Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Óengus I of the Picts

Óengus I of the Picts
I'm nominating this article because it is clearly of FA quality. The topic is a very demanding one, and the research for the article more thorough than WP can reasonably expect to have on such an article. The nature of the topic may mean that at times the article can be unavoidably technical in style and it may not naturally interest all general readers, but the text is tight, the explanations clear, and the article as a whole very well balanced. It is an almost perfect way to start research on the king, which is precisely what WP is supposed to be about. The achievement of the article thoroughly deserves FA recognition. The article has been under peer review for a while, and because it has already reached FA quality for content and is generating no more comments on style, it is now obviously time for the FA nomination stage. Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 04:54, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, per nomination, Calgacus (ΚΑΛΓΑΚΟΣ) 04:58, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. It is about the most comprehensive coverage of this remarkable ruler that I've ever seen. Bravo! Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 14:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, excellent article. One minor quibble, though: the first map needs a caption. Kirill Lokshin 16:17, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, excellent article.Kaisershatner 18:16, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, well done! - Mailer Diablo 19:40, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, outstanding article. Kyriakos 20:34, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support...ditto. Comprehensive, well-written, lead OK Cas Liber 09:41, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support, very informative and well written. Also, all sources are cited. Yono 22:35, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comments Some great research here. Good job! Some specific comments:
 * Caption for the first image could use some work. Some readers who jump straight to the picture without first reading the article may be confused by "the royal figure". Identifying it as Oengus would be better IMO. Also, what is a "kaiserfibel" and "imitatio imperii"? It may therefore be taken... - ambiguous use of "it".
 * The last three paragraphs of Sources and background could use some citations.
 * Óengus was middle-aged by the time he entered into history and his early life is unknown. Chronology of that sentence is a bit weird... How about this: "Much of his early life is unknown; Óengus was middle-aged by the time he entered into the annals of history."
 * On 12 August 729 Óengus defeated and killed Drest at the undentified Druimm Derg Blathuug "Unidentified" maybe? Still confusing though...what is "Druimm Derg Blathuug"? A battle site?
 * The story of the foundation of St Andrews, originally Cennrígmonaid, is confused... I'm not sure "confused" is the right word to use there...
 * The amount of information that has come down to us about Óengus... Avoid first person Gzkn 03:22, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll try to address those helpful remarks. Thank you. As for a kaiserfibel, I believe that it is a brooch like the one Justinian is wearing on the San Vitale mosaic in Ravenna (see here). Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:46, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Revised to meet Gzkn's concerns; hope I succeeded. Angus McLellan (Talk) 21:40, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. My concerns in the peer review have been answered. -- Ghirla -трёп-  11:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support because, per Calgacus, this article is clearly worthy of FA status. It is well-written, comprehensive, concise, and has a superb amount of fact-filled notation. And in my opinion, those who want to contribute to making an article worthy of FA-class should examine this article—this is how you do it. Cliff smith 00:25, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Support Just plain well-done. [[Image:Icons-flag-gb-sct.png]] Canæn [[Image:Icons-flag-gb-sct.png]] 03:41, 1 December 2006 (UTC)