem to be Julian; I assume this is standard?
    • Hmmm, since the Gregorian calendar wasn't around yet, I guess so? What would be the difference?
      • A few days :) I don't think you need to do anything here.
        • My point (very much not clearly made) was what you 'tipped you off', i.e. why the dates "seem to be Julian" ;).
          • I was curious and checked a calendar converter.
  • Life: "youngest of all of al-Mustansir's sons" Halm p. 88 has him as the fourth oldest of ten sons, quite a bit different from the youngest of seventeen. Would it make sense to state how much younger than Nizar he was?
    • Yes, this puzzled me for a while. I don't know where Halm gets this from. Walker, who lays out his investigation in some detail, is quite definitive: "it now appears even more likely that the future al-Musta'li was the youngest of al-Mustansir's sons. He was, moreover and perhaps most importantly, the only one born (and raised) under the dictatorship of Badr." The statement of Halm contradicts even Halm's own notes on the issue, since he remarks (p. 366) on the existence of Ahmad's older namesake brother. I guess what Halm means is that Ahmad was the youngest of the four surviving sons of al-Mustansir at the time of the latter's death, but this is contradicted by calling these four the 'eldest'. Given that Nizar, likely the firstborn, was born in 1045, thirty years before al-Musta'li, it beggars belief that al-Musta'li may have been among the older sons of al-Mustansir. As noted above, the communis opinio among scholars is that he was indeed the youngest son.
  • "no definite designation of Nizar" this makes sense only in conjunction with the footnote that talks about Nass (Islam). It might be worth moving some of that footnote into the main text. Or to just say "no formal designation"?
    • Changed.
  • The three paragraphs starting from "In 1122" are later explanations and justifications for al-Musta'li's accession. I found this a bit confusing, as the accession itself hasn't happened yet in the body of the article, and it seems we are jumping forward and backwards in time. Perhaps an introductory sentence would help, or some reordering (you could have the paragraph talking about al-Mustansir's death and the accession right after talking about Ahmad's wedding, and then tell us about al-Amir's proclamation and other attempts to justify what happened. In other words, first have the succession and then the dispute about the succession?
    • Good suggestion, done.
  • Would it make sense to cite some modern Nizari scholars? And do we know what other Islamic leaders/scholars at the time thought of this split?
    • Good question: I have tried to find WP:RS on the issue (or at least some source in a language I can read) while working on Nizar's article, but have failed so far. Modern Nizaris are obviously partisans of Nizar's succession, but remarkably for an event of such apparent importance I don't have the impression that it is a major talking point. As long as there is an 'imam of the time', the past is not so relevant, it seems. The reaction of other Islamic leaders is also difficult to know; within Ismailism, the reaction is known and given in the article. Outside, it must have been seen as a simple succession dispute, if it registered at all. If you are a Sunni ruler or scholar, and learn of these events, you would likely not attribute any particular religious significance to them, since you already reject Fatimid claims and legitimacy in toto.
  • Nizar's revolt and the Nizari schism: How long/when is the "in the meantime" (you mean the time between al-Mustansir's death and the "grand assembly of officials")?
    • Yes, but it is needlessly confusing. Have rephrased to 'After fleeing from Cairo'.
  • "allegiance of the Arab tribes" which Arab tribes? Are they important players? (I do not understand enough of the context here).
    • No names for the tribes are given here, although I could make an educated guess who these were (Juhayna, Tha'laba, Tayy). The point is that the Arab tribes were semi-autonomous, and could provide a crucial pool of military manpower (as well as an excellent and skilled, albeit undisciplined, raiding/reconnaissance force). Have slightly rephrased to emphasize the military dimension of this, but don't know if it is enough.
      • The main issue for me is that "al-Afdal managed to win back the allegiance of the Arab tribes" is surprising, as we didn't yet know that their allegiance had changed.
        • After further consideration, I decided to remove this. It is covered in a bit more detail in Nizar's article, and here it is rather redundant.
  • perhaps clarify "immured" to "immured and died" as in Halm?
    • Done.
  • Do we know anything about the rumours that he was poisoned? (Where do these rumours come from and who wrote about them?)
    • Well, the sources report it as a rumour, but as Halm notes ('wie üblich munkelte man'), this is the inevitable rumour that will always arise when a ruler dies at an early age, and in unclear power relationships, as here. The other sources don't even mention the rumours.
      • Mentioning this only in the body and not in the lead is fine.

