Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Agua Dulce/archive1


 * 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 Graham Beards via FACBot (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2015.

Battle of Agua Dulce

 * Nominator(s): Karanacs (talk) 02:05, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

This is the latest entry in my survey of the battles of the Texas Revolution. It's a mostly forgotten episode that had little actual impact on the war or its outcome, although it has the distinction of having been fought at just about the same hour that leaders in Texas were declaring independence several hundred miles away. There is a bit of drama - ambush! high-speed chase across the countryside! stampeding horses! Karanacs (talk) 02:05, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Images - only image is the map, which is appropriately licensed. Are there any other images that could be included? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:00, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
 * There are no images that I can find of the Texian commander, and the only image I've found that purports to be of the Mexican commander I cannot verify. I could put File:Campaigns_of_the_Texas_Revolution.jpg (which was used in the FA Texas Revolution) in the Prelude section, but it's hard to read when it's that small.  Images of Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, Sam Houston, James Fannin, or Frank Johnson could go in the background of prelude sections, but they aren't really that important to this article. Karanacs (talk) 20:23, 4 July 2015 (UTC)

Support - this is a nice easy read and gives me a sense of the Texas Revolution - a war that I've always found confusing for some reason. I can't remember the exact rules regarding non-breaking spaces, but introduced one in this edit because the number was on a separate line. Otherwise I can't find any nitpicks. Nice work. Victoria (tk) 20:26, 24 July 2015 (UTC)
 * After reading the comment above I searched google images and found that we have File:JamesWFannin.jpg on en.wp so I took the liberty to add it. I won't be offended if you don't like it and revert. Victoria (tk) 20:36, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Support. Comments. The article is in good shape, and I look forward to supporting once these minor points are dealt with. -- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 14:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "The resolution thus gave the Mexican Army permission to take no prisoners in the war against the Texians": didn't the Tornel Decree apply only to foreigners? So it would not have given the Mexicans permission to execute someone born in Mexico or Mexican Texas?  Explanatory footnote added.
 * Suggest linking "fifteen-minute battle" to Battle of San Patricio, or perhaps naming and linking the battle in that sentence. I know it's linked in the infobox, but most readers won't see the connection.
 * "rode leisurely": "leisurely" is not an adverb, so this needs rephrasing.
 * "historians generally only list 12 Texians as killed. It is likely that historians were not including the Tejanos under Benavides."  It's not clear if these are modern historians or 19th century historians.
 * Do we need the list of Texas Revolution battles in the "See also" section, given that they're listed in the infobox? removed
 * All looks good now. I've switched to support above.  Nice work, Karanacs, and thanks, Maile, for helping out. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 22:45, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Crisco comments

 * Overall the lead strikes me as a bit verbose. - This lead is the style Karanacs uses. Thats all I know about this. — Maile  (talk) 17:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * many of the Texians were shot before they were able to raise their guns. Many Texians -  Any way to avoid this repetition? ("many ... many")
 * It is likely that historians were not including the Tejanos under Benavides. - I'd give this in-article attribution
 * Otherwise nothing to comment on. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:22, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Comments from West Virginian
 * Karanacs, first and foremost I would like to comment you on a job well done on this article. I only have a few quibbles regarding your well-written article. Otherwise, I find that it meets the criteria outlined at Featured article criteria and Manual of Style/Lead section. Thank you for all your hard work on this article and for your continued contributions to Wikipedia. -- West Virginian   (talk)  23:36, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * San Patricio, Texas can probably be rendered as just "San Patricio" in the first paragraph in the lede since at the time it was located in Tamaulipas and not Texas.
 * I wonder if there is another way to reword "The Mexican army quickly put down revolts in the Mexican interior..." to avoid repeating Mexican twice in the same sentence. Perhaps consider "The Mexican Army quickly put down revolts throughout the country's interior" or something like it.
 * Mexican Congress should probably be wiki-linked to Congress of the Union.

Coordinator note: hasn't been active in over a month, so this may have to be archived as an abandoned nomination if she doesn't return soon. -- Laser brain  (talk)  13:28, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , I don't see why this should go to waste. The above comments are just prose quibbles. Can I be allowed to take this one? --ceradon ( talk •  edits ) 04:16, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm planning to send Karanacs an email if she doesn't surface soon and decide a course of action from there. I'm uneasy having anyone take over a nomination unless they are very familiar with the subject, have been involved in developing the article, and have access to the sources. I hope you understand. -- Laser brain  (talk)  10:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * , very well. It'll be a shame if Karanacs doesn't/can't handle this. --ceradon ( talk •  edits ) 06:46, 24 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Per prodding from, I have fixed the issues mentioned above. The issue with the Tornel Decree is in the footnote. Please note that Karanacs never used Almonte's Texas in her research. I have linked it where the entire book is online. — Maile  (talk) 17:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Note - I did nothing about the "verbose" lead. That's the style of Karanacs, as far as I know.  I don't think I should be the one to re-edit it. — Maile  (talk) 17:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. I'm not clear on what the last paragraph before Aftermath is saying. I see the complaint about the lead above; I made a couple of edits, but I don't see a copyediting problem. (If there's a problem with the choice of what to include, that's not something I would normally tackle in a copyediting role.) These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 20:32, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Support - If the lead is going to be trimmed, alright. If not, no worries. This is a good article, and I'm not going to block it. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

comments - I was/am happy with the lead, FWIW. I will take a look at the referencing. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:08, 31 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Formatting of references internally consistent. Nil issues. (well, just formatted 2 page ranges)
 * Graham source supports the underrepresentation of Tejano involvement - material faithful to and does not copy source. so ok.
 * Jackson/Wheat supports the text, though one segment from a different page and added.
 * Earwig's copyvio tool looks fine

In summary, all material examined looks good, but much is offline only. Leaving it to the delegates on this one....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:53, 31 August 2015 (UTC)

Graham Beards (talk) 18:33, 6 September 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.