The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot ( talk) 19 May 2021 [1].
This article, Fort Concho, is a former US Army installation located almost literally in the middle of Texas. It is in fact the best-preserved 19th century US Army installation anywhere in the country, let alone Texas. For that reason, it has the distinction of being a National Historic Landmark. Just as with my previous FA, this is the labor of two years, which I hope to just need one FAC for this time. ♠Vami _IV†♠ 01:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Looked at this during the peer review, so I may not find a whole bunch of new stuff. Will try to review this here over the next couple days. Might claim for 5 points in the WikiCup. Hog Farm Talk 15:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks like I caught some stuff this time I missed in the PR. Hog Farm Talk 16:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Here are some of my initial comments.
Lead:
It was established in November 1867 at the confluence of the Concho Rivers, situated on the Butterfield Overland Mail Route and Goodnight–Loving Trail. The US Army operated the fort for twenty-two years, from November 1867 to June 1889- Is there any way to combine these, as I assume the Army operated the fort immediately from its establishment. How about something like "The US Army established the fort in November 1867 at the confluence of the Concho Rivers, situated on the Butterfield Overland Mail Route and Goodnight–Loving Trail, and operated it until June 1889"?
Initially, Fort Concho was the principal base of the 4th Cavalry and then between 1875 and 1882, the "Buffalo Soldiers" of the 10th Cavalry.- Did the fort serve as base of the 4th and 10th cavalries at the same time, or was it the 4th and then the 10th?
The fort was abandoned in June 1889 and passed into civilian hands.- In the first paragraph, it is already mentioned that the fort operated till June 1889.
on July 4, 1961- add a comma after "1961"
40 acres (16 ha) grounds- This should be "40-acre (16 ha) grounds". You can add
|adj=on
to {{
convert}}.
As of August 2019, the fort was visited annually by around 55,000 people.- I would use active voice, e.g. "As of August 2019, around 55,000 people visited the fort annually".
Operation by the US military:
But in 1849, American colonists began crossing West Texas in large numbers to reach California, where gold had been discovered- It seems weird to begin a sentence with "But". Usually you can drop it or replace it with "However".
and among those avenues was the Butterfield Overland Mail route, established in 1858 to bring mail from St. Louis to San Francisco- I would move this to the next sentence, which is
On its way through Texas, the route passed through Fort Chadbourne...
But after the end of the war in 1865- Same as above.
But later that year, the US Army was ordered to reoccupy its pre-war Texas billets early in 1867- Same, but "but later that year" may be a little redundant, and you can just say "shortly afterward".
identified the junction of the Concho Rivers as an ideal site because of the abundance of water- I also think this is better fit for the next sentence (
The site was also desirable for its proximity to the routes it was to guard and for the abundance of nearby grazing land).
More later. Epicgenius ( talk) 16:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Construction:
Construction of Fort Concho was assigned on December 10, 1867, to Captain David W. Porter, assistant quartermaster of the Department of Texas.- I would suggest either recasting this in active voice, or rephrasing this so that the date is first (e.g. "On December 10, 1867, the construction contract was assigned to Captain David W. Porter...")
Progress was slow- How slow? Is it like "100-year construction project" slow, or just your standard delays?
In March- In March 1868, I presume.
They were followed over the next year by two more officer's residences, another barracks were built, and a permanent guardhouse and stables- You can probably drop "was built".
a quartermaster's corral, and a wagon shed- The comma's also unnecessary here, as this is not an ordered list.
Construction was again slowed in February 1872 with the discharging of most of the civilian workforce following budget cuts to the US War Department- this phrasing is awkward. I would use active voice for at least part of the sentence, e.g. "Construction was again slowed in February 1872 when most of the civilian workforce was discharged following budget cuts to the US War Department"
By 1879, the fort was garrisoned by eight companies of regular soldiers billeted in entirely limestone-built structures,[26] of which there were 39 by April 1889- 39 limestone structures or 39 soldiers per company? Epicgenius ( talk) 22:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Base of the 4th Cavalry
numbering 129 in the 1869 reports of the War Department, out of a force of 3,672 in Texas- This is awkward; I would place the "1869 reports of the War Department" at either the beginning or the end of this fragment.
Comanche and Kiowa raids increased in number over the rest of 1871- Became more frequent?
by August,[39] Sheridan, now commanding the Military Division of the Missouri,[11] ordered five expeditionary forces of more than 3,000 soldiers each into the South Plains.- I suggest this can be a new sentence.
