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) 7 February 2023 [1].

La Salute è in voi

Nominator(s): czar 20:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• 25¢
• "An indispensable pamphlet for those comrades who love self-instruction"
• "Mere possession of this wicked treatise would suggest that the owner was up to no good."
• "The great unmentioned fact" of the Sacco-Vanzetti case
• "If any of the bombers used La Salute as their textbook (and there is no evidence that they did), it proved inadequate ... None of the [their] bombs ever reached their intended targets ... They injured only bystanders or themselves."

Probably the first bomb-making handbook at FAC, this little article is a complete treatment of the subject and its weaponization from all of its major sources. After a review by @ Asilvering last year, I haven't found any further improvements to make. I believe it meets the criteria. Looking forward to your consideration, czar 20:07, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Images are appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria ( talk) 02:55, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments

• "It also includes safety procedure" => "It also includes safety procedures"
• "The handbook treated its measurements like a farmer's almanac by giving potential household uses for chemicals" - is it really the "measurements" that were treated like an almanac? I don't get this sentence......
• "but otherwise lacking occupational access to dynamite and the practical experience in bomb-making" => "but otherwise lacking occupational access to dynamite and practical experience in bomb-making"
• "La Salute è in voi did not contain complex formula" => "La Salute è in voi did not contain complex formulae"
• refs after "if not the full book" are not in order
• same with refs after "printed by the newspaper on its back page"
• "depicting Ravachol" - could you give context to who he was? Just saying "depicting French anarchist Ravachol" would suffice
• There's no reason to have brackets round the whole sentence beginning "(Though during". Lose the brackets and change the first word to "although"
• "After Sacco and Vanzetti were denied appeal" - again, give context as to who these men were
• Also no need to wikilink their names twice in the paragraph
• "to avoid appearance that" => "to avoid the appearance that"
• That's what I got :-) -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 10:26, 15 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  Thanks, @ ChrisTheDude. Appreciate the review and I believe I've addressed your bullets. The refs out of order are intentional so as to list the most relevant ref first. czar 09:55, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

  Hmmm, I have always understood that multiple refs placed together should always be in numerical order, but try as I might, I can't find any MOS page that actually says that. So maybe it's actually no big deal. Support -- ChrisTheDude ( talk) 16:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Verification

• Comment: I verified all the refs when I did the GA review. No major changes since then. -- asilvering ( talk) 04:29, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

SC

• Link anarchist? (Or is that considered overlinking?)
• For some translated titles—such as Cronaca Sovversiva (Subversion Chronicle)—you italicise both original and translation; for others—such as Guerra all’oppressore (War Against Oppressors)—you don't. I'm not sure of the MOS stance on this, but consistency either way would be best.
• "defendents'": " defendants'"?
• There's a couple of hidden notes you should probably remove at some point too.

Hope these help. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 12:22, 17 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks @ SchroCat. Addressed those. The italics is tricky because it depends whether the handbook is a creative work. I'm going to err on the side that it is, per its source. czar 06:15, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

• A final suggestion from me (your call on it either way): you can link both Ettore Molinari and Luigi Galleani in the image caption should you want to.
  Support from me – interesting article. Cheers – SchroCat ( talk) 09:32, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Comments by Ian

Recusing coord duties to review... All WP needs is a Featured Article on a bomb-making handbook but let's live dangerously... ;-)

• Completed my habitual copyedit so let me know if you think I messed up anything -- no outstanding queries re. the prose.
• Content-wise, seems succinct yet comprehensive, and neutral in tone.
• I'll take Nikki's image review as read.

Source review

• Nothing leaps out re. reliability.
• Formatting-wise:
  • If you're going to link one publisher (i.e. Princeton University Press) you may as well link all you can (or none at all).
  • I don't think there's any need to include OCLC when you have ISBN, and it's not done consistently anyway.

Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 20:53, 18 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Thanks, @ Ian Rose. Appreciate the edits, which look good, and addressed the rest. czar 05:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Tks, happy to support. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 00:05, 20 January 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi Ian, is that a source review pass and a general support? Gog the Mild ( talk) 13:42, 7 February 2023 (UTC) reply

Hi Gog, yes it is. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 15:45, 7 February 2023 (UTC) reply

• 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) 17:00, 7 February 2023 (UTC) reply

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