A very interesting article about a puppet ruler in a complicated time. As I said, I found the "Disputed succession" bit somewhat hard to understand, and as this is kind of the central issue from the religious split perspective, it would be worth clarifying it as much as possible. As I said, I am clueless about the period, so I apologise if I missed something obvious. — Kusma ( talk) 16:54, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Some comments above. Thank you for the interesting responses. — Kusma ( talk) 17:13, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • @ Kusma: a delayed thanks for the many valuable comments. Have responded above. Constantine 09:59, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
      • Much improved. I think there are a few smallish issues left (header levels issue above; Arwa al-Sulayhi is linked at second instead of first mention; I guess a native speaker will find some prose issues), but I think I don't have much else to add here. — Kusma ( talk) 14:11, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


  • I didn't get to review his brother, so will have a look soonish. FunkMonk ( talk) 12:49, 19 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • At first glance, there's a bunch of WP:duplinks, which can be highlighted with the usual script. [20]
  • " All three refused, each claiming that he had been designated as successor by their father." When I first read this, I was confused, because I thought "he" referred to al-Musta'li. Not a big deal, but maybe "they" would be clearer?
  • "A letter sent to Queen Arwa al-Sulayhi" Link and present her at first mention, now this only happens further down.
  • Wow, I've never seen a footnote within a footnote before (b), but I guess that's the only way to do it in this case.
  • "to make common cause the Crusaders" Missing "with"?
  • "and main candidate for their father's succession, Nizar" The article body seems much less clear that he was actually designated as such.

Comments by Unlimitedlead

I will review after Kusma's comments have been addressed. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 12:45, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • "Throughout his reign, al-Musta'li remained subordinate to al-Afdal, who was the de facto ruler of the state" Which state? I think this needs to be explicitly stated.
    • Clarified.
  • "While Egypt experienced a period of good government..." This is rather vague.
    • Have tried to clarify. What exactly do you think needs to be elaborated?
  • "Despite Fatimid attempts to treat with the Crusaders..." What does it mean to "treat with"? I would reword.
    • Done.
  • Cairo is double linked in the infobox.
    • Fixed.
  • "Ahmad's oldest half-brother, Nizar ibn al-Mustansir, was apparently considered at the time as the most likely successor to their father, as was the custom..." What custom? I would briefly explain or place a note.
    • Hmmm, have rephrased slightly, but do I really need to explain primogeniture in succession? That the eldest usually succeeds in a monarchy is common knowledge.
  • "...Abdallah and Isma'il made for a nearby mosque..." "made off" sounds quite colloquial; reword?
    • Done.
  • "In it he puts forth a number of arguments..." "puts" is present tense; please switch to past tense.
    • fixed.
  • "Modern historians point out that this was a deliberately misconstrued argument, as the princes were sent away for their protection, not because of their rank" Is it possible to have a citation for this sentence?
    • Clarified that this is Walker's view, and repeated the citation
  • Link Coup d'état?
    • Done.

@ Unlimitedlead: Thanks for taking the time, I've addressed your comments so far. Constantine 10:08, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

As always, I am more than happy to give my suggestions on how to improve an article. However, I do not feel comfortable supporting or opposing this nomination at this time. Thank you for understanding. Unlimitedlead ( talk) 21:57, 26 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Comments by Borsoka

  • The long reign of al-Mustansir ensured that he had numerous offspring... Is there a connection between the length of a ruler's reign and the number of his children? For instance, Sigismund of Luxemburg ruled for 50 years but he fathered only one child.
    • There definitely is, if you have a large harem at your disposal and not much to do since your viziers govern the country for you... But you are right, the statement is open to misinterpretation. Rephrased.
  • Other reports... No reports have been mentioned. Is his date of birth mentioned in the first sentence a fact or an assumption?
    • Removed and replaced with a variant date. The commonly mentioned/accepted date is the former (1074).
  • Do we know his mother's name?
    • No, at least not in the sources cited here, and I haven't been able to find anything anywhere else. Given the deliberate Fatimid policy of not allowing prominence to anyone from the family but the caliph and his designated heir (with some exceptions that are notable precisely as exceptions), her name was likely never recorded.
  • I assume Nizar was Ahmad's half-brother.
    • Indeed, aded.
  • Do we need a footnote within a footnote? I think the issue could be solved with a wikilink to nass (Islam) and a reference to the Ismaili conception of imamate in the main text.
  • ...was apparently considered as the most likely successor to his father... Is "apparently" necessary? By whom or when was he considered as his father's heir? Perhaps "their father"?
    • Rephrased a bit.
  • often stated ... By whom or when?
    • Added.
  • ...favoured the accession of Ahmad. Why?
  • I would mention Cairo before referring to it as "the capital".
  • (father of the Caliph al-Hafiz) Do we need to know in the article's context? If yes, his reigning years should also be mentioned.
  • the wedding banquet... I am not sure that all readers will understand that this is a reference to Ahmad's wedding.
  • Link Fatimid Great Palaces when the first reference to the palace is made (in the section's second paragraph).
    • Done at an earlier place, where it is now mentioned
  • Introduce (and link) Queen Arwa al-Sulayhi when she is first mentioned.
  • What does the term "Musta'li leader" mean?
  • ..., but the Fatimid vizier's efforts ultimately failed Consider deleting this text, because the following sentences contain a full account of the events.
  • ...other Seljuk emirs of Syria... Were all of them emirs or some of them were leaders bearing a different title (such as atabeg)?
  • make contact with them... I assume with the crusaders/crusader leaders.
  • Do we have further information about his family? Was Sitt al-Mulk his sons' or al-Amir's mother? Borsoka ( talk) 17:08, 23 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Mustaʽli Ismailism should be mentioned and explained in the main text.
  • I understand his date of birth mentioned in the lead is not a fact.
  • ...and main candidate... Is this factual and neutral?
  • Al-Musta'li died in 1101 and was succeeded by his five-year-old son, al-Amir. I think this could be the closing sentence in the lead. I would not repeat the year of death in the lead but would mention the rumours that he was poisoned.
  • Consider linking the Siege of Jerusalem (1099) in the lead.
  • ... a major victory over the Fatimid army ... Perhaps "a major victory over al-Afdal/al-Afdal's army"? Borsoka ( talk) 02:16, 25 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Ernest Roberts (Australian politician)

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 07:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Ernest Roberts was an up-and-coming South Australian state and federal politician who died young. Not my first soldier/politician, I brought Bill Denny and Arthur Blackburn up to FA a few years back, but some extra non-military eyes would be really helpful, especially anyone with experience of reviewing politician bios. Roberts served twice in the Second Boer War with colonial and then Commonwealth mounted troops. I haven't done many bios of soldiers from that war, and I think the recent GAN by Hog Farm and A-Class review by a few Milhist types have improved the article markedly. Have at it! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 07:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Drive-by comment on nationality field in infobox

I'm unsure what the convention is for using this field on this infobox, but "English-Australian" seems rather strange to put on here? If it's supposed to represent national status, then "British" or " British subject" would be more appropriate. If nationality means ethnicity in this context, then wouldn't just filling in "English" make more sense? Horserice ( talk) 19:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Good point. Not sure when that got there, but have adjusted it to British-Australian. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 10:33, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support from Hawkeye7

I reviewed this article (and provided a source review) at A class and assert that it is of Featured Article quality. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:36, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks Hawkeye! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 10:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Review by Steelkamp

I'll review this article seeing as I have experience in writing Australian politician articles. Steelkamp ( talk) 08:34, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • " as an independent Labor Party candidate". I would replace that with "as an independent Labor candidate". Isn't the whole point of describing oneself as an independent Labor candidate to say that you aren't part of a party but subscribe to the same ideology? That's why I would leave out "party" and not link the party as well.
  • "The Premier of South Australia". This should be "The premier of South Australia" as per MOS:JOBTITLES.
  • Upper house could be linked.
  • And on that note, is it possible to mention lower house somewhere?
  • You could link "crossed the floor" to crossing the floor.
  • It should be mentioned that the Kingston government governed with the support of the ULP, seeing as Kingston wasn't actually part of the party.
  • "The election brought the Price-Peake Government to power, a minority government under the ULP premier, Thomas Price, working in a coalition government with the Liberal independents led by Archibald Peake." That's a lot of mentions of "government" I would remove the third one and just have it as "...working in a coalition with the Liberal independents..."
  • There's an inconsistency in capitalisation between "Kingston government" and " Price-Peake Government". Perhaps Price-Peake Government needs an RM to move it inline with Australian federal governments.
  • "and his explanation met with loud cheers from the crowd." Should that instead be "and his explanation was met with loud cheers from the crowd."
  • Boer Commando has an uppercase "C" but this article uses a lowercase "c".
  • Can rearguard be linked?
  • What's with the inconsistency between "de Wet" and "De Wet"?

Comments by JennyOz

Hi PM, a lot of life in 45 years. I only have a few comments and suggestions...


  • He was re-elected in the state election of 3 November 1906. - why include "the" in wlink here but not in the 1905 immediately preceding?
  • When a by-election was called on 13 June 1908 - called for 13 June to avoid ambiguity?
  • He successfully contested his seat - defended?
  • The loss of Roberts ... was keenly felt by - "keenly" is an unfortunate word in this circumstance? It can also mean enthusiastically. Perhaps swap to intensely felt or similar?

Early political career

  • trade union-run weekly magazine - swap hyphen to a MOS:SUFFIXDASH ie trade union–run

Soldier and journalist

  • The convoy was regularly sniped at, but the troops, supported by the guns - what sort of guns? maybe link artillery above?
  • Hartebeestfontein - is Hartbeesfontein?