Base of the 10th Cavalry
In July 1877, Captain Nicholas M. Nolan led an ill-fated expedition out of Fort Concho that achieved nothing and killed four soldiers from the 10th Cavalry's Company A- The detail that the expedition "achieved nothing and killed four soldiers from the 10th Cavalry's Company A" is very interesting. In light of that, though, "ill-fated" may be redundant, but that's just my opinion.
The disarmament was delayed until April 16 because of rains, and resulted in failure when the Mescalero Apache escaped with most of their arms.- As another editor once said, What helps is if you separate the sentences by removing ", and" in your head. (E.g. is "and resulted in failure when the Mescalero Apache escaped with most of their arm" a complete sentence? It's not, so either the comma should be removed, or you should reword the fragment after the comma to "and it resulted in failure".)
The 10th Cavalry transferred permanently to Fort Davis, farther to the west, in July 1882.- do we know why?
Post-Texas Indian Wars and deactivation
By the mid-1880s, the ranches that now enclosed the surrounding plains with barbed-wire fencing reduced the soldiers, barred by law from cutting the wire, to patrolling roads.- This sentence is also awkward, largely because "enclosed" is used as a passive verb instead of an active verb. Additionally, there are two thoughts here: the ranches were enclosed with barbed-wire fencing, and the soldiers were forced to patrol roads. I suggest something like this: "By the mid-1880s, ranches enclosed the surrounding plains with barbed-wire fencing; the soldiers, barred by law from cutting the wire, were reduced to patrolling roads."
In early 1888, the 8th Cavalry gathered at Fort Concho from around Texas, and then left in June for Fort Meade, South Dakota.- Same issue as above, regarding the comma after "Texas".
On June 20, 1889, the men of K Company lowered the flag over the fort for the final time, and left the next morning- Same issue with the comma after "time". Epicgenius ( talk) 15:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Relationship with San Angelo, Texas
By 1875, San Angelo was a collection of saloons and brothels and had a reputation befitting that- the second part of the sentence seems redundant. How about something like "By 1875, San Angelo was known for its collection of saloons and brothels"?
This was the state of affairs- Same here, I'd just say "This continued..."
traders and settlers, and allowed- This comma is unnecessary.
Preservation
As early as 1905, however, influential locals tried to conserve the fort. J. L. Millspaugh, one of the sutlers contracted to supply the fort, suggested without success that the city buy the fort- It may just be me but I think "fort" is repeated quite excessively here.
A decade later in 1924- How about just "Eleven years later"?
When the museum began expanding into other rooms of the courthouse, Carson moved the museum into Fort Concho's headquarters building on August 8, 1930- The way it's currently worded, it sounds like the museum was relocated while it was expanding. I would therefore replace "When" with "After" or something similar.
The Great Depression and World War II imposed financial difficulties on the museum- I would say directly that the museum didn't have too much funding.
The museum was made a department of the city of San Angelo in 1955, but there was only property purchased in that decade- How many properties? Or did the museum just buy property and do nothing else?
The second half of the 20th century was to see a change in the Fort Concho Museum's fortunes.- In my view, "change in fortunes" is a little eupheimstic.
On July 4, 1961, Fort Concho was named a National Historic Landmark District,[71] and placed on the National Register of Historic Places on October 15, 1966,[72] by the National Park Service (NPS).- I would standardize the date placement in this sentence structure. E.g. "On July 4, 1961, Fort Concho was named a National Historic Landmark District, and on October 15, 1966, the National Park Service (NPS) placed it on the National Register of Historic Places."
and advised both times the expansion of the museum staff.- I would also rephrase this. Either drop "and" (i.e. "...both times advising the expansion of the museum staff") or move "both times" after "staff".
Fort Concho Museum and Bell, Klein and Hoffman, an Austin-based architecture firm specializing in restorations- This is strange because the firm's name is "Bell, Klein and Hoffman", but the sentence structure may indicate "Fort Concho Museum and" is part of the name. I would rephrase this to clarify the distinction between the two entities, e.g. "Fort Concho Museum, along with Bell, Klein and Hoffman, an Austin-based architecture firm specializing in restorations" (though this sentence already has many commas).
On January 1, 1986- needs a comma after this
and announced in 2017 that it would use the donated money and other proceeds to expand its visitors center and rebuild Barracks 3 and 4 over 2018.- The way the sentence is set up, it sounds like the donor from 2015 made this announcement. However, I think the museum made the announcement, so that should be clarified.
