The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 4:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [1].
As noticed by SandyGeorgia in 2021, this featured article last formally reviewed in 2008. There are prose issues (perhaps best exemplified by the admonition to "see below"), as well as dated text such as sourcing a list of discovery statistics to a source last updated in 2008, "The continuing discovery of large numbers of the smaller members of the family by SOHO will undoubtedly lead to a greater understanding of how comets break up to form families" from a source from 16 years ago, and similar. I don't think this will be a hard save, but this does need work. There are also more recent sources that should likely be consulted, such as [2], [3], and others. Hog Farm Talk 04:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC) reply
Gonna do some work here, beginning with some unsourced paragraphs. Given what is said above, I guess that these are the sources that need to be included? Some questions:
Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 07:04, 18 October 2023 (UTC) reply
Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 14:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC) reply
I think we're getting closer, but there's still a bit of work needed here yet. Hog Farm Talk 16:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Coming back to this ...
References
It is particularly noteworthy to highlight that their perihelion distances are very small: q < 0.01 au (i.e. less than about two solar radii), thus falling within the Sun's Roche limit.Would it make more sense to provide a statement like that instead of talking about one particular example? Also, I feel that
less than about two solar radiiis more dramatic for readers who don't instantly remember the Sun's radius in km. XOR'easter ( talk) 00:59, 8 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This seems fine otherwise, but I would appreciate if we could get one of our astronomy editors to give this a third-party readthrough; I'm just not all that familiar with this group of comets. Hog Farm Talk 23:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This is all I noticed from another read-through, I think I'll be ready to support keeping this once these two things are addressed. Hog Farm Talk 23:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
@ FAR coordinators: need an update here. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 10:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Those are my thoughts. Z1720 ( talk) 18:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 4:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [4].
Pre-hold content
|
---|
It has been a few weeks since I raised concerns at Talk:Andrew Jackson about the neutrality of the Andrew Jackson article. In my opinion, this article should not have been promoted to a featured article. Since I first raised concerns, there have been some improvements, but I believe that there is a lot of work left to be done before this article meets the WP:FACRITERIA. Overall, I think that this article does not meet Wikipedia's standards for WP:NPOV. Though one editor has been arguing that there is "no bias," many parts of this article are still heavily skewed in Jackson's favor. In particular:
|
There are now three mentions of Native Americans in the lead; does the preponderance of reliable sources, and summmary of the article, justify this weight? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The article could still benefit from trimming and verbosity reduction. Here is but one example:
Jackson had not fully recovered from his wounds when Governor Blount called out the militia in September 1813.[85] A faction of Muscogee (Creek) known as the "Red Sticks" had broken away from the Muscogee Creek Confederacy, which wanted to maintain peace with the United States. The Red Sticks, led by William Weatherford (also called Red Eagle) and Peter McQueen, had allied with Tecumseh, a Shawnee chief who was fighting with the British against the United States.[80][86][87] Earlier in the summer, a party of Red Sticks had gone to Pensacola to pick up supplies from the Spanish.[88] During their return, they defeated an ambush at Burnt Corn Creek by American militia.[89][90] On August 30, the Red Sticks avenged the ambush by attacking Fort Mims, a stockade inhabited by both white Americans and their Creek allies. They killed about 250 militia men and civilians.[91][92] The attack became known as the Fort Mims massacre.[93][94]
Jackson's objective was to destroy the Red Sticks.[95]
The article retells too much history (and this happens repeatedly); there is an article for Fort Mims Massacre, and we don't need all the background detail. A trim is still needed throughout.
"Known as" is used twice in the sample para above, and nine times throughout; it is often redundant. For example, the entire para above could be reduced to something like (this can be improved upon, but just a sample idea that it can be done in two sentences) ...Jackson had not fully recovered from his wounds when Governor Blount called out the militia in September 1813 following the August Fort Mims Massacre. The Red Sticks, a confederate faction that had allied with Tecumseh, a Shawnee chief who was fighting with the British against the United States, killed about 250 militia men and civilians at Fort Mims in retaliation for an ambush by American militia at Burnt Corn Creek.
Jackson's objective was to destroy the Red Sticks.[95]
Sample only, cuts the words in half. Getting this article to a reasonable size is doable, if the weight and neutrality issues can be sorted. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Should this be moved from Writings to External links?
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Progress is being made so I am not ready to declare move to FARC; Wtfiv has proven capable of working through disputes in the past, so we can give this more time. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Progress update based on FAR and Talk comments:
Current length of main body is 11603 words. Wtfiv ( talk) 05:31, 20 January 2023 (UTC) reply
6 Feb 2023 Progress update: Still awaiting a possible further update of legacy from an editor. Otherwise, the article is unchanged. Currently, many of the first FAR concerns have been addressed (e.g., issues raised by FinnV3 addressed, attempts to address points from second iteraction of FAR editors, article length reduced by 4000 words; but is still 11.6K words long.) Wtfiv ( talk) 02:12, 7 February 2023 (UTC) reply
11 Feb 2023 Progress update: Legacy reworked, as editor proposing to rewrite hasn't responded. Recent changes have attempted to address concerns. Minor trimming, article reduced by about 300 words, presently 11.3K words of main text. Wtfiv ( talk) 17:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Carlstak, ARoseWolf, and Jr8825: for comment (take note of WP:HJP). SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:07, 16 June 2023 (UTC) replyThis problem is not unique to Wikipedia’s treatment of the Holocaust. A similar disinformation campaign is taking place in Wikipedia’s articles on Native American history, where influential editors misrepresent sources to the effect of erasing Native history and whitewashing American settler colonial violence. The Wikipedia article on Andrew Jackson, plagued by such manipulations, attracts thousands of readers a day.
"She uses the present tense, but does not point to any problematic passages."This says it all. If you have an issue with the article then there is a talk page where discussions are ongoing about ways to improve the article. Maybe come there and have an honest and open discussion rather than simple throwing around accusations with no evidence to support your viewpoint.
I'll be trying to go through and address Sandy's concerns about prose quality, verbosity, etc. If I have any larger-scale questions or concerns, I'll note them here. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 03:46, 13 October 2023 (UTC) reply
See Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Andrew Jackson/archive1#Stability, 1e; we need to get eyes on this and head towards wrapping this up, as 1e issues are surfacing. My concern here is that we need active watchlisting to keep this article stable and at standard. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply
MOS:SANDWICHing in several places needs to be addressed. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 10:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Hi Nikkimaria, I think most of the major concerns regarding this article have been addressed. But I'm unsure of next steps. Hog Farm and Extraordinary Writ have both provided additional input into this article that has improved it. I know that Sandy was still concerned about the lead's length. I tried to address the concern by reducing it a little, but am too close to the material to do much more. (I suspect I'm too sensitive to the fine balance this article has had to strike in its portrayal of Jackson when I took it on for FAR cleanup.)
How should we proceed? I think the article has been salvaged and almost every major issue, with the exception of whether the lead length is acceptable, has been addressed. Sandy hasn't been available for three months, but should we wait longer in case Sandy returns and wants to weigh in on the lead length issue? Wtfiv ( talk) 19:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 3:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [5].
As described in my talk page notice from December 2023, this 2008 FA promotion has not been maintained as well as it should have been - outdated material is present and there have been accretions of uncited material in the years since. Hog Farm Talk 20:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 3:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [6].
I am nominating this featured article for review because of Z1720's notice a few months ago. ( t · c) buidhe 17:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 4:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [1].