Later political career

  • Roberts was a member of royal commissions in 1906 and 1908, inquiring into the affairs of produce merchants and into wheat-marketing practices in the state respectively. - these are state RCs? Would better link be List of South Australian royal commissions#State of South Australia? His name appears (unlinked) in 1907 merchants but not the wheat RC. He also appears in the 1897 Bundaleer waterworks RC
  • a by-election was called. Roberts won the 13 June by-election as - swap the 2 by-election links?
  • He successfully contested his seat at - defended / held?
  • Minutes after speaking in a fiery - new para or even Death and memorial/legacy or similar new section?
  • a stone statue of Queen Victoria - a? is there more than one in Adelaide? If only one ( Victoria Square, Adelaide#Statue of Queen Victoria) change to the stone statue? (not suggesting to link)
  • It consisted of a broken column - still does? ie consists?

Consistencies etc

  • 4th Imperial Bushmen's Contingent - is linked in infobox but not elsewhere?
  • per cent of the vote v per cent of the votes
  • "wagons of De Wet's rearguard" v "continued to pursue de Wet into" - mid-sentence caps consistency?


  • Manning, Geoffrey - authorlink Geoff Manning
  • Murray, P.L. - add space between initials


  • add Category:Burials at West Terrace Cemetery
  • add Category:19th-century Australian politicians - (was in SA HoA 1896)

Thanks PM, very interesting to read this. My relative was also with the 4th Contingent and sailed on the Manhattan. He was KIA in May 1901 and was later honoured by Rowell.

I may have one more comment but have to re-read the sentence tomorrow to check I'm not confused. JennyOz ( talk) 12:42, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Freedom (concert)

Nominator(s): Pseud 14 ( talk) 20:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Having previously worked on a Filipino concert article, I've decided to try my hand with another one. This time it is about a 2021 livestreaming concert curated by singer Regine Velasquez at the height of the COVID-19 lockdowns and absence of in-person live events. It finds Velasquez crafting a show with the intention of being given the freedom to sing whatever she wants and to have freedom from her audience's high expectations. Constructive criticism, in any form and from anyone, will be appreciated. Happy to address your comments and thanks to all who take the time to review. Pseud 14 ( talk) 20:49, 10 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support from Gog the Mild

Recusing to review.

  • "through four live streaming platforms at 8:00 p.m." Should "at" be 'from'?
I think "at" is used to describe specific times or a particular numerical time on the clock i.e. it aired on Wednesdays at 9:00 p.m., "from" would probably be used for time ranges/duration i.e. from 8:00 p.m to midnight. Thoughts?
In which case perhaps 'through four live streaming platforms at 8:00 p.m.'?
Done as suggested (I think). Let me know if I understood it correctly.
  • "she's". The MoS depreciates such contractions. (If it didn't, it would be 'she'd'.)
  • "spanning different music eras, such as Elton John, Chris Isaak, George Michael, Sara Bareilles, Dua Lipa, and Billie Eilish". That doesn't really work. Perhaps rephrase?
  • "many of whom praised". "whom" → 'which'.
  • "₱1 million". Is it known what the equivalent in US dollars was?

More to follow. Gog the Mild ( talk) 23:34, 10 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thank you for doing the review Gog. I have addressed all points, except where I had a comment to clarify. Pseud 14 ( talk) 00:56, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "Development of Freedom began ..." → 'The development of Freedom began ...'.
  • "the show would be livestreamed on February 14, 2021". But it wouldn't. Maybe 'the show was scheduled to be livestreamed on February 14, 2021' or similar?
  • "The concert's name and concept was crafted from Velasquez's desire to perform new material from a variety of music genres and step out of her comfort zone." This seems a little promotional. Could we step back from Wikipedia's voice? 'Velasquez stated that the concert's name and concept was crafted from her desire to perform new material from a variety of music genres and step out of her comfort zone.' or similar?
Revised as suggested
  • "In an online press conference with Star Music, Velasquez revealed, "Because of the pandemic that happened, it’s like we all want to be free. Personally, I wanted to do something else and be given that freedom of singing whatever I want ... free of expectations from people". This seems both primary sourcing and marketing tosh. What information is it conveying? Whatever it is, could it not be paraphrased in straight prose? (Per MOS:QUOTE.)
Paraphrased in prose.
  • Does the last sentence of this paragraph not effectively duplicate the first?
  • "The show was stated to have a total of 20 production numbers and will have a running time of two hours". This mixes tense. One way of resolving t would be 'The show was stated to have a total of 20 production numbers and a running time of two hours'. There are others.
Revised per suggestion
  • "and revealed that". Maybe something a little more NPOV? 'claimed', 'stated', 'asserted', 'said' or even more circumlocutory?

