The article was promoted by User:Ian Rose 10:13, 8 February 2013 [1].
Fort Dobbs (North Carolina) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article because it concisely and completely covers a frontier fort that was involved in a critically under-recognized period of conflict, and because I have put this article through multiple ringers including WP:MILHIST A-Class Review, GAN, a lengthy Peer Review, and I believe this article is in peak condition. This is my first nomination, and the first article I've started that's gotten this far, so I look forward to the experience. Cdtew ( talk) 23:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. I've reviewed this for A-class and Peer Review. Well done. - Dank ( push to talk) 00:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Sources and images (but not spotchecks) were mostly covered at the recent peer review, but a few more:
I am not opposing (yet) because the article isn't in bad shape, but I would suggest additional prose checking and tightening. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Revisit by SandyGeorgia:
Now we have this:
Delegate comments -- A belated welcome to FAC on behalf of the delegates, Cdtew... I'll want to see a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of close paraphrasing, which is standard procedure for new nominators (and is generally expected every so often for old FAC hands as well). If one of the reviewers above would like to take care of that, well and good, otherwise I'll scout around for someone to action. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 05:56, 28 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Spotchecks of 7 sources:
The article was promoted by User:Ian Rose 10:13, 8 February 2013 [1].
Fort Dobbs (North Carolina) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Toolbox |
---|
I am nominating this for featured article because it concisely and completely covers a frontier fort that was involved in a critically under-recognized period of conflict, and because I have put this article through multiple ringers including WP:MILHIST A-Class Review, GAN, a lengthy Peer Review, and I believe this article is in peak condition. This is my first nomination, and the first article I've started that's gotten this far, so I look forward to the experience. Cdtew ( talk) 23:53, 12 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. I've reviewed this for A-class and Peer Review. Well done. - Dank ( push to talk) 00:29, 13 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Sources and images (but not spotchecks) were mostly covered at the recent peer review, but a few more:
I am not opposing (yet) because the article isn't in bad shape, but I would suggest additional prose checking and tightening. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Revisit by SandyGeorgia:
Now we have this:
Delegate comments -- A belated welcome to FAC on behalf of the delegates, Cdtew... I'll want to see a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of close paraphrasing, which is standard procedure for new nominators (and is generally expected every so often for old FAC hands as well). If one of the reviewers above would like to take care of that, well and good, otherwise I'll scout around for someone to action. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 05:56, 28 January 2013 (UTC) reply
Spotchecks of 7 sources: