Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/January 2025

1914–15 Gillingham F.C. season

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

For my 37th nomination of a Gillingham F.C. season, we jump back 90 years from my most recent nom. This particular season took place against the backdrop of the first year of the First World War and the decision to play on was controversial. Following the football authorities finally giving in to public sentiment, the final game of this season would prove to be Gillingham's last game for more than four years. As ever, any feedback will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 14:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

NØ

• "Gillingham, founded in 1893 under the name New Brompton, had played in the Southern League since the competition's formation in 1894, gaining promotion from Division Two at the first attempt in 1895 and remaining in Division One ever since, albeit with little success." - Kind of long. How about something like "Founded in 1893 as New Brompton, Gillingham joined the Southern League in 1894. They gained promotion from Division Two at the first attempt in 1895 and have remained in Division One, though with limited success."?
• "Gilligan scored twice in a 4–0 victory for the home team, which The Sporting Life said was 'thoroughly deserved', but it would prove to the last game which Gillingham won for more than four months." => "Gilligan scored twice in a 4–0 victory, which The Sporting Life called 'thoroughly deserved', but it would be their last win for over four months."
• "Glen sought the permission of the club's board of directors to get married on Christmas Day and therefore miss the game that day; his request was refused." => "Glen asked the club's board for permission to miss the Christmas Day game to get married, but his request was refused."
• That's it from me!--NØ 18:09, 13 December 2024 (UTC)
  • @MaranoFan: - many thanks for your review, all addressed! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:55, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
• Support--NØ 08:28, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

HF

I'll take a look at this soon. Hog Farm _Talk 01:34, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

@Hog Farm: - giving a very gentle nudge on this one. If you feel you no longer have the capacity to review the article, that's honestly not a problem -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:30, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

I'll get to this by Sunday at the latest; it looked to be in very good shape based on my initial skim of the article. Hog Farm _Talk 15:05, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

• " "Bee", a writer for the Liverpool Echo, described the signing as an "excellent capture",[15][16] " - a minor quibble, but this all seems to be in the first reference, with the second one not really adding anything. Is the Manchester Courier reference really supporting or adding anything? It's just a very brief annoucnment of the transaction
• I don't think Category:English football clubs 1913–14 season is the correct category; I've gone ahead and moved the article into the 1914-15 one.

I'm going to go ahead and support; I usually don't like to review with only minimal commentary but this being the nominator's 37th in the series, they've got the formula pretty much perfected. Excellent work on this article for a very bad team; this was worse than the 2023 Kansas City Royals season that I recently endured as a fan. Hog Farm _Talk 22:21, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

• @Hog Farm: - thanks for fixing my dumb typo there. I don't recall why I added that second reg re: Hafekost so I just went ahead and removed it -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

Mike Christie

Support. I've read through and made a couple of very minor copyedits; this is up to your usual standard. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:14, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Image and source review

Is there a source for the kit in the infobox? ALT text and image placement are OK. Sources seem consistently formatted. What makes "Conway, Tony (1980). The "Gills". Meresborough Books. ISBN 978-0-9052-7026-5." and "Elligate, David (2009). Gillingham FC On This Day. Pitch Publishing. ISBN 978-1-9054-1145-0." reliable sources? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:40, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: - source added for kit. Both the books you mention were not self-published but published by mainstream publishers with extensive catalogues. Pitch Publishing is one of the UK's leading publishers of sports books whose titles are carried by all major bookstores, and Meresborough Books, whilst now defunct, published over 300 books by various authors over its more than 20 years of existence. Not really sure what to say beyond that..... -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 18:55, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

OK. I guess I couldn't find much through my searches, which may say more about the searches than the sources... Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:04, 31 December 2024 (UTC)

Support from Z1720

I made one edit to the article: feel free to revert if it is not helpful. I also checked the lead and the infobox, and all information there is cited in the article body. No further concerns. Z1720 (talk) 23:35, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:46, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

History of infant schools in Great Britain

Nominator(s): Llewee (talk) 11:31, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

What if a history article but with cute pictures?

This is my second nomination of this article. It was previously nominated under the title "infant school" (see) but as there were concerns about that article's scope it's focus has been made more specific. I will link everyone who commented on the original nomination so they can decide whether to say anything about the articles current state; Wehwalt, Generalissima, Nikkimaria, WhatamIdoing, UndercoverClassicist, Gerda Arendt, Crisco 1492 and Serial Number 54129. Llewee (talk) 11:31, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

@Llewee: you're supposed to wait 2 weeks before starting another nominations. It's been five days. {{@FAC}} 750h+ 23:38, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

FrB.TG, said that doesn't apply in this case when they closed the last nomination--Llewee (talk) 00:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Just saw that. My bad 750h+ 02:53, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Support from Crisco 1492

• My support from the previous nomination still stands. I'm seeing that discussion of Ireland has been removed, and I think the change in scope has helped keep the article more specific.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:33, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Comments Support from Tim riley

An instructive article by a writer clearly in command of the subject. A few minor quibbles about the prose:

• "It was somewhat common for children" – you like the word "somewhat" somewhat: it crops up five times in your text. Like "however", "somewhat" is usually better omitted. I think the prose would be less woolly without any of the five here.

  reworded to take out the somewhats, in some cases I've tried to keep the meaning the somewhat was conveying--Llewee (talk) 16:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "However, the societies did not aim to cater for the younger age group" – you are even keener on "however" than on "somewhat" – there are eight "however"s throughout the text, and you could, and I suggest should, lose at least the second, fourth, fifth, sixth and seventh of them.

