Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Capon Chapel/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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14:11, 11 July 2015.

Capon Chapel

 * Nominator(s): West Virginian   (talk)  04:24, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

This article is about a notable historic landmark in West Virginia's oldest county, and it also illustrates the Baptist and Methodist heritage associated with the church. All guidance and comments are greatly appreciated throughout this process. -- West Virginian   (talk)  04:24, 31 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Also, it may be of interest to FAC reviewers that Capon Chapel has already reached Good Article status and it has been successfully nominated to DYK and has undergone a copyedit by the Guild of Copyeditors. A peer review of the article was also recently completed. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:16, 31 May 2015 (UTC)


 * Comments taking a a look now. I'll make straightforward copyedits as I go and explain what I do in the edit summaries - please revert me if I accidentally change the meaning - and jot questions below. cheers, Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:23, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Cas Liber, I appreciate your review of this article and for the meaningful edits you have made thus far. Please feel free to be bold in your copyedits, as it is important for me to have someone not myself look at this article with fresh eyes and ways to make it better. -- West Virginian   (talk)  16:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 *  The Capon Chapel property consists of the church structure (c. 1852), its associated cemetery, and the historic wrought iron fence enclosing the cemetery. A separate section of the cemetery is enclosed by a chain link fence. - comes over as a bit wooden, why not "The Capon Chapel property consists of the church structure (c. 1852), and its associated cemetery, which is enclosed partly by the historic wrought iron fence and partly by a chain link fence." ...
 * Cas Liber, thank you for the suggestion. Your version flows much better, and so I have incorporated it that way in the text. Thanks again! -- West Virginian   (talk)  16:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 *  a land grant that Charles II of England awarded to seven of his supporters in 1649; the grant was renewed by an official patent in 1688 - why not just, "a land grant that Charles II of England awarded to seven of his supporters in 1649 and renewed by an official patent in 1688" ?
 * I've also incorporated this suggestion in the text. -- West Virginian   (talk)  16:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 *  The Baptist denomination was the first to establish churches in Hampshire County that continue to exist - this is confusing, do you mean, "The Baptist denomination established the oldest extant churches in Hampshire County"? or something else?
 * This is what I was attempting to convey, and this conveys it more clearly. I've also incorporated this suggestion into the text. -- West Virginian   (talk)  16:35, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Since no singular denomination oversaw the church during this early period sounds odd, I'd say --> "Since no single denomination oversaw the church during this early period"
 * I've incorporated this change into the text. -- West Virginian   (talk)  02:41, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Other than that, I can't see anything else and it impresses as exhaustive, so it's a tentative support from me on comprehensiveness and prose. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 11:21, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Thank you Cas Liber for taking the time to assist me in improving this article, and thank you for your support. -- West Virginian   (talk)  11:41, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Image review
 * File:Flag_of_West_Virginia.svg: what is the copyright status of the original flag?
 * File:Logo_of_the_United_Methodist_Church.svg: according to the source page, this was registered as a trademark - are we certain it wasn't also registered as copyrighted? Nikkimaria (talk) 17:28, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Nikkimaria, thank you for engaging in the image review for this Featured Article candidacy. As these two images in question are used for the West Virginia and Methodism portals, I do not have control over their usage and modification. Therefore, I've removed both portal links from the portal bar. -- West Virginian   (talk)  17:55, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments
 * In the section "Baptist affiliation" I was confused by the first two sentences "The Baptist denomination established the oldest extant churches in Hampshire County.[12] After the end of the American Revolutionary War, other Baptist preachers continued their attempt" what is the difference between "Baptist denomination" and "other Baptist preachers"? Are one group "primitive" which is mentioned later in the paragraph?
 * Rather than Baptist denomination, I've rendered this "The Baptists" so that it is less confusing. Let me know if this works! -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I think the grammar of "...came from Pennsylvania after arriving in Pennsylvania from Wales... " may need clarification.
 * I've changed this sentence to "one of the families that came from Wales through Pennsylvania in the late 17th century." -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * I was also confused by the grammar in the Architecture section "facing toward Timber Ridge, and facing opposite of the Cacapon River and Christian Church Road".
 * The main facade faces toward Toward Timber ridge, and not against the main avenues of approach (Cacapon River and Christian Church Road). I've rendered this as "The church's main façade is located on its east side, facing toward Timber Ridge, and away from the Cacapon River and Christian Church Road." Does this work? -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * There appears to be some overlinking picked up by User:Ucucha/duplinks - specifically Electrical conduit and Heart pine in the "Interior" section and Virginia House of Delegates in the "Cemetery" section.
 * This has been remedied. -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * There are some minor CS1 "deprecated parameters" issues using "author-separator=" refs 3,4,5,6 (see Help:CS1 errors)
 * I've removed the deprecated parameter "author-separator=" from refs 3,4,5,6. -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Also some problems with the "Harv" linking of the references - If you click on the names "Scaffidi", "Brannon" and "Grose" in refs 7,8,17,19,21,25,27,& 30 it doesn't link to the full details in the bibliography. This may be because of details about the PDF file coming after the page number in the Harvnb references, but I'm not sure of the cause. &mdash; Rod talk 20:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've removed the PDF mention from refs 7,8,17,19,21,25,27,& 30. There should not be any Harv linking errors now. Thank you for your suggestions and additional guidance, Rod! -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:24, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 * These are still showing as a problem (but I can't remember which tool is highlighting the errors for me). I will try to look at this again later.&mdash; Rod talk 06:08, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Rod, I made some further fixes to the references themselves, and all links seem to be working for me now without error. Let me know if you have any other issues with these links. - West Virginian   (talk)  08:15, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Further comments
 * In Geography and setting "Capon Chapel and its associated cemetery are located to the east Christian Church Road" - should it be "to" or "on" - this may be a US v Brit English but it is not how I would say it.
 * Rod, thank you tremendously for your additional comments. Regarding this first comment, it is correct to use "to" here. As this is an American historic site, American English should suffice here. I'm not opposed to changing it to "on" though if that garners your approval! -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I would suggest waiting for a native US English speaker before making any changes to this.&mdash; Rod talk 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Ref 18 is to an image on commons of the sign outside the church. I have no reason to doubt its accuracy but could a secondary source be found for the claim about meeting under an oak tree & the likely first construction date of 1750? If the date is accurate it conflicts with the construction date in the info box.
 * I was not able to find another claim of this date, but it is the date given in oral tradition throughout that end of the country. While a structure may have been constructed at that date, the current church was not built until the 1850s. I can remove this text if this is problematic. -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * If true I think it makes the church more "notable" but would worry whether the "primary source" of a sign outside the church should be considered RS in this case.&mdash; Rod talk 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Rod, I've removed the two instances where the historical marker was used as a reference. The only information that was sourced from the sign was the information regarding burials and meetings under an old oak tree at the site in the 18th century. I've removed mention of this oak tree as there is no other documented evidence for it outside oral tradition. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In Methodist affiliation, what is the significance of the statement "In 1976, the circuit's pastor was Thomas Malcolm"?
 * It's not necessarily significant, but it fills in a blank as to who the pastor was at that time in the church's history. No written records were kept of the preachers of this small church, so when a name was available, I included it. This too can be struck if problematic. -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * OK I just thought as it is pretty much the only historic pastor named that it might be significant.&mdash; Rod talk 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It's not significant on its own, but because little information exists, I felt it wouldn't hurt to mention him. I can remove him from the prose if this is problematic. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In Preservation, what does "refurnished" mean - does this mean planks were replaced?
 * The usage of refurnished here means that the planks were sanded and "refurnished" or re-lacquered if you will. -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Perhaps a little explanation would be useful, perhaps saying "and its wide, heart pine plank floors were sanded and re-lacquered". (or similar).&mdash; Rod talk 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * This has been incorporated into the text. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In Exterior, what is a "drop pendant"?
 * The drop pendant in this case is a small "pendant-shaped" wooden embellishment at the top of the gable-front. A drop pendant, especially in American English, is anything shaped like a drop. Drop pendant usually refers to jewelry, but can also refer to doorknobs, lighting, and in this case, a wooden embellishment. I'm definitely open to suggested rewording. -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * OK perhaps just the addition of the word wooden ie "accentuated by a single wooden drop pendant at the top of the gable" (or similar) (to stop me thinking about jewelry).&mdash; Rod talk 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I've modified the text so that it says this. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In Interior how can the alter be a pulpit? To me (based on UK churches) these are different concepts. Should "swag" be wikilinked to Festoon?
 * As it is a very small church, the pulpit and the altar are one in the same. I've wiki-linked swag to Festoon. -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)


 * In Cemetery, should Picket fence be wikilinked as this is not a term used worldwide?
 * The fence in this case isn't a "picket fence" per se. The pickets here just refer to the fence poles or posts, which are also known as pickets in American English. I can definitely reword this if necessary. -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * More evidence of my lack of US English. Again I would wait for any comment by a native speaker.&mdash; Rod talk 18:58, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I'd hate to hold up a review over the word "picket" so I've changed it to fence post. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Some of these additional comments may be because of my (very) limited knowledge of the subject matter and/or US v Brit English, so please reject if inappropriate.&mdash; Rod talk 07:47, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * As I stated above Rod, I really appreciate you taking the time to review this article and leave comments and additional guidance. I've responded to all your above comments, and can reword and rephrase as necessary. I will try to find additional sourcing for the historical marker, but I am fine with removing that content for now if need be. Thanks again! -- West Virginian   (talk)  18:32, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Rod, I've removed the information from the historical marker, since it was not sourced elsewhere. I've also removed the problematic word "picket" and I can also remove the pastor if his mention too seems problematic. I'm also concerned that "to" continues to be problematic as well, so I do hope another American English speaker comes to my rescue on that account. Thank you for taking the time to conduct such a thorough review. -- West Virginian   (talk)  13:46, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * I think most of my comments are resolved (just waiting on a US English speaker for "to" or "on") but I can now support this as meeting the criteria.&mdash; Rod talk 17:47, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Rod, once again, thank you for taking the time to perform this thoughtful review and for providing guidance to improve the overall quality of this article so that it meets FA status. It is really appreciated! -- West Virginian   (talk)  21:00, 11 June 2015 (UTC)

Support Had forgotten about this sorry. I reviewed this at an earlier date and believe it is certainly the best article we can produce on it. Excellent work.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:16, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Note -- West Virginian, is this your first FAC? If so, a belated welcome from the coordinators, and a note that we'll require an editor to conduct a spotcheck of sources for accuracy and avoidance of close paraphrasing, which is a hoop all newbies have to jump through. Looks like we also need the usual source review for formatting/reliability, which we try to conduct on all nominations. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:15, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Source review and spotchecks
i.e. I think this one looks alright overall....Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 05:02, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Formatting of sources looks ok. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:28, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Sources appear to conform to reliable sources. Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 04:29, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Refs from Maxwell and Swisher support sentences they are at end of, with no paraphrasing and good faithfulness, though the second item attributed to refs 13, 17 and 23 - I can't see how 23 supports that, given the sentence talks of the early 20th century and the book was written in 1897.
 * I can't check Munske and Kerns as that book has no preview to me. Ditto Wirtz book...
 * ref 18 supports text well with no paraphrasing
 * Scaffidi references checked against source and are faithful. A couple of repeated words were substituted, otherwise wording is acceptably distant (some can't be substituted)

Ian Rose (talk) 14:11, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.