More to follow. Gog the Mild ( talk) 03:10, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks Gog. Comments/suggestions have been actioned. Let me know if I missed anything. Pseud 14 ( talk) 04:43, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "female dancers doing a lyrical dance routine." Consider "doing" → 'performing'.
  • Optional: Something at the end of this paragraph to indicate that the first act has ended? Similarly at the end of the following paragraph.
I was able to use "ended the segment" on the second para. Can't think of any alternative to close the act or end the segment for the first para though. Hopefully that's fine.
  • "Freedom closed with a performance of Tears for Fears's "Mad World"." Should it be mentioned that this was an encore?
  • "A music critic from the Manila Standard. Is the name of this critic known?
Unfortunately, it's not mentioned on the article. In the absence of name(s) in reviews for film/tv/concerts, we usually substitute it with media critic, music critic, a writer for [publication].

Not in my usual area, so feel free to argue with anything. Still, nice to see such a solid article outside of where I usually review. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:29, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks Gog, I have addressed the above. Let me know if they are to your satisfaction. I appreciate you taking on this review, a fresh set of eyes is always welcome. Pseud 14 ( talk) 23:53, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thanks for the thorough review and your support Gog. Pseud 14 ( talk) 00:09, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

CommentsSupport from Chris

  • "Freedom: The Regine Velasquez Digital Concert" - infobox image seems to suggest the full-length title was actually Freedom: The Regine Velasquez-Alcasid Digital Concert
Updated the title
  • "that she'd never done before" => "that she had never done before" (no contractions!)
You're right! I should've remembered, I learned this from your reviews :)
  • "Velasquez stated that the concert's name and concept was crafted" => "Velasquez stated that the concert's name and concept were crafted" (there are two subjects so the verb should be plural)
  • "by The Philippine Star, who noted it is" => "by The Philippine Star, which noted that it was"
  • "The performance began [...] She then descends [...] The singer continued" - begins in the past tense then switches to present tense then back to past. Use past throughout the synopsis
Should be consistent in the past tense now
  • "including those who have passed away" => "including those who had died"
  • "In a review by the Philippine Entertainment Portal, it considered the show's production" => "A review by the Philippine Entertainment Portal considered the show's production"
Thank you for your review ChrisTheDude. I have actioned your comments, let me know if I missed anything. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:52, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you for reviewing and for your support ChrisTheDude. Pseud 14 ( talk) 19:53, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

Thanks for the image review Nikkimaria. Removed px size. Pseud 14 ( talk) 01:21, 18 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Drive-by comment
"₱1 million (US$0.02 million)" looks very strange; something like "₱1 million (US$20,000)" would be better. — Kusma ( talk) 09:14, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thanks Kusma. Revised as suggested. Pseud 14 ( talk) 12:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Source review

  • No verification problems found in my brief spotcheck.
  • All refs have links to accesible archives.
  • I feel obligated to ask, are there any secondary sources that could be used as alternatives to Instagram (ref 5) and Twitter (ref 6, 19)? Since these are posts from Velasquez herself they are acceptable in the absence of other options.-- N Ø 13:17, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you for the source review MaranoFan. I have removed ref 5 & 6, replaced with a secondary source (now ref 4). Ref 19 has been replaced with a secondary source, now Ref 17. Let me know if there's anything I may have missed. Pseud 14 ( talk) 13:43, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thanks for addressing this so quickly. Apologies for another minor nitpick, but I noticed that most of the refs that go to have as the publisher but ref 3 and ref 11 have ABS-CBN News. It should probably be consistent. This is the last thing I caught.-- N Ø 13:57, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
MaranoFan No worries at all and thanks for catching that. I believe it should all be fixed and consistent now. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:04, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
With that out of the way, the source review passes!-- N Ø 14:07, 21 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
I also support this FAC on prose. Got a good look at it during the source review and it is engaging and of a professional standard. It is well-researched, and props to the nominator for watching the whole concert and writing an elaborate synopsis of it for the readers.-- N Ø 09:22, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Thank you for the kinds words. Appreciate the dual reviews and your support MaranoFan. Pseud 14 ( talk) 17:21, 24 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply


Saving a spot, will come to this after Telephone :) ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
01:38, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Back! Delighted to review more of your stuff