  I've gotten rid of most of them. I'm not sure if they are the ones you suggested as I lost count a bit.--Llewee (talk) 16:46, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "Various other figures also established infant schools and wrote books about the subject. David Turner, an academic, wrote ..." – I think it would be helpful to your readers to make it clear that Turner was not one of those writing contemporary books about the subject but was writing in 1970.

  added "who studied 19th-century infant schools" after "an academic"--Llewee (talk) 17:06, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "By the mid 1830's" – does the source really have the naff apostrophe?
• "some schools were too dominated by religion" – a bit judgemental without a citation.

  I have taken that bit out as the point is also said in more neutral way in the quote.--Llewee (talk) 16:57, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "W. B. Stephens, an historian" – unless you are aged 90+ and cling to the pronunciations 'otel and 'istorian, I'd make "an" "a".
• "According to historians Helen May, Baljit Kaur and Larry Prochner" – clunky false title.

  dealt with in the same way to the David Turner issue--Llewee (talk) 17:13, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "He was not primarily interested" – the last person mentioned was "the pupil", and it would be as well to replace the pronoun with the name.

  done--Llewee (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "some of the questions indicate to desire to avoid rote learning –should the first "to" be "a"?

  done--Llewee (talk) 20:37, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "The number of children under seven in schools ... In 1840 the Council on Education in England and Wales" – the whole of this paragraph is given a single citation. Does it cover all 196 words?

  I've broke this and other long chunks of text into multiple citations.--Llewee (talk) 14:43, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "Many more of the less financially secure working classes" – is this a posh way of saying "poorer"?

  It is a bit jargony. I think I was trying to emphasise the distinction from the "skilled working classes" mentioned previously. I have changed it to "Many poorer families".--Llewee (talk) 20:45, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "The expansion of young children attending school" – I take this is meant to mean that the numbers rather than the children expanded.

• I don't think child obesity was as much of an issue in those days. Changed to "rise of".--Llewee (talk) 20:53, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "the under five's" – we could well do without the apostrophe.

Removed. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:36, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

• "More middle-class parents" – this is ambiguous: were the parents more middle class or were there more parents from the middle class?

  I have changed "more" to many" to clarify this point.--Llewee (talk) 14:43, 20 November 2024 (UTC)

• "In the first year, the 'reception class', children" – any reason for ignoring the MoS's preference for double quotes?

  fixed--Llewee (talk) 22:50, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

• "This method quickly became the principle method" – you mean "principal", I think.

  changed this--Llewee (talk) 22:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)

That's all from me. I hope some of these points are of use. – Tim riley talk 18:06, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

Afternoon Tim, how is it looking now? Gog the Mild (talk) 15:36, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

The amendment of principle/principal was the final change I was looking for. After a last read-through I am now happy to support the elevation of this article to FA. Tim riley talk 16:21, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, the 1830s thing is in the source sorry.--Llewee (talk) 16:24, 23 November 2024 (UTC)

Image and source review

Images seem well-placed. What's the copyright status of the painting in File:Flickr - USCapitol - Weaving.jpg? File:British Central School Borough Road.png has a bare URL, as do several other images. Some files may need a commons:Template:PD-scan. Viz File:Infants of the British school, Llanymddyfri NLW3363470.jpg, do we know when the photographer lived? File:A practical guide to the English kinder-garten (children's garden) - for the use of mothers, nursery governesses, and infant teachers - being an exposition of Froebel's system of infant training - (14596479949).jpg needs an actual copyright tag. OKish ALT text. Sauce-wise, is #37 really saying "infant school"? I figure a government or education website would be a better source for such a claim, too. What makes https://education-uk.org/history/index.html a reliable source? Are the ITV report, Morgan Thomas 1936 and Grimshaw 1931 influential enough to warrant mention? Nothing jumps me as unused or questionable otherwise, but I must caution that this isn't a field where I am an expert in. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Jo-Jo Eumerus, The first image's page on commons says that it is in the public domain because it was created by an employee of the American government. I have added John Thomas's age range; he died in 1905. I have fixed the URL and PD-scan issues. The man who created History of education in the UK (See) appears to be a retired teacher who has a Diploma of Education; he says in his autobiography that he has strong political views but the history itself seems very well written and based on academic sources (for example, see the first section of chapter one). It appears that citizensinformation.ie is run by a agency of the Irish Government (See). The cited page doesn't mention infant schools but it does mention infant classes and the point when children enter them. The two early 20th century biographies correspond to what Whitbread says about the period; I included them in order to give more tangible examples as the academic sources can be quite abstract. The ITV News report received a little discussion recently; though Wales doesn't have much of a public debate. I included it mainly in order to add a bit more detail to the Welsh paragraph and as balance to a article cited slightly earlier which criticises phonics.--Llewee (talk) 13:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

I guess this is OK, unless a spotcheck is needed. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:00, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Support

Per my comment at the first fac, my concerns were pretty much solely 1B orientated; that the scope has been sufficiently adjusted that I see no major obstacles to promotion. Tight faded male arse. Decadence and anarchy. A certain style. Smile. 10:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

Prose review by Generalissima

Always love seeing your attention to education - such an undercovered subject on-wiki!

• Lede solid, good length.
• Terminology good.
• I'm interested by the relatively limited mention of religion as a motivation for early childhood education within Great Britain itself; it seems to mainly come up in its spread elsewhere. Was there just not as much religious advocacy for these institutions?
• The second half of the article is especially very well-written. I like how you cover smaller details like teaching methods without ever getting too niche.

@Llewee: Really just have the one question about religion and I'll be happy to support; I'm not an expert in the subject matter, so I'm curious. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:48, 1 December 2024 (UTC)

Llewee, nudge. Gog the Mild (talk) 14:19, 4 December 2024 (UTC)

Generalissima There was some religious influence on infant schools which is mentioned a bit in the article. I have added a quote to illustrate the point in the home and colonial infant school society section. But sectarianism wasn't a major issue (which it definitely was in other aspects of 19th century English and Welsh education).--Llewee (talk) 18:19, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

• Hi Generalissima, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:15, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

  Oh! I forgot I never officially supported. Support. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 20:16, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Comments and support from Gerda

I took part in the more general review for Infant schools and return to an article with a more specific focus. I am not sure if that limitation is already complete, seeing a level-2 header about Worldwide spreading. Or what do I miss? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Lead

• "The movement quickly spread across the British Empire, Europe and the United States. It was used by missionary groups in an effort to convert the empire's non-Christian subjects." - Besides that spreading seems not exactly "in GB", which empire?

  clarified British empire--Llewee (talk) 00:59, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

  taken this bit out, per article body--Llewee (talk) 19:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Background

• Why a Boston illustration when the focus is GB?

  I chose that image because it shows a pre-industrial family business. It is quite hard to find relevant images on commons and my searches on the British Newspaper Archive didn't have much success. I've found a fairly relevant image which is meant to be depicting a British family now. But its not ideal as it was drawn much later in the early 1900s.--Llewee (talk) 23:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• "New, more punitive, forms of child labour", - more p. compared to what?

  clarified--Llewee (talk) 23:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

• why Dame school capital?

  its after a full stop, unless I have missed something--Llewee (talk) 23:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

Worldwide ...

• As said before, I wonder about the scope. Do we exclude Ireland, but include the World, or at least the Commonwealth?

  I have taken out the worldwide spread section and moved the relevant links to further reading--Llewee (talk) 19:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Professionalisation and expansion

• This seems a too general header, followed by subheader Home and Colonial Infant School Society which seems too specific - I never heard that term. It seems about adopting Pestalozzi's concepts, no?

  I hope the new headings are an improvement--Llewee (talk) 00:17, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Edwardian ...

• Will the article for the longish red link be written soon?

  I added that link on the advice of another editor. I'd like to write an article on the subject at some stage but I haven't got any immediate plans to do so.--Llewee (talk) 00:59, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

See also

• I am not happy about the four articles, thinking, that the first should contain the later three, in which case the whole bunch could be replaced by one link to the first in the prose, no? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:29, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

• They appear to be already there; so I have taken them out this article. I'm not sure where the education in the UK article could fit in prose.--Llewee (talk) 19:42, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for the changes, support for FA --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:22, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Drive-by comments

• Salmon and Hindshaw needs an OCLC. (776414455)

  Added here and for the 1930s biographies.--Llewee (talk) 00:24, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

• "The first infant school was founded in New Lanark, Scotland, in 1816." Either 'in Great Britain' needs adding, or it needs deleting from the similar statement in the main article, depending on what the sources say.

  It says "first infant school in Britain" in the source, so clarified in the lead.--Llewee (talk) 00:32, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 20:32, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:15, 3 January 2025 (UTC)

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

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 2 January 2025 [1].

---

Teddy Wynyard

Nominator(s): AA (talk) 15:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

This article is about Teddy Wynyard, a noted sportsman and soldier. As a cricketer, he played Test cricket for England and had a substantial domestic career with Hampshire, where he was instrumental in their return to first-class status in 1894. He was also a footballer, playing in the infancy of the game. He played for the Old Carthusians and won the 1881 FA Cup with the team. He was also adept at winter sports, winning the International Tobogganist Championship at Davos in 1894, 1895 and 1899. In the army, he saw action in the Third Anglo-Burmese War (Burmese Expedition), for which he gained the DSO. He would retire from military service in 1903, but returned to serve in WWI. He was also an important administrator in cricket. Altogether, an interesting character who led a varied life. AA (talk) 15:55, 9 November 2024 (UTC)

Placeholder

• Putting my name down to review this one when I have sufficient time -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:05, 9 November 2024 (UTC)
  • One drive-by comment - as per the footnote immediately below them, football stats shown in infoboxes are "Club domestic league appearances and goals" only. As his Corinthians appearances were in friendlies, these should not be shown (and for the other teams you can remove the ?s and simply show blanks as league football did not even exist in that time period) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:46, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

    @ChrisTheDude I have removed the football teams/stats from the infobox, as I don't think the other teams need to be shown as they were not league clubs, and they are mentioned in the prose. AA (talk) 20:53, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

