Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Blackford County, Indiana/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 not promoted by Nikkimaria 14:16, 5 November 2011.

Blackford County, Indiana

 * Nominator(s): TwoScars (talk) 19:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because of the significant additions made by myself and a second contributor during the last six months. TwoScars (talk) 19:09, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Be consistent in whether ISBNs are hyphenated or not
 * All ISBNs are now hyphenated. Fixed two that were not in Reference section. TwoScars (talk) 03:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Use a consistent format for shortened citations
 * Suggest splitting explanatory and citation footnotes into separate sections
 * Check that all shortened citations actually correspond with a full bibliographic entry - FN 43, for example, does not. On the other hand, don't duplicate full bibliographic info in footnotes for sources in the References list. Also, any uncited sources in the References list (for example, Boyd 1985) should be deleted or moved to a Further reading section
 * Be consistent in what is wikilinked when
 * Wikilinks are now generally applied only once, and almost always the first time the term appears in the text. In a few cases, the same link is used for two different names, such as Converse and Crumley's Crossing, since both names are for the same community.  Montpelier is wikilinked twice:  once for Montpelier, Indiana, and once for Montpelier, Vermont.  The Montpelier, Indiana wikilink is in the Geography section instead of the opening (where it first appears) because it is more useful at that location.TwoScars (talk) 22:16, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Newspapers without weblinks need page numbers
 * "The New York Times", not "New York Times"
 * Convenience links to print-based sources like Google Books don't need retrieval dates
 * Be consistent in what is italicized when
 * Use a consistent date format
 * All dates now on YYYY-MM-DD format.TwoScars (talk) 23:27, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Stats or STATS Indiana or STATSIndiana? Use consistent naming
 * what makes this a high-quality reliable source? This? This?
 * All three sources have been replaced.TwoScars (talk) 03:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Check for minor inconsistencies like doubled periods
 * There are no doubled periods. There is a reference to a book with a long name—I have used A History of Blackford County..., to refer to this book.  I have fixed "four four universities" in the Education and healthcare section, and the spelling in that section, and one spelling in the References section. TwoScars (talk) 03:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Multi-page documents like FN 147 need page numbers
 * Don't include page numbers in References for books for which you cite a different page number in footnotes (Ex. Beeson & Bonham)
 * Removed page numbers in references from Beeson & Bonham, Hammel & Klinglehoffer TwoScars (talk) 03:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * be consistent in whether states are abbreviated or spelled out
 * References fixed: IL to Illinois, MD to Maryland TwoScars (talk) 03:39, 30 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Don't duplicate cited sources in External links. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:30, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

Link check - no DAB-links, no dead external links, still several duplicate links (list can be provided if needed, mostly county and town names). GermanJoe (talk) 12:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, please provide a list of duplicate links. Is there a tool I do not know about that finds the duplicate links?TwoScars (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

Oppose - while the article had a very helpful peer review and contains a lot of valuable information, prose and structure appear not ready for FA-level. Some comments for lead and geography follow:
 * Lead "Two incorporated cities and one incorporated town are located within the county. The county is also the site of at least 15 unincorporated communities and ghost towns. A small portion of a third city extends into the southeast corner of the county." ==> Too detailed for lead, can be trimmed. Limit information to the most important, essential facts.
 * "As of the 2010 census, the county's population is 12,766 people in 5,236 [occupied] households." ==> self-evident, can be trimmed.
 * "The county's two rail lines are [owned by the same railroad company]." ==> Vague, is the company fact really lead-worthy?. Maybe "The county has two rail lines, consisting of a western and a north-south route, crossing in Hartford City." or something similar instead.
 * Excellent—I will fix that. The current text is the result of a debate about ownership of the lines.


 * "...for [certain] members of the Miami tribe." ==> which members? Or trim the vague phrasing.
 * I will fix. The certain members are Francis Godfroy, family, and friends.


 * "The first European-American settlers were typically farmers, and small agricultural communities became scattered throughout the county." ==> Tense, "... were scattered." or "... were spread".
 * "The county began as mostly swampland, and [became] more agriculture-oriented as the swampland [became] drained." ==> "... the swampland was drained" to avoid repetition. Also "more agricultural-oriented" doesn't work here. The article already states, that settlers were "typically" farmers before - how can it get more agricultural? (More land was available for agriculture, sure. But that doesn't necessarily increase the overall economic orientation).
 * "The county's appearance was transformed ..." ==> How? By the examples, i guess it grew more wealthy and "modern", but this should be stated explicitly.
 * "and became even more important after the loss of several large manufacturers during the 20th century." ==> Main causes for this losses and development?
 * Geography - The location of Hartford City is described twice.
 * Fixed. The first one-sentence description was meant to describe the location of the county.TwoScars (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * content of "Licking and Harrison townships were original to the county. ..." ==> Content of whole paragraph is "history".
 * content of "There are two incorporated cities within the county, and a small portion of a third city ..." ==> With all the population data this paragraph would better fit into either "Demographics" or a new sub-section "administrative divisions" (together with all sub-communities and ghost towns).


 * I would suggest limiting "geography" to general geographical information, that is a broad description of the county's layout and then enter much sooner into history. That whole information about incorporated or unincorporated communities and barely known ghost towns should be moved further down.
 * Wouldn't a change like that be contrary to WikiProject U.S. counties? Townships, communities, and contiguous counties are supposed to be in the Geography section (FA example: Warren County, Indiana.)  Another reviewer wanted the Geography section, with its information on the communities, near the beginning to make it easier to understand the history section.  How strong do you feel about your suggestion?TwoScars (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The primary target should be to present the information to the reader as accessible as possible. As an outside reader i only need to know at first, that the county consists of 4 major townships and what the biggest 1-3 settlements are, both informations could easily be introduced in history before listing all the communities in detail. As an aside, when you check WikiProject U.S. counties, the used template contradicts the text description, so i am not sure, what the actual consensus is. I'd suggest to use the structure, that works best for the article regardless. The guideline is just that - a guideline. GermanJoe (talk) 10:00, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Image Map of Blackford County:
 * a legend would be great, the reader shouldn't have to guess, which dots (yellow, red) mean what.
 * use consistant colors for name backgrounds (or explain the colors in the legend).
 * the background raster is distracting - could it be hidden?
 * Winterhurst is missing, why? (Slocum has no known location, but could also be added with a footnote "exact location unknown").
 * Tried to fix your concerns in the caption. A legend will cover some of the county or require a bigger map.  Winterhurst can be added.  I had concerns about Winterhurst and Slocum, even though they were on the Historical Society's list, because I could not find any other information on them.  Slocum is on a map that is in the Gas Boom section.  I can add Winterhurst.  Do you still think I need a legend after the caption change?TwoScars (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Image for "Godfrey Reserve" should have a brief caption.
 * Added caption.TwoScars (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)


 * A quick check of further paragraphs shows similar problems with awkward, sometimes vague or repetitive phrasing (more examples can be provided, if needed).
 * Yes, please provide more examples. What seems clear to a member of the Blackford County Historical Society can be vague to someone that has never lived in the area.  I appreciate your guidance and assistance.TwoScars (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate the amount of work already put into article improvements, but it would probably be better to withdraw the nomination for now to allow some more work on article structure (if necessary) and a cleanup of the article's prose by an uninvolved editor (a request at the Guild of Copy Editors would be best). GermanJoe (talk) 12:49, 31 October 2011 (UTC)


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