Involvement in the YFZ ranch raid
I'll finish this off later. Epicgenius ( talk) 21:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Grounds and architecture
The material used in the fort's construction was not produced locally- Would it be easier to say "produced elsewhere", "sourced externally", or something similar instead of "not produced locally"?
a ventilator and a single chimney each- One ventilator and one chimney?
Barracks 1 had two dining halls to Barracks 2's two,- If they both had two, this can be condensed.
Barracks 3 and 4 were identical to Barracks 5 and 6. The latter buildings were demolished after the fort was abandoned and have not been rebuilt.- This should probably be rephrased. Based on grammar, here "the latter" refers to Barracks 5 and 6, but based on context, I assume it refers to Barracks 3 and 4. Maybe something like "Barracks 3 and 4, while identical to Barracks 5 and 6, were demolished after the fort was abandoned and have not been rebuilt."
About 50 feet (15 m) of the headquarters building is the former residence of Oscar Ruffini,[96] San Angelo's first civic architect.- 50 feet frontage?
The post hospital was built from 1868 to 1870.- This seems to be a different building than the reconstructed hospital today. I would suggest "The original post hospital..."
The houses generally follow an L-shaped plan with a primary residential building and kitchen, connected by veranda- One veranda per house or one veranda total?
Officer's Quarters 8 and 9 were built to the same plan as Officer's Quarters 1, and were also completed in 1872.- This comma is not necessary here.
The buildings form a duplex stand to the same height and have two fireplaces each.- Should there be a comma after "duplex", or is "stand" an adjective?
@ Vami IV: That's it for me. Looks pretty good from my view. Epicgenius ( talk) 22:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
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.
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
This is a really good article. I've reviewed up to the "Relationship with San Angelo, Texas" section now, more to follow. The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:28, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words., but also
Avoid beginning a sentence with a figureat MOS:NUMNOTES.
That takes me to "Grounds and architecture". More to come. The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:31, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Last set:
That's the end of my review, phew eh? The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:40, 15 May 2021 (UTC)
The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot ( talk) 19 May 2021 [1].
This article, Fort Concho, is a former US Army installation located almost literally in the middle of Texas. It is in fact the best-preserved 19th century US Army installation anywhere in the country, let alone Texas. For that reason, it has the distinction of being a National Historic Landmark. Just as with my previous FA, this is the labor of two years, which I hope to just need one FAC for this time. ♠Vami _IV†♠ 01:21, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Looked at this during the peer review, so I may not find a whole bunch of new stuff. Will try to review this here over the next couple days. Might claim for 5 points in the WikiCup. Hog Farm Talk 15:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Looks like I caught some stuff this time I missed in the PR. Hog Farm Talk 16:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Here are some of my initial comments.
Lead:
It was established in November 1867 at the confluence of the Concho Rivers, situated on the Butterfield Overland Mail Route and Goodnight–Loving Trail. The US Army operated the fort for twenty-two years, from November 1867 to June 1889- Is there any way to combine these, as I assume the Army operated the fort immediately from its establishment. How about something like "The US Army established the fort in November 1867 at the confluence of the Concho Rivers, situated on the Butterfield Overland Mail Route and Goodnight–Loving Trail, and operated it until June 1889"?
Initially, Fort Concho was the principal base of the 4th Cavalry and then between 1875 and 1882, the "Buffalo Soldiers" of the 10th Cavalry.- Did the fort serve as base of the 4th and 10th cavalries at the same time, or was it the 4th and then the 10th?
The fort was abandoned in June 1889 and passed into civilian hands.- In the first paragraph, it is already mentioned that the fort operated till June 1889.
on July 4, 1961- add a comma after "1961"
40 acres (16 ha) grounds- This should be "40-acre (16 ha) grounds". You can add
|adj=on
to {{
convert}}.
As of August 2019, the fort was visited annually by around 55,000 people.- I would use active voice, e.g. "As of August 2019, around 55,000 people visited the fort annually".
Operation by the US military:
But in 1849, American colonists began crossing West Texas in large numbers to reach California, where gold had been discovered- It seems weird to begin a sentence with "But". Usually you can drop it or replace it with "However".
and among those avenues was the Butterfield Overland Mail route, established in 1858 to bring mail from St. Louis to San Francisco- I would move this to the next sentence, which is
On its way through Texas, the route passed through Fort Chadbourne...