Image review

• File:Teddy_Wynyard_c1900.jpg: when and where was this first published?
  • Comment. @Nikkimaria: so far, the only version of this photo I can find is on ESPNcricinfo here, which attributes it to Hampshire County Cricket Club. Will see if I can find a publishing date, though undoubtedly prior to 1908 as he is wearing a Hampshire county cap, and his playing career with Hampshire ended in 1908. AA (talk) 20:48, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• File:Teddy_Wynyard_Vanity_Fair_25_August_1898.jpg needs a US tag
  • Done. Tag added. AA (talk) 20:42, 10 November 2024 (UTC)

• File:Old_carthusians_1881.jpg: source link is dead, when and where was this first published, and what research was undertaken to try to identify the author?
  • Comment. It would appear to be from this source using the Wayback machine. AA (talk) 20:40, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
    • Comment. I've conducted a reverse image search, which doesn't bring up anything not searchable through certain keywords in Google. I can drop a message on the WP:FOOTBALL talkpage and see if anyone knows if it might be from a book. AA (talk) 22:26, 10 November 2024 (UTC)
      • Comment. @Nikkimaria:. I have contacted Charterhouse School who have confirmed this picture comes from an album in the Charterhouse School archives, and have provided permission for the image to be used in the article. I have filled out a reproduction agreement form and sent this back to their archivist. How do I proceed from here in updating the Wikicommons page? AA (talk) 22:45, 27 November 2024 (UTC)
        • VRT would usually be the way to go for documenting permission. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:46, 28 November 2024 (UTC)

AA, have you resolved this? If so, could you ping Nikkimaria. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

I have had no reply from Charterhouse with regard to the template VRT requires. AA (talk) 22:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild I have emailed them again. They are away until 8th January (and may periodically check emails, according to the out of office). Shall I remove the image for now, then re-add once the email template for release has been sent back to me? AA (talk) 22:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

That would seem sensible. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:50, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild done :) AA (talk) 23:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Comments

• "The son of the soldier and judge William Wynyard, he was born" - I feel like the body should "start afresh" after the lead, so I would be tempted to say "The son of the soldier and judge William Wynyard, Edward George Wynyard was born"
  • Comment. Have gone with your suggestion, it reads much nicer and with a better flow. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "It was speculated, that had he not pursued a military career, he may have achieved" - comma is in the wrong place, it should be "It was speculated that, had he not pursued a military career, he may have achieved"
  • Comment. Comma moved about! AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "His actions were praised by General's Sir Robert Low and Sir George White" - there should not be an apostrophe in the plural form of "general"
  • Done. I have removed the apostrophe. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "In recognition of his actions, he was appointed to command a company of the Welsh Regiment" - it was spelt "Welch" in the lead......?
  • Done. I have changed to Welsh in the lead as it wasn't known as the Welch Regiment until 1920. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "By the time he had returned home later in 1887, Hampshire had lost their first-class status since his departure for India, following a number of poor seasons." - I feel like the words "since his departure for India" are a bit redundant here
  • Done. Removed. I did toy with putting in "By the time he had returned home later in 1887, Hampshire had lost their first-class status in 1885, following a number of poor seasons", but it doesn't quite read right I don't think. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "who had noted that both Wynyard and fellow soldier Francis Quinton, had been missing" - that comma should not be there
  • Done. Nice spot on the rogue comma! AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "With the outbreak of Second Boer War" => "With the outbreak of the Second Boer War"
  • Done. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "During the winter which proceeded the 1904 season" => "During the winter which preceded the 1904 season"
  • Comment. The final paragraph of the previous section talks briefly about the 1904 season. The section which follows begins by talking about his tour West Indies which happened in the winter which followed the 1904 season. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
    • Gotcha. In that case I think it should simply say "the winter which followed the 1904 season". I'm not 100% sure that "proceeded" can be used as a transitive verb in the sense of "came after" (i.e. can you really say "Thursday was the day which proceeded Wednesday"......?) - if it can it must be an archaic/obscure usage and I cite myself as an example of it being confusing to readers ;-) -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:20, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
      • Comment. Yeah, I've always disliked using "proceeding", I'd prefer something more fancy! Have changed it :) AA (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "with Wynyard heading the teams batting averages" => "with Wynyard heading the team's batting averages"
  • Done. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• " she had become stuck under the ice following a mountain torrent.;" - there's a stray full stop before the semi-colon
  • Done. A good spot! AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• "forming his own club, "The Jokers" which was drawn" => "forming his own club, "The Jokers", which was drawn "
  • Done, comma inserted. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• These very minor points are all I got - ChrisTheDude (talk) 19:15, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
  • @ChrisTheDude:. Many thanks for your comments :) Please find my responses above. AA (talk) 20:21, 11 November 2024 (UTC)
• Support on prose -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Matarisvan

Hi AA, my comments:

• "played at domestic level": "played at the domestic level"?
  • Done. AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Link "Warwick Militia" to Royal Warwickshire Regiment, both in the lead and body?
  • Done. Thanks for the suggestion, I was unsure as to their connection! AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "he enrolled in the fee-paying Oxford Military College": what year?
  • Comment. I can't find a specific year(s) mentioned, nor do there appear to be any records available to view online from the college (it went bust in the mid-1890s). The 1885 book Oxford Military College looks like it might be a register, but the only UK copy is 200 miles away in North Wales!!! AA (talk) 20:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Link "India General Service Medal" to India General Service Medal (1854–95)?
  • Done. I'll add the redlink the MILHIST article request page. AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  @AssociateAffiliate, the link here should actually be India General Service Medal (1854); I had transcribed the title improperly. Also, could you respond to points number 3, 6 and 10-12? Matarisvan (talk) 19:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