As noticed by SandyGeorgia in 2021, this featured article last formally reviewed in 2008. There are prose issues (perhaps best exemplified by the admonition to "see below"), as well as dated text such as sourcing a list of discovery statistics to a source last updated in 2008, "The continuing discovery of large numbers of the smaller members of the family by SOHO will undoubtedly lead to a greater understanding of how comets break up to form families" from a source from 16 years ago, and similar. I don't think this will be a hard save, but this does need work. There are also more recent sources that should likely be consulted, such as [2], [3], and others. Hog Farm Talk 04:43, 2 September 2023 (UTC) reply
Gonna do some work here, beginning with some unsourced paragraphs. Given what is said above, I guess that these are the sources that need to be included? Some questions:
Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 07:04, 18 October 2023 (UTC) reply
Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 14:41, 8 November 2023 (UTC) reply
I think we're getting closer, but there's still a bit of work needed here yet. Hog Farm Talk 16:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC) reply
Coming back to this ...
References
It is particularly noteworthy to highlight that their perihelion distances are very small: q < 0.01 au (i.e. less than about two solar radii), thus falling within the Sun's Roche limit.Would it make more sense to provide a statement like that instead of talking about one particular example? Also, I feel that
less than about two solar radiiis more dramatic for readers who don't instantly remember the Sun's radius in km. XOR'easter ( talk) 00:59, 8 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This seems fine otherwise, but I would appreciate if we could get one of our astronomy editors to give this a third-party readthrough; I'm just not all that familiar with this group of comets. Hog Farm Talk 23:20, 2 January 2024 (UTC) reply
This is all I noticed from another read-through, I think I'll be ready to support keeping this once these two things are addressed. Hog Farm Talk 23:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC) reply
@ FAR coordinators: need an update here. Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 10:15, 4 February 2024 (UTC) reply
Those are my thoughts. Z1720 ( talk) 18:23, 10 February 2024 (UTC) reply
The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 4:22, 6 April 2024 (UTC) [4].
Pre-hold content
|
---|
It has been a few weeks since I raised concerns at Talk:Andrew Jackson about the neutrality of the Andrew Jackson article. In my opinion, this article should not have been promoted to a featured article. Since I first raised concerns, there have been some improvements, but I believe that there is a lot of work left to be done before this article meets the WP:FACRITERIA. Overall, I think that this article does not meet Wikipedia's standards for WP:NPOV. Though one editor has been arguing that there is "no bias," many parts of this article are still heavily skewed in Jackson's favor. In particular:
|
There are now three mentions of Native Americans in the lead; does the preponderance of reliable sources, and summmary of the article, justify this weight? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:03, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply
The article could still benefit from trimming and verbosity reduction. Here is but one example:
Jackson had not fully recovered from his wounds when Governor Blount called out the militia in September 1813.[85] A faction of Muscogee (Creek) known as the "Red Sticks" had broken away from the Muscogee Creek Confederacy, which wanted to maintain peace with the United States. The Red Sticks, led by William Weatherford (also called Red Eagle) and Peter McQueen, had allied with Tecumseh, a Shawnee chief who was fighting with the British against the United States.[80][86][87] Earlier in the summer, a party of Red Sticks had gone to Pensacola to pick up supplies from the Spanish.[88] During their return, they defeated an ambush at Burnt Corn Creek by American militia.[89][90] On August 30, the Red Sticks avenged the ambush by attacking Fort Mims, a stockade inhabited by both white Americans and their Creek allies. They killed about 250 militia men and civilians.[91][92] The attack became known as the Fort Mims massacre.[93][94]
Jackson's objective was to destroy the Red Sticks.[95]
The article retells too much history (and this happens repeatedly); there is an article for Fort Mims Massacre, and we don't need all the background detail. A trim is still needed throughout.
"Known as" is used twice in the sample para above, and nine times throughout; it is often redundant. For example, the entire para above could be reduced to something like (this can be improved upon, but just a sample idea that it can be done in two sentences) ...Jackson had not fully recovered from his wounds when Governor Blount called out the militia in September 1813 following the August Fort Mims Massacre. The Red Sticks, a confederate faction that had allied with Tecumseh, a Shawnee chief who was fighting with the British against the United States, killed about 250 militia men and civilians at Fort Mims in retaliation for an ambush by American militia at Burnt Corn Creek.
Jackson's objective was to destroy the Red Sticks.[95]
Sample only, cuts the words in half. Getting this article to a reasonable size is doable, if the weight and neutrality issues can be sorted. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:26, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Should this be moved from Writings to External links?
SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 22:53, 14 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Progress is being made so I am not ready to declare move to FARC; Wtfiv has proven capable of working through disputes in the past, so we can give this more time. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 03:59, 19 January 2023 (UTC) reply
Progress update based on FAR and Talk comments:
Current length of main body is 11603 words. Wtfiv ( talk) 05:31, 20 January 2023 (UTC) reply
6 Feb 2023 Progress update: Still awaiting a possible further update of legacy from an editor. Otherwise, the article is unchanged. Currently, many of the first FAR concerns have been addressed (e.g., issues raised by FinnV3 addressed, attempts to address points from second iteraction of FAR editors, article length reduced by 4000 words; but is still 11.6K words long.) Wtfiv ( talk) 02:12, 7 February 2023 (UTC) reply
11 Feb 2023 Progress update: Legacy reworked, as editor proposing to rewrite hasn't responded. Recent changes have attempted to address concerns. Minor trimming, article reduced by about 300 words, presently 11.3K words of main text. Wtfiv ( talk) 17:27, 11 February 2023 (UTC) reply
@ Carlstak, ARoseWolf, and Jr8825: for comment (take note of WP:HJP). SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:07, 16 June 2023 (UTC) replyThis problem is not unique to Wikipedia’s treatment of the Holocaust. A similar disinformation campaign is taking place in Wikipedia’s articles on Native American history, where influential editors misrepresent sources to the effect of erasing Native history and whitewashing American settler colonial violence. The Wikipedia article on Andrew Jackson, plagued by such manipulations, attracts thousands of readers a day.
"She uses the present tense, but does not point to any problematic passages."This says it all. If you have an issue with the article then there is a talk page where discussions are ongoing about ways to improve the article. Maybe come there and have an honest and open discussion rather than simple throwing around accusations with no evidence to support your viewpoint.
I'll be trying to go through and address Sandy's concerns about prose quality, verbosity, etc. If I have any larger-scale questions or concerns, I'll note them here. Extraordinary Writ ( talk) 03:46, 13 October 2023 (UTC) reply
See Wikipedia talk:Featured article review/Andrew Jackson/archive1#Stability, 1e; we need to get eyes on this and head towards wrapping this up, as 1e issues are surfacing. My concern here is that we need active watchlisting to keep this article stable and at standard. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:03, 13 November 2023 (UTC) reply
MOS:SANDWICHing in several places needs to be addressed. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 10:08, 30 November 2023 (UTC) reply
Hi Nikkimaria, I think most of the major concerns regarding this article have been addressed. But I'm unsure of next steps. Hog Farm and Extraordinary Writ have both provided additional input into this article that has improved it. I know that Sandy was still concerned about the lead's length. I tried to address the concern by reducing it a little, but am too close to the material to do much more. (I suspect I'm too sensitive to the fine balance this article has had to strike in its portrayal of Jackson when I took it on for FAR cleanup.)
How should we proceed? I think the article has been salvaged and almost every major issue, with the exception of whether the lead length is acceptable, has been addressed. Sandy hasn't been available for three months, but should we wait longer in case Sandy returns and wants to weigh in on the lead length issue? Wtfiv ( talk) 19:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 3:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [5].
As described in my talk page notice from December 2023, this 2008 FA promotion has not been maintained as well as it should have been - outdated material is present and there have been accretions of uncited material in the years since. Hog Farm Talk 20:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC) reply
The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot ( talk) 3:58, 27 April 2024 (UTC) [6].
I am nominating this featured article for review because of Z1720's notice a few months ago. ( t · c) buidhe 17:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC) reply