But after the end of the war in 1865- Same as above.
But later that year, the US Army was ordered to reoccupy its pre-war Texas billets early in 1867- Same, but "but later that year" may be a little redundant, and you can just say "shortly afterward".
identified the junction of the Concho Rivers as an ideal site because of the abundance of water- I also think this is better fit for the next sentence (
The site was also desirable for its proximity to the routes it was to guard and for the abundance of nearby grazing land).
More later. Epicgenius ( talk) 16:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
Construction:
Construction of Fort Concho was assigned on December 10, 1867, to Captain David W. Porter, assistant quartermaster of the Department of Texas.- I would suggest either recasting this in active voice, or rephrasing this so that the date is first (e.g. "On December 10, 1867, the construction contract was assigned to Captain David W. Porter...")
Progress was slow- How slow? Is it like "100-year construction project" slow, or just your standard delays?
In March- In March 1868, I presume.
They were followed over the next year by two more officer's residences, another barracks were built, and a permanent guardhouse and stables- You can probably drop "was built".
a quartermaster's corral, and a wagon shed- The comma's also unnecessary here, as this is not an ordered list.
Construction was again slowed in February 1872 with the discharging of most of the civilian workforce following budget cuts to the US War Department- this phrasing is awkward. I would use active voice for at least part of the sentence, e.g. "Construction was again slowed in February 1872 when most of the civilian workforce was discharged following budget cuts to the US War Department"
By 1879, the fort was garrisoned by eight companies of regular soldiers billeted in entirely limestone-built structures,[26] of which there were 39 by April 1889- 39 limestone structures or 39 soldiers per company? Epicgenius ( talk) 22:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)
Base of the 4th Cavalry
numbering 129 in the 1869 reports of the War Department, out of a force of 3,672 in Texas- This is awkward; I would place the "1869 reports of the War Department" at either the beginning or the end of this fragment.
Comanche and Kiowa raids increased in number over the rest of 1871- Became more frequent?
by August,[39] Sheridan, now commanding the Military Division of the Missouri,[11] ordered five expeditionary forces of more than 3,000 soldiers each into the South Plains.- I suggest this can be a new sentence.
Base of the 10th Cavalry
In July 1877, Captain Nicholas M. Nolan led an ill-fated expedition out of Fort Concho that achieved nothing and killed four soldiers from the 10th Cavalry's Company A- The detail that the expedition "achieved nothing and killed four soldiers from the 10th Cavalry's Company A" is very interesting. In light of that, though, "ill-fated" may be redundant, but that's just my opinion.
The disarmament was delayed until April 16 because of rains, and resulted in failure when the Mescalero Apache escaped with most of their arms.- As another editor once said, What helps is if you separate the sentences by removing ", and" in your head. (E.g. is "and resulted in failure when the Mescalero Apache escaped with most of their arm" a complete sentence? It's not, so either the comma should be removed, or you should reword the fragment after the comma to "and it resulted in failure".)
The 10th Cavalry transferred permanently to Fort Davis, farther to the west, in July 1882.- do we know why?
Post-Texas Indian Wars and deactivation
By the mid-1880s, the ranches that now enclosed the surrounding plains with barbed-wire fencing reduced the soldiers, barred by law from cutting the wire, to patrolling roads.- This sentence is also awkward, largely because "enclosed" is used as a passive verb instead of an active verb. Additionally, there are two thoughts here: the ranches were enclosed with barbed-wire fencing, and the soldiers were forced to patrol roads. I suggest something like this: "By the mid-1880s, ranches enclosed the surrounding plains with barbed-wire fencing; the soldiers, barred by law from cutting the wire, were reduced to patrolling roads."
In early 1888, the 8th Cavalry gathered at Fort Concho from around Texas, and then left in June for Fort Meade, South Dakota.- Same issue as above, regarding the comma after "Texas".
On June 20, 1889, the men of K Company lowered the flag over the fort for the final time, and left the next morning- Same issue with the comma after "time". Epicgenius ( talk) 15:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Relationship with San Angelo, Texas
By 1875, San Angelo was a collection of saloons and brothels and had a reputation befitting that- the second part of the sentence seems redundant. How about something like "By 1875, San Angelo was known for its collection of saloons and brothels"?
This was the state of affairs- Same here, I'd just say "This continued..."
traders and settlers, and allowed- This comma is unnecessary.
Preservation
As early as 1905, however, influential locals tried to conserve the fort. J. L. Millspaugh, one of the sutlers contracted to supply the fort, suggested without success that the city buy the fort- It may just be me but I think "fort" is repeated quite excessively here.
A decade later in 1924- How about just "Eleven years later"?
When the museum began expanding into other rooms of the courthouse, Carson moved the museum into Fort Concho's headquarters building on August 8, 1930- The way it's currently worded, it sounds like the museum was relocated while it was expanding. I would therefore replace "When" with "After" or something similar.
The Great Depression and World War II imposed financial difficulties on the museum- I would say directly that the museum didn't have too much funding.
The museum was made a department of the city of San Angelo in 1955, but there was only property purchased in that decade- How many properties? Or did the museum just buy property and do nothing else?
The second half of the 20th century was to see a change in the Fort Concho Museum's fortunes.- In my view, "change in fortunes" is a little eupheimstic.
On July 4, 1961, Fort Concho was named a National Historic Landmark District,[71] and placed on the National Register of Historic Places on October 15, 1966,[72] by the National Park Service (NPS).- I would standardize the date placement in this sentence structure. E.g. "On July 4, 1961, Fort Concho was named a National Historic Landmark District, and on October 15, 1966, the National Park Service (NPS) placed it on the National Register of Historic Places."
and advised both times the expansion of the museum staff.- I would also rephrase this. Either drop "and" (i.e. "...both times advising the expansion of the museum staff") or move "both times" after "staff".
Fort Concho Museum and Bell, Klein and Hoffman, an Austin-based architecture firm specializing in restorations- This is strange because the firm's name is "Bell, Klein and Hoffman", but the sentence structure may indicate "Fort Concho Museum and" is part of the name. I would rephrase this to clarify the distinction between the two entities, e.g. "Fort Concho Museum, along with Bell, Klein and Hoffman, an Austin-based architecture firm specializing in restorations" (though this sentence already has many commas).
On January 1, 1986- needs a comma after this
and announced in 2017 that it would use the donated money and other proceeds to expand its visitors center and rebuild Barracks 3 and 4 over 2018.- The way the sentence is set up, it sounds like the donor from 2015 made this announcement. However, I think the museum made the announcement, so that should be clarified.
Involvement in the YFZ ranch raid
I'll finish this off later. Epicgenius ( talk) 21:05, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
Grounds and architecture
The material used in the fort's construction was not produced locally- Would it be easier to say "produced elsewhere", "sourced externally", or something similar instead of "not produced locally"?
a ventilator and a single chimney each- One ventilator and one chimney?
Barracks 1 had two dining halls to Barracks 2's two,- If they both had two, this can be condensed.
Barracks 3 and 4 were identical to Barracks 5 and 6. The latter buildings were demolished after the fort was abandoned and have not been rebuilt.- This should probably be rephrased. Based on grammar, here "the latter" refers to Barracks 5 and 6, but based on context, I assume it refers to Barracks 3 and 4. Maybe something like "Barracks 3 and 4, while identical to Barracks 5 and 6, were demolished after the fort was abandoned and have not been rebuilt."
About 50 feet (15 m) of the headquarters building is the former residence of Oscar Ruffini,[96] San Angelo's first civic architect.- 50 feet frontage?
The post hospital was built from 1868 to 1870.- This seems to be a different building than the reconstructed hospital today. I would suggest "The original post hospital..."
The houses generally follow an L-shaped plan with a primary residential building and kitchen, connected by veranda- One veranda per house or one veranda total?
Officer's Quarters 8 and 9 were built to the same plan as Officer's Quarters 1, and were also completed in 1872.- This comma is not necessary here.
The buildings form a duplex stand to the same height and have two fireplaces each.- Should there be a comma after "duplex", or is "stand" an adjective?
@ Vami IV: That's it for me. Looks pretty good from my view. Epicgenius ( talk) 22:42, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
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.
Additionally, if you liked this review, or are looking for items to review, I have some at my nominations list. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 19:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:08, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
This is a really good article. I've reviewed up to the "Relationship with San Angelo, Texas" section now, more to follow. The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:28, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Integers from zero to nine are spelled out in words., but also
Avoid beginning a sentence with a figureat MOS:NUMNOTES.
That takes me to "Grounds and architecture". More to come. The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:31, 14 May 2021 (UTC)
Last set:
That's the end of my review, phew eh? The Rambling Man ( Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 08:40, 15 May 2021 (UTC)