  • Comment. I will amend, just working my way through them. Have been on a radiology reporting course most of the day, been taking one point at a time during breaks! AA (talk) 20:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

• Link "Thornhil" to Thornhill, Southampton in both lead and body?
  • Done AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "1897 ... prestigious North v South fixture" and "1900 ... North v South fixture": who won, and what was Wynyard's score?
  • Done. "Prestigious"... North v South? Not how I would describe it... yikes, that should have been Gentlemen v Players! Amended, and summary of his performances commented on. Have double-checked the article, no other glaring mishaps from me :) AA (talk) 21:20, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "alluded to be the": remove the "be"?
  • Done. AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "heavy defeat on the Jamaicans": by how many runs/wickets?
  • Done. Victory margin added. AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "though did earn selection": "though he did earn selection"?
  • Done. AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "he struggled against the leg spin": what were his scores?
  • Done. Have given more of an overview of his struggles on the tour, mentioning his average and that he only passed fifty once in six matches. AA (talk) 20:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "representative matches for London": What London FC was this? Consider linking if details available?
  • Comment. The source isn't specific. I would hazard a guess Warsop is referring to a London-wide county representative team (likely post-1889), similar to other county representative teams? AA (talk) 20:25, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "captained Hampshire": was this Southampton F.C.?
  • Comment. The source is very specific that he captained Hampshire in three sports (cricket, football, hockey). There's no mention of Wynyard in any of the annals of Southampton F.C., so I am pretty certain it was for a representative county side; however, there is no mention of dates, but with the formal organisation of football in Hampshire occurring in 1889, I'd say it was probably after then. AA (talk) 20:18, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• "Wynyard was survived by his wife": do we have her name?
  • Done. We have her name and their year of marriage, and they had just one child. AA (talk) 18:48, 16 November 2024 (UTC)
• Girdlestone, Hardman and Hay 1911; Humphris and Creagh 1924 need locations of publication, though for the first it would just be a formality.
  • Done. AA (talk) 18:10, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Will try to do spot checks soon. Cheers Matarisvan (talk) 11:33, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

@Matarisvan many thanks for your comments. Please find above my responses :) AA (talk) 21:22, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

AA, can support on prose. Will try to do spot checks soon. Btw, are your recent FACs part of a featured topic? Say cricketers and soldiers, or team members of Hampshire or the MCC during a particular year? Matarisvan (talk) 18:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

Matarisvan cheers! A lot of my recent expansions have been Hampshire cricketers who were also soldiers, the two are sort of where my interests lie. I have several more Hampshire cricketers who were soldiers lined up to bring to FAC in the near future! No such featured topic though! Doesn't a featured topic have to have a featured parent article for the other articles to branch from? AA (talk) 20:32, 17 November 2024 (UTC)

• Please note: I will be out of the UK from 19/11 to 24/11, so might not be able to respond during that time. AA (talk) 20:42, 18 November 2024 (UTC)

AA, if you are back, perhaps you could address these comments. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:00, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Done! AA (talk) 23:00, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

• Hi Matarisvan, I was wondering if you felt in a position to either support or oppose this nomination? Obviously, neither is obligatory. Thanks. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:38, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Gog the Mild, I can support this nomination based on my prose review. Matarisvan (talk) 15:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Source review

Source formatting seems mostly consistent. I am kinda dubious of using late 19th century newspapers from the now-UK; are these really high-quality reliable sources? And what makes the CricketArchive a high-quality reliable source? Did some spotchecking which didn't turn up anything. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:07, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

• @Jo-Jo Eumerus: thanks for your comment. I consider the late 19th century newspapers to be reliable, none of them deviate from the narrative of the article. In fact, I'd consider them more reliable than modern-day cricket coverage, which is lacking and often shoddily written! CricketArchive is regarded as an authoritative source. It's run by the people from The Association of Cricket Statisticians and Historians, who are trusted by the International Cricket Council to maintain and expand the statistical and biographical history of players, so it is a highly reliable source. AA (talk) 21:12, 24 November 2024 (UTC)

  @Jo-Jo Eumerus just wondering where you might stand with your review? AA (talk) 23:35, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

  Referencing this decade-old post here since it and what I've heard about British newspapers in other occasions (e.g Leveson Inquiry) are the reasons why I am so dubious about the British newspapers. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:01, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

  Admittedly, modern British media is "gutter", which is why I turned off long ago! But older newspapers and their editors arguably more integrity and less spin. In fairness to the BNA references used, they are all from reputable (per WP:SOURCE) Hampshire-based newspapers (with two in Buckinghamshire, who cover his life and death there, as that is where he retired to). None of them make any controversial or outlandish claims, simply backing up the chronology of events (such as him succeeding Russell Bencraft as captain in 1895 [ref 33], or being recruited by the South African Cricket Association in 1908 [ref 64]). AA (talk) 21:52, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Jo-Jo Eumerus any followup for this? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 20:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)

  I am not really sure. Perhaps this needs a second or third opinion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)

  Jo-Jo, the discussion you linked actually gives cricket facts as an example of the sort of thing British newspapers can be relied on for. Is there some usage in the article that you're doubtful about? If they are being used solely for straightforward and unsurprising facts I think they should be treated as reliable. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:54, 25 December 2024 (UTC)

  No, it's a general concern I have whenever I see these newspapers mentioned. But if they can be relied on for cricket stuff, then I guess my question is answered. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:14, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Source review, 2nd or 3rd opinion

• There seems to be some confusion about British news sources here. They are not generally unreliable or unsuitable and should, on the whole, be treated as trustworthy as any other nation’s newspapers. On some small number of topics, a small number of them are unreliable, and these are all detailed at the WP:RSN. For pretty much all papers (except where forbidden by the RSN), sports coverage is uncontroversial and reliable, as their use is at this article. I would say this is a source review pass from the standard of press coverage here. - SchroCat (talk) 22:20, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Coord note

Five weeks in and discussion seems to have stalled without a clear consensus to promote. If the nomination doesn't get additional comments, it may be liable to be archived in the next few days. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 22:43, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

@David Fuchs just wondering if this nom is at the stage where a decision can be made? Cheers :) AA (talk) 21:23, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

Comments from Mike Christie

I've copyedited a little; please feel free revert any changes you don't like.

• "partaking as a tobogganist in the International Championship": I think "participating" is an apter word.
  • Done. Agree, "participating" is much better. AA (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• "As a career soldier, Wynyard was commissioned into the Warwick Militia in September 1879": I think this would read more naturally as just "A career soldier, Wynyard was ...".
  • Done. It does read more naturally, the "as" is unnecessary. AA (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• "Wynyard cleverly disguised himself": we shouldn't say "cleverly" in Wikipedia's voice. I'd just cut it -- the cleverness is apparent in the success of the disguise.
  • Done. He fooled them all! AA (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• "Wynyard retired in 1903": suggest "Wynyard retired from the army in 1903", since the previous sentences are about cricket rather than his military career.
  • Done. Per your suggestion, now makes it clearer to the reader. AA (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• Is the "[sic]" in "all round [sic]" because it's normally "all-round"? If so I don't think it's needed. Or are you concerned that someone will correct it, thinking it's a typo? A hidden comment would probably suffice for that".
  • Done. It should be "all-rounder", but I have no removed "[sic]" and inserted a hidden comment so nobody changes it! AA (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• The subsection is titled "Early first-class career", but some of these matches were not first-class -- some of the Hampshire matches, of course, as you state, and perhaps some of the ones in India? Could we make it clearer if any of the other matches were not first-class?
  • Done. I have expanded a sentence to make it clear the matches in India were not first-class. Haven't done that with the school matches, as I think that is more obvious! AA (talk) 22:12, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• "With his presence in the regimental team, it is believed they only lost one match between 1883 and 1890": this wording implies his presence is probably the reason they lost only one match; does the source make this assertion?
  • Comment. The source says: "...whilst he was with the 8th King's Regiment in India, we believe that they only lost one match between 1883-90, and this is easily understood when we learn that the Old Carthusian averaged 100 runs per innings to his own bat. I have taken that as the source making the assertion that it was his presence in the team which was largely to thank for that record. AA (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• " this had been alluded to the Hampshire committee in 1897": presumably this should read "alluded to by the"?
  • Done. Good spot! AA (talk) 21:02, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• "This was exemplified by the fact that he made just three appearances for the county ..." I don't think "exemplified" is quite right here. Suggest cutting this to just "He made just three ..." as the previous sentences have told the reader what is coming.
  • Done. Hmm, yes, it has already set the stage so this is unnecessary. AA (talk) 21:35, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• I copyedited a sentence in the last paragraph of the "Hampshire's return ..." section, starting "His retirement", but I think it's still not quite right. It was a long and complex sentence, and it's now two sentences, which I think is an improvement, but "Wynyard was assisting in running" is a bit ugly. I cut the mention of Lords as unnecessary but perhaps it should be returned?
  • Comment. Yeah, each time I convinced myself it was alright, it suddenly didn't look alright! Now reads "...which Wynyard assisted in running at Lord's". How does that read? AA (talk) 22:06, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• "though given his lack of appearances during the tour he was mostly utilised in the touring team as a reserve player": this doesn't make sense to me -- it seems to be saying that because he made few appearances he was used as a reserve player, but it would be logical the other way round. What does the source actually say?
  • Comment. The source says "It seems obvious that he was mainly selected as a reserve player, as he played in only two first-class matches..." I have reworded and shortened the sentence. AA (talk) 22:28, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• '... and "a fine, free hitter" who "used a great variety of strokes, especially those in front of the wicket".[68] It was noted that he was effective in utilising a number of different strokes ...': The second sentence repeats Wisden; I'd cut one or the other.
  • Done. Have cut the second mention and left the part which talks about his developing a method of hitting left-handed bowlers over cover-point. AA (talk) 22:30, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
• "she had become stuck under the ice following a mountain torrent": I don't understand what happened to her -- "following" implies she was walking along beside a stream.
  • Comment. I have changed "stuck" → "drawn". The source and other reports of the time sadly are not specific as to what she was doing by the stream to end up in such a predicament! AA (talk) 22:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Interesting article. There can't be many people who've scored a goal in an FA Cup Final and also scored runs at Test level in cricket. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:11, 15 December 2024 (UTC)

• Comment. @Mike Christie:. Please find above my comments. He is certainly an interesting man who led a very varied life. I can't think of too many who have scored a goal in an FA Cup final and runs in Test cricket. From a Hampshire perspective, C. B. Fry played in an F.A. Cup final but never scored. Denis Compton played for Arsenal in a final too, but also never scored. Perhaps Wynyard is unique?! AA (talk) 22:53, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

Support. The changes look good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 00:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Drive-by comments

• The last paragraph of the lead uses "served" three times. Would it be possible to synonym away either the first or second?
  • Done. Have kept the first use of the word, but changed the wording for the second and third. AA (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)
• "He retired from military service in 1903, but returned to active service in the First World War, where he initially served with the Middlesex Regiment, before being seconded to the Labour Corps, where he was commandant of Thornhill Labour Camp in Thornhill, Southampton." A busy sentence. Perhaps break it.
  • Done. Have broken up the sentence! AA (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 22:12, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• @Gog the Mild:, how does it look now? AA (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Gog the Mild (talk) 23:13, 2 January 2025 (UTC)

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

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

The article was promoted by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 1 January 2025 [2].

---

Steele's Greenville expedition

Nominator(s): Hog Farm _Talk 19:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

This was a little-known operation during the Vicksburg campaign, not to be confused with the better-known Steele's Bayou expedition. Grant and Sherman sent Steele's division up to Greenville, Mississippi, and then down Deer Creek, destroying cotton and supplies along the way. Additionally, the operation served as a bit of a diversion of Confederate attention from the main show further downriver. Some historians have opined that this operation is evidence of shifting Union views on forced emancipation, the use of Black troops, and the application of total war. Ironically, Sherman, who has historically known as a proponent of hard war, objected to some of the actions against civilians during the operation. Hog Farm _Talk 19:48, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Support Comments from Graham Beards

I have taken the liberty of making a few edits, which I am happy to discuss. There are a few other expressions that I think can be improved:

• Here "The naval historian Myron J. Smith and the historians William L. Shea and Terrence J. Winschel state that around 1,000 slaves were freed, while the historian Timothy B. Smith states that estimates range to up to 2,000 or 3,000 slaves followed Steele's column back to Greenville." Why do our US contributors always have to write "state that" instead of the simpler "said" or "say"?
  • I've rephrased these; it's an Americanism but I'm not sure why. Hog Farm _Talk 16:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
• Here "Both Sherman and Steele believed that Union troops had gone too far in behavior that affected civilians, rather than just targeted the Confederate war goals." Should this be "targeting"?
  • Yes, I've fixed this. Hog Farm _Talk 16:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
• "Going forward" is such a cliche!
  • Rephrased this sentence. Hog Farm _Talk 16:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
• Here "although other operations such as Grierson's Raid also played a role in that." I think the "in that" is redundant.
  • Removed. Hog Farm _Talk 16:06, 6 December 2024 (UTC)

I might have more comments later. Graham Beards (talk) 21:01, 5 December 2024 (UTC)

Image review

• Suggest adding alt text
  • I've added alt text, although I would appreciate if someone checked what I used for the maps. Hog Farm _Talk 02:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
• Suggest scaling up the second map
  • I've scaled it up to upright=1.6; please feel free to adjust to a different scaling if you think it would be an improvement. Hog Farm _Talk 02:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
• File:Frederick_Steele.jpg needs a US tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:01, 6 December 2024 (UTC)
  • @Nikkimaria: - Would this clear derivative of the photo published in 1893 be sufficient support for pre-1929 publication for a PD-US tag? Hog Farm _Talk 02:32, 8 December 2024 (UTC)
    • Think so. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:37, 8 December 2024 (UTC)

Support from Crisco

• The next morning, the boats reached Smith's Landing; Smith's was 20 miles (32 km) south of Greenville. - Smith's ... Smith's
  • Rephrased. Hog Farm _Talk 15:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• the Lee - Either missing a word or one too many
  • Should have been "that"; corrected. Hog Farm _Talk 15:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• as at least $3 million - Value today?
  • Have used {{inflation}}; let me know if you think there's a better way. Hog Farm _Talk 15:06, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
    • I'd probably round to avoid being too specific. Adding |r=-3 to the template will round it to the thousands.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
      • Thanks, done. I want to look to see what the source exactly says for the final point before making a rephrasing. Hog Farm _Talk 17:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
        • Thanks HF.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
• notes that estimates range to up to 2,000 or 3,000 slaves followed Steele's column back to Greenville - Maybe "notes that an estimated 2,000 to 3,000 slaves followed Steele's column back to Greenville"? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
  • I prefer the current phrasing; the way the source is wording is that Smith is noting that these are estimates made by other people, but he does not endorse a specific estimate here. Hog Farm _Talk 02:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
• Support on prose. Looks good.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 19:48, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Thank you for your review! I would review your FAC but I think the images would be hard to explain to my wife if she walked by my computer while I was reviewing it. Hog Farm _Talk 02:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
    • LOL, no worries. Thanks for the offer, though! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:19, 20 December 2024 (UTC)

Comments from Mike Christie

• "While much of Steele's force remained the Washington's Landing area": missing word?
  • Yes, fixed. Hog Farm _Talk 18:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• "continued on inland": I think "on" is unnecessary.
  • Removed. Hog Farm _Talk 18:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• "The presence of Lee's force became known to Steele": can we say how?
  • A scouting patrol; added. Hog Farm _Talk 02:50, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
• "While Ferguson had withdrawn his troops, the Union soldiers found large quantities of supplies and cattle, which they brought back to camp": suggest "Ferguson had withdrawn his troops, but left behind large quantities of supplies and cattle, which the Union soldiers found and brought back to camp". I misparsed "while" as "During" on first reading.
  • Done. Hog Farm _Talk 18:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• "While the Union troops had been ordered to avoid disturbing local families who were peaceful and remained at home, these orders were ignored": suggest "The Union troops had been ordered to avoid disturbing local families who were peaceful and remained at home, but these orders were ignored".
  • Done. Hog Farm _Talk 18:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• Do we need the corn volume in four different units?
  • Have reduced it to US bushels and liters Hog Farm _Talk 18:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
• "estimates range to up to 2,000 or 3,000 slaves followed Steele's column": missing word or some editing debris here?
  • Have rephrased this a bit, is it better now? Hog Farm _Talk 18:54, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

    Tweaked it a bit more. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:08, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

• "rather than just targeting the Confederate war goals": is "goals" the word you want here? I would have expected something like "men and materiel".
  • I have rephrased this. Hog Farm _Talk 02:50, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

All very minor, and I'll be supporting once these are addressed. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:32, 26 December 2024 (UTC)

Support. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:32, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Source review: Pass

• Will pick this up. - SchroCat (talk) 22:13, 27 December 2024 (UTC)

Very straightforward one this. Formatting is consistent and appropriate. Sources are all reliable, appropriate and high quality. Source review pass. - SchroCat (talk) 12:49, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

Comments by Dudley

• "Major General William T. Sherman hoped that Steele might reach to where Deer Creek met Rolling Fork". You mention Sherman four times, but never explain his position and role. This needs clarification.
  • I have clarified this, although this adds a new source (pinging the source reviewer as a courtesy) although I don't expect Welcher to be controversial as a source. Hog Farm _Talk 00:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the ping. No issues with the new source - just a minor tweak on the formatting (which I sorted). Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:01, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
• "any baled cotton marked with "CSA"". You should add "(for Confederate States of America).
  • I've added this. None of the sources directly say this, but it's fairly obvious so I think it's fine. Hog Farm _Talk 17:41, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
• "Steele's troops left the Young's Point, Louisiana, area late on April 2," The location needs more explanation than a red link.
  • I've put this as a footnote to keep the digression out of the main text - is this sufficient or do you think I ought to move this into the main article text? Hog Farm _Talk 17:41, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
• "Two regiments and the Union Navy tinclad steamer USS Prairie Bird were left at the landing point to guard it". As you have specified the strength of the expedition as 5600 men, I think it would be clearer to give the strenght of the guards in number of men rather than regiments.
  • I don't think this is possible. The closest I can find is Bearss calling the regiments "understrength"; I've tracked down the primary source that Bearss used and the relevant quote (from a document prepared by Steele on April 5) is "The gunboat Prairie Rose will remain there with the transports. I have left two small regiments as a guard, and have ordered six of the steamers back to report to Commander Graham". Hog Farm _Talk 17:41, 28 December 2024 (UTC)

• How about a footnote giving the standard strength of a regiment and stating that they were understrength? Dudley Miles (talk) 09:29, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

• @Dudley Miles: - well, this isn't the greatest solution either. The standard size of a regiment when the war started was 1,000 men, but that didn't hold up for very long due to disease, casualties, etc. There was no real standard strength by 1863. Bearss's listing of the units that accompanied Steele on this expedition includes 15 infantry regiments, two companies of cavalry, and two batteries of artillery. Even if you exclude the cavalry and artillery, that's less than 400 men per regiment on average. So the average unit of Steele's was at less than 40% of the nominal standard strength - the two understrength ones must have been particularly bad, but the 1,000 man standard strength would be a bit of a red herring here. Hog Farm _Talk 19:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

• I think that what you say here is well worth inclusion in the main text. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:35, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

• Let me think about the best way to accomplish this. I really don't want that 1,000 figure in there without significant context. Hog Farm _Talk 22:36, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

• "Henry Halleck had written to Grant". You should state Halleck's position.
  • I have added some context for this. Hog Farm _Talk 00:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
• The article looks fine. Just a few nit picks. Dudley Miles (talk) 16:12, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  • @Dudley Miles: - Thanks for the review! How do the changes made look? Hog Farm _Talk 00:10, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

• Support. I have made a suggestion above, but whether you adopt it does not affect my support. Dudley Miles (talk) 20:35, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

@FAC coordinators: - May I have another nomination, or would you rather that I determine what to do with Dudley's final suggestion first. Hog Farm _Talk 22:47, 29 December 2024 (UTC)

Given Dudley's comment I don't think we need wait, feel free to start another nom. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:00, 30 December 2024 (UTC)

Support from Z1720

Non-expert prose review:

• I made some copyedits as I read the article, but spotted no concerns. Did a lead check, and all of that facts there are cited in the body of the article. No other concerns. Z1720 (talk) 01:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 13:04, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

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