Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of infant schools in Great Britain/archive1

History of infant schools in Great Britain

Featured article candidates/History of infant schools in Great Britain/archive1

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

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)[reply]

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

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

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

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)[reply]

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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]

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

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

"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)[reply]
"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)[reply]
"This method quickly became the principle method" – you mean "principal", I think.
changed this--Llewee (talk) 22:47, 21 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

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)[reply]

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