Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/David Lewis (politician)/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 SandyGeorgia 17:45, 22 November 2009.

David Lewis (politician)

 * Nominator(s): Abebenjoe (talk) 01:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because... after nearly two years as a GA, it has received numerous copy-edits, with minor content changes in that time, that I feel now bring it up to FA status. Abebenjoe (talk) 01:13, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 *  Comments Oppose (see below): Prose needs a lot of work. It's quite bloated—I think two or three hundred words could probably be shed without losing meaning—and there are stylistic and some grammatical errors.  An example of the former is the article's frequent referral to its subject as "David", which should only be done in cases where he's being distinguished from somebody else with the same last name.  An example of the latter is the frequent misuse of colons (when being used as part of a sentence, the portion of the sentence preceding the colon must be an independent clause).  I'll do what I can to help with this, but I'm not sure I'll be able to manage a full copyedit during the article's time at FAC, and am not sure that my copyediting would be sufficient in any event. Steve Smith (talk) 02:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I guess if we both have at it we could sort that out. Never say die. --Malleus Fatuorum 02:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, I didn't say "oppose"... Steve Smith (talk) 02:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * ... and neither did I. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the more closely I look at the article, the clearer it becomes that it's not ready for FAC. Besides the prose issues, which extend well beyond the examples I cited, the tone is frequently POV and there are major gaps in the coverage (for example, until my last edit, the body of the article didn't actually say anything about Lewis being a Rhodes Scholar; the reader was left to infer that from a section heading and a category).  I really hate to do this, because I love seeing articles about Canadian political history promoted and it's obvious that a great deal of good work has gone into this, but it's just not close enough to justify reviewers' time.  I'd be happy to work with the article's authors outside of FAC to help get it up to snuff, if they'd like me to. Steve Smith (talk) 03:03, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Please add alt text to images; see WP:ALT. And please remove the two little flags; see WP:FLAGBIO. Eubulides (talk) 04:01, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment 2c. Variety of 2c consistency issues, please see this FAC's talk page for details.
 * 1c grade citation issue: a number of references to Newspapers lack authors, article titles, and page references, please correct this urgently, see your final citation, "Ward, Bruce (1981-05-24). "David Lewis' principles guided political career". The Toronto Star (Toronto: Torstar): pp. A4." as an example of newspaper reference formatting.
 * In relation to 1c, can you explain the reliance on Smith 1989? Why are there no references to histories of the NDP?  How have you exhausted the scholarly literature? Fifelfoo (talk) 04:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * There are not that many histories of the NDP, and the few that are, are listed in the bibliography. Most are memoirs, like Donald C. MacDonald's book. I could have used more of Gad Horowitz's book, but it was covered in Smith 1989.  Smith 1989 is the only book the fully chronicles the Lewis' involvement with the party, with far more detail than other books that are devoted to T.C. Douglas, or M.J. Coldwell (the Stewart books).Abebenjoe (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Many articles are from either the Toronto Star, or the Globe and Mail newspapers, both based in Toronto, Canada. In many cases, the author is not determined except that it may be given as the wire-service Canadian Press (CP).  Some of the older Isis articles from the 1930s didn't appear to have explicit authorship, as they were from editorials, if my memory serves me well.Abebenjoe (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Image review: I'll get back to the prose in a bit, but there are some image issues:
 * File:Claire Gillis, David Lewis, M.J.Coldwell c007253.jpg (and the cropped version in the infobox) is tagged as being in the public domain because it's a Canadian photograph taken before January 1, 1949, but the description suggests that it's actually a British photograph.
 * By what reason is File:David Lewis.jpg in the public domain in the United States? Steve Smith (talk) 06:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * In Canada, any photograph taken before 1949 is in the public domain. This photo is in Canada's national archives, and deals with a Canadian subject: leaders from the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation political party, attending a conference in London, England in 1944.  By Canadian standards, this is a public domain photograph, as no copyright exists. The David Lewis 1944 jpeg is a cropped version of this photograph.Abebenjoe (talk) 20:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Canadian photos taken pre-1949 are indeed in the public domain. