Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Arthur Sifton


 * 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 Karanacs 17:37, 17 March 2009.

Arthur Sifton

 * Nominator(s): Sarcasticidealist (talk)

This is the next step in List of premiers of Alberta's long, slow march towards featured topic status. FAC has already heard the thrilling story of Alexander Cameron Rutherford's forced resignation at the hands of the Alberta and Great Waterways Railway scandal, but don't you wonder what happened next in with the government of Alberta? No? Well, read this article anyway.

More seriously, this article has undergone WP:GAC and WP:PR processes, with useful comments at each. I look forward to receiving more here. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:26, 9 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Support, this is really good. I geared up for making a laundry list due to the length but I didn't find much. Some trifles:
 * Do Canadians not use the date / month format, like 26 October?
 * Likewise, capitalizing the first letter after a colon when it begins a complete sentence?
 * There is some inconsistency in beginning sentences with "In "; sometimes you use a comma, sometimes you don't. I added commas to all the ones I saw, but please check through again.
 * "Election day returns showed Sifton with ..." This construction is ungainly, but I can't think if anything new at the moment.
 * "It was not only in agricultural policy that the UFA made its influence felt." Prefer "spread its influence".
 * "Though he was not yet an old man, 58 at the time of joining the government ..." I don't know about this. Would you object to "Although he was only 58 at the time of joining government ..."?
 * Kudos. -- Laser brain  (talk)  05:17, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review (always easy to thank a reviewer for a positive one...). With regards to your points about Canadian English, I can tell you that the way I've done both is the way most commonly used in Canada, though I couldn't say whether this is because it's the Canadian way or because of American influence (for example, "check" is far more common than "cheque" here, though the latter is considered the correct spelling).  We're a confused people.  I've made the two changes you suggested; I agree that both are improvements.  I'm not sure that I find the "election day results..." bit unwieldy, but I also have a huge crush on unwieldy language, so I may not be the best judge of this.  Anyway, thanks again for the support. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 05:36, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:14, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Tech. Review
 * Dabs
 * There is a self-redirect to the article, I don't know whether it is intentional or accidental.
 * (At the time I'm writing this) I can't access the dab checker tool, so I don't know whats the follow up on this comment.-- ₮ RU  C Ө   22:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I couldn't find it. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * External links
 * ..are found up to speed.
 * Ref formatting
 * The following refs are duplicated and appear in the ref section as such, a ref name should be used instead.
 * Thomas 111
 * Hall 38
 * The following ref names are used more than once to name different refs, when it should only name one specific ref.
 * Thomas 111
 * Hall 38 -- ₮ RU  C Ө   21:11, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref formatting fixed. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 12:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC
 * Yep.-- ₮ RU  C Ө   22:22, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Support Comments This is what I like about WP - never heard of the chap but decided to have a read/review and glad I did. Ready to support but could you pls action this: Apart from a couple of trivial changes I did on my own, just a few other minor suggestions, though support won't be conditional on these: Anyway, very well done. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:24, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Moreover, his victories were marred by accusations of unethical electoral tactics." As the last sentence in a paragraph, and because it's a strong statement in itself, this should be cited.
 * Heh, I know you've admitted the American influence is strong, but do we have to begin sentences with "But", as is "But when Sifton and Scott raised the issue with the new Prime Minister"...?! How about "However..."
 * I think non-English expressions like en banc are generally italicised.
 * "although he led the party to victory in each of the 1913 and 1917 elections..." Is "each of" really necessary, seems like clutter to me.
 * I've addressed all of your points except the first; that one I'll address this evening, when I have my references handy. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 12:19, 11 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've now addressed your first concern as well. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 20:15, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Yep, that's fine - full support, well done! cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments I have a feeling that in reading your work, I am going to learn more about Alberta's premiers than anyone ever thought there was to know! I especially like how the entire time of Sifton's leadership is almost a complete mirror of today... Alberta being overwhelmingly Liberal federally, Conservatives opposing the Liberals proroguing the legislature, etc. Very good read. I really have only some very minor points. Otherwise, fantastic work, as usual! Resolute 03:34, 12 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Sifton's first foray into politics was in 1878, when he campaigned for the introduction of prohibition under the auspices of the Canada Temperance Act in Lisgar and Marquette." We've already read that Sifton has moved from Ontario to Winnipeg to PA to Calgary.  As we are now going back in time with this statement, I have no idea where Lisgar and Marquette are.  It may also help to state that he was campaigning in the electoral districts of Lisgar and Marquette, unless they were also towns?
 * "He was re-elected in 1883, and did not seek re-election at the conclusion of this second term[2] (though he did briefly consider running for mayor before concluding that he had insufficient support to be elected)." The use of parentheses seems to be unnecessary here, though I am not sure how to reword it.  Do we know if Sifton's decision not to run for a third term was the result of his belief he did not have support to run for Mayor?  Or did his move to PA have some impact on this decision, or vice versa?
 * "Sifton was immediately one of the area's most prominent Liberals, and was named president of the Alberta Liberals shortly thereafter" Is this anachronistic? Given the area that is now Alberta was still part of the NWT in 1901, was there such a thing as the "Alberta Liberals" at that time?  Or did he become the president of what would become the Alberta Liberals when Alberta joined confederation in 1905?
 * "Much of his work was criminal" I am not sure if this needs to be rewritten, but I did laugh at the concept of most of a judge and politician's work being criminal.  Might it be better to say that "much of his work was in criminal law"?
 * "Arthur Sifton's political style was to remain aloof and detached, and to say no more than necessary; it is from this that he earned the nickname "the Sphinx"." You've already stated in a previous section that he was called the Sphinx. Is it necessary to do so a second time?
 * In the election tables, you have an unexplained 1 as a superscript to his 1917 seat totals. I presume that it is related to note 94 on Cross winning two ridings, but if there is any reason for this note to be different, it is not explained.
 * I believe I've addressed all of your points. With regards to the municipal politics issue, the sources do not include the information you ask about.  Good catch on the "Alberta Liberals" thing - I've clarified that it was the Liberals in the District of Alberta. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 20:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Support All concerns resolved. Resolute 01:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Image review
 * All image issues have been resolved. Awadewit (talk) 17:38, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

These issues should be easy to resolve. Awadewit (talk) 18:58, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * File:Calgary officials.jpg - Are these the Glenbow Archives referred to in the source? If so, perhaps linking would help users and avoid confusion.
 * File:Sifton in Wetaskiwin.jpg - Same Glenbow issue as above
 * File:Arthur Lewis Sifton.jpg - WP:IUP encourages us to link to the HTML page, not directly to the JPG. Can you do that with Canadian Archives? Also, the date of the photo is missing, which would establish its claim to being in the PD.
 * Done in all cases. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 19:12, 15 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.