  • Convert all double quotation marks used in reference titles to single quotation marks ( MOS:QWQ)
  • "Velasquez arranged for the livestream in order to perform material from a variety of music genres"
    • I feel like this would be a great opportunity to include the "freedom of singing" quotation to wrap it back to the opening line
    • The sentence's structure as it stands is somewhat convoluted and hard to parse. "Freedom's premise is 'freedom of singing', stemming from Velasquez's desire to cover songs from several genres" --- how's that?
  • "create a live experience on a stream that she had never done before" very vague. I looked at the prose to see if there was anything there that clarified the meaning for me, but I found nothing. Perhaps it is an allusion to the "Velasquez additionally thought her fans were longing for some sort of human connection" bit, but in that case, I think it's better to just say that outright?
  • "Freedom was filmed live" the live is redundant
  • "Commercially, the show was also successful" the ticket sales speak for itself; remove it
Development and background
  • You specify Valentine's Day in the lead but not the prose.
I've piped to February 14 as mentioning both the date and "Valentine's day" would appear redundant. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Split everything in the first paragraph starting from "Freedom was officially announced in December..." The sentences before that cover the online benefit concerts she did, and Freedom isn't really one.
  • "A promotional poster was released along with the announcement of the venture showing a portrait of Velasquez's head shot in grayscale." I am pretty sure most concerts come with promotional posters. Simplify this to "The promotional poster depicted a portrait of Velasquez's head shot in greyscale." In case there was more than one promotional poster, change the "the" article to "a".
  • I hate to nitpick this, but "step out of comfort zone" is a MOS:IDIOM and must be replaced.
  • Is there any particular reason behind saying "claimed" "said" "asserted" and other such similar words when discussing Velasquez's vision for Freedom? It makes it seem like we shouldn't take what she says at face value.
Per Gog's review above, usage is more NPOV. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "Velasquez was heavily involved in planning and production" you already said this
  • "Velasquez was heavily involved in planning and production, and said that her main objective was to deliver performances of songs from various music eras 'with an exciting twist'. She claimed that working on the project fueled her artistic growth and maturity.
    • This fits more snugly with the previous section. you can merge the "main objective... music eras ... 'exciting twist' " bit with the part on the previous paragraph that mentions how she wanted to "perform new material from a variety of music genres", and you can move the "artistic growth" part after "different elements of the production"
  • Move the sentence about the production numbers after the sentence about the filming location
  • Split everything in the last paragraph starting from "On February 9..." into its own paragraph.
  • The lead says "potential exposure" while the body says "due to a COVID-19 exposure". One implies a possibility and another implies that possibility happened. Clarify which one it is.
Consistent now. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "VIP-ticket holders got to experience exclusive behind the scenes footage from Freedom's rehearsals" I think this should be at the end, beside "VIP-ticket guests also got to attend a virtual meet-and-greet and after party"
  • Later in the prose you say the concert is divided into acts. State this fact: "The concert is divided into four acts and opens..."
  • Be consistent with the tense. "descended the podium...goes straight..." is one example.
  • "she made her way to a piano" if she played this song on a piano, say that instead
  • Since the premise is that Velasquez covered many songs from several different eras, include the release years for each song after namedropping them
  • "performed 'Levitating'...with her dancers while doing a choreography" ambiguous sentence structure. Did Velasquez dance with the dancers? Did the dancers also sing "Levitating"? A mix of Both?
Revised and clarified. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "cover of Adele's 'Rolling in the Deep' and interpolation of Linkin Park's 'In the End' " to clarify, she interpolated Linkin Park for this Adele cover, yes?
Correct. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "lyrical dance routine" -> "dance routine based on the lyrics"?
I think lyrical dance itself is a much more appropriate terminology. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "paying tribute to individuals in the industry" you mean the music industry?
Entertainment industry. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
Critical reception
  • We mentioned earlier that Velasquez felt pressure to continue surprising her audience. In the critical reception section, try to link that to her prior comment by saying the reviews seemed to indicate that her worries were assuaged.
I think the Rappler review which described her demeanor as relaxed, etc. seemed to allude to that, including the quote. I'm not sure if her personal worries needs to be justified with the positive review. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • Since we only have three reviewers, write "Freedom was met with positive reviews from three critics." Using "generally" implies a wide pool of commentary from which to derive consensus, which is not the case here.
  • ""bared Regine's beautiful range and exceptional artistry" give examples of songs that exemplified this.

That's all I have to say. We are close to the light at the end of the tunnel in terms of prose; all we need is a bit of tweaking here and there and we're good to go! I performed thorough copyediting to address issues with clarity, flow, cohesion, concision, and repetition; and make sure the intended meaning in some parts was properly reflected. Nothing about the content itself has changed drastically, so it should be okay; regardless, please feel free to revert changes with which you disagree.

Thank you for this article! I had a great time reading this. If you have time and energy, your input on a FAC of mine would greatly be appreciated. Still, you are not obligated to respond. Hope wiki-life and off-wiki life are treating you well, and have a nice week! ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ 💬 " Will you call me?"
📝 " Will you hang me out to dry?"
06:59, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Thanks for your thorough review and copyedits Your Power. I have addressed all points, unless otherwise stated. Let me know if you have additional comments or if I missed anything. I'd be happy to have a look at your FAC this week. Pseud 14 ( talk) 14:26, 28 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Panagiotis Kavvadias

Nominator(s): UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 18:46, 10 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

This article is about a Greek archaeologist - one of the most significant figures in the discipline in one of its most important periods. Kavvadias led the Greek Archaeological Service between 1885 and 1909, and was responsible for some of its most significant excavations of the 19th century as well as for completely transforming the way that antiquities and the practice of archaeology were handled in Greece. He was also notable for managing to so totally upset the Greek government and most of the rest of its archaeological establishment that he was eventually marched out of the country, with the official label of "dangerous reactionary".

The article has gone through a GA review from User:Modussiccandi, which gave me the first indication that it might have legs for FAC, and subsequently a peer review from Modussiccandi, User:Gerda Arendt and User:Iazyges. In the course of both, it has gone through substantial changes, and I am grateful to them for all their help so far, particularly as this is my first nomination.

It should be said that Kavvadias is not a well-documented subject, particularly given his prominence at the time. I don't think it's too hubristic to say that this article is currently the closest thing to a thorough biography of him that exists in English, and the most detailed Greek sources (largely, the work of Vasileios Petrakos) don't come close to attempting a whole-life portrait. It's difficult to reconstruct a lot of the fine details and chronology of some important parts of his story, particularly his education and his last months as Ephor General, and there are a few key sections where we're really reduced to one or two sources.

Thank you in advance for your time, comments and assistance.

UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 18:46, 10 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Noting here that I have signed on as the mentor for this FAC. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 22:13, 10 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Coord note -- I gather this would be UndercoverClassicist's first FA if successful, in which case welcome...! As a reminder for reviewers and fellow coords, a spotcheck of sources for accurate use and avoidance of plagiarism or close paraphrasing will be required at some stage. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 17:23, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support from Gerda

I confirm the support reached in the peer review. Thank you! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:28, 10 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Image review

  • File:Panagiotis_Kavvadias.png: if this was first published in 1937, why would it be PD-1996? The Greek copyright would have expired after 1996.
  • File:The_Euthydikos_Kore_1.jpg needs a tag for the original work. Ditto File:Persian_rider.jpg, File:Tanagra_d'època_hel·lenística,_museu_de_la_Ciutat,_València.jpg
  • File:Parthénon_-_Chapiteau_couché_-_Athènes_-_Médiathèque_de_l'architecture_et_du_patrimoine_-_APMH00025669.jpg: where is that licensing coming from?
  • File:Stefanos_Koumanoudis.JPG needs a US tag. Ditto File:Achilleas_Postolakas.JPG
  • File:Goudi_coup_poster.jpg: when was this first published? Nikkimaria ( talk) 15:50, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    • I'm afraid I'm very much not an expert in copyright licences - bear with me for what I'm sure are some fairly amateur questions:
      • File:Panagiotis_Kavvadias.png: I uploaded that one, having thoroughly confused myself as to exactly what the applicable rules were. I asked the question on Commons, and got no answer. Looking again, my current understanding is that (assuming 1937 is the first publication, which is not a given, as it's almost certainly a pre-1909 photo) it's probably in copyright until 1937+95=2032. However, it's also certainly Fair Use (once reduced in size), so I think the best thing to do in the short term is to re-upload it to Wikipedia under those terms and use that version: does that sound right? UndercoverClassicist ( talk)
        • Yes, there would be a potential for a fair-use claim if no free image of the subject could be found. Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:41, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
          • I've re-uploaded the file to Wikipedia as Fair Use, and that's now the version linked in the article (it'll be shrunk down by the bot in the next few days, I imagine). UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 10:40, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
      • I'm not sure what you mean by 'a tag for the original work', could you explain? UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
        This means the copyright for the object itself, to show that it is in the public domain; as the 3d objects require a PD justification for both image and the object. In this case, as the works are ancient, you use PD-art-70-3d. I have tagged them as such. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
        Got it: thank you for doing that. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 20:45, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
      • File:Parthénon_-_Chapiteau_couché_-_Athènes_-_Médiathèque_de_l'architecture_et_du_patrimoine_-_APMH00025669.jpg: I'm fairly sure that everything on POP (which is called the Open Heritage Platform) is licensed under the License Ouvert: I'm not sure where the CC license comes from, though, and suspect it's not correct. The photographer, Magne (Lucien, not Louis, as on the page), died in 1916, so we're over 100 years PMA if that makes a difference? UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
        The work is released by the French ministry of culture as CC-by-SA-3.0. I have corrected the tag. Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 19:34, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
      • File:Stefanos_Koumanoudis.JPG appears in the same publication as File:Panagiotis_Kavvadias.png, though I strongly suspect that's not its first appearance (it's certainly about 30 years older), so I suppose the same applies - and therefore that it probably needs to go unless we can sniff out an older publication? UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
      • I've added {{PD-US-expired}} to File:Achilleas_Postolakas.JPG - and, after a ridiculous amount of sniffing around, managed to track down and verify the source. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
      • File:Goudi_coup_poster.jpg is 1909 or 1910 (and certainly before 1912): the Commons page says 1909. It's difficult to be 100% about which exact version of the poster/postcard it was, but it's from the immediate aftermath of the coup in August 1909: see here for a similar image. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 17:17, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

Support by Kusma

This will be next on my list of things to review. Looks very interesting! — Kusma ( talk) 19:01, 11 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply

  • Lead: I am a bit concerned that the phrase "ΒΜΧς/2626" has no hits outside Wikipedia on Google, and none on Google Books or Scholar. Are there other more widely used designations for this law?
    • This is one I've found very tricky. ΒΜΧς' is a number: in Arabic numerals, it's 2466 (not 2626 as in article; I think that was a misreading or different number quoted in one of the sources.) In Greek, it's universally referred to as νομος ΒΜΧς', sometimes with its subtitle Περι Αρχαιοτήτων (On Antiquities). I've rarely seen it referred to in English by non-Greek scholars: here's one example with the Greek number, the Arabic and the subtitle. With that said, an article published for the Ministry of Culture calls it Law ΒΧΜΣΤ (2646) [I suspect the 'T' is a mistake], and I'm sure I saw 2626 quoted in another source. I wonder whether just 'the Antiquities Law of 1899' might be the way forward? UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 11:20, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    @ Cplakidas: I imagine this is something you might know about? UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 07:07, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    @ UndercoverClassicist: ΣΤ is merely the capitalized form of the letter ς when used as a numeral (e.g. Louis XVI is Λουδοβίκος ΙΣΤʹ). Let me have a look whether I can find the law in question. Constantine 16:54, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Found it: Law ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ Περὶ ἀρχαιοτήτων, issued on 24 July (O.S.) 1899, published in the government gazette on 27 July (O.S.). Constantine 17:08, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Thank you for clarifying! For the article, I would suggest to use something like "the antiquities law of 1899" in the lead and to add the full name/Greek numerals in the body. — Kusma ( talk) 17:50, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Thank you both: User:Kusma, I agree and will make that change.
    @ Cplakidas: as I'm now thoroughly confused with Greek numerals, can I just confirm what the correct Arabic numerals are? As far as I understand - which isn't far - it should be 2466? Also, is there a reason you've used Ϛ (capital ς?) rather than Σ, ς, ΣΤ... is one seen as more correct than the others? UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 18:15, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    'Ϛ' is the form used in the actual document, and the correct contemporary capitalized form of the letter ς. ΣΤ is another way of writing it if you do not have a 19th-century-vintage Greek typewriter at hand, which is why it has become the common modern form (and you found it in modern Greek publications thus). So if you want the original name, it is ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ (with the quotation marks, which are actually part of the numeral). In a modern publication, it would appear as ΒΧΜΣΤʹ, and the Arabic numeral rendering is 2646 (͵Β = 2000, Χ = 600, Μ = 40, Ϛ = 6). Constantine 18:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Thank you: I'll make those changes. As far as the exact phrasing, I'm leaning towards 'the archaeological law of 1899' in the lead and 'Law 2646/1899 'On Antiquities'' as the full name in the body: there seem to be a million and one ways to refer to these laws in English, but that seems to be the most common (that is, including the year) in HQRS. I'm in two minds about including the Greek transliteration: that would fit the general practice for most Greek things in the article and reflect that the 'real' name is Greek, not English, but I wonder whether appending ( Greek: Νόμος ͵ΒΧΜϚʹ Περὶ ἀρχαιοτήτων) to that title is a bit clunky? UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 18:31, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    'Law 2646/1899' would be enough IMO, and is also a valid format that a Greek person would immediately recognize. I would only recommend using the original name if you want to reference the original document somewhere. Constantine 18:45, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    OK, let's go with that. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 19:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Now done. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 08:37, 14 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
  • "His career saw significant modernisation" hmm, could you be clearer on whether this is credited to him?
    • I was trying to thread that needle: I don't think I found a source explicitly using the word 'modernisation' in respect to K. himself (though you could argue that Petrakos' detailed description of the professionalisation of archaeology through his reforms amounts to the same thing), but at the same time, Greek archaeology during his career goes from 1885, when it's a basically-amateur thing conducted largely by looters, self-trained and untrained 'archaeologists', to 1924, when it's a government-run business with a large, Greek-trained and professional body of people working to do it and regulate it, almost entirely thanks to rules and laws that he introduced. Happy to take a steer here. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 11:30, 12 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    Perhaps you could move this closer to the "energetic, centralising, autocratic" bit and just state he oversaw the professionalisation of his field in Greece. The foreign bodies were equally important for his downfall and for his achievement, so I'm not sure they should be mentioned only for one of them. — Kusma ( talk) 00:00, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply
    That's fair; Bosanquet linked the two in his obituary, but he certainly had an angle on the matter as a British archaeologist and a strong Kavvadias supporter. With that said, I'd be inclined to mention them for both in the lead: they're certainly an important part of his career (and downfall!), and so ought to feature somewhere. UndercoverClassicist ( talk) 07:02, 15 March 2023 (UTC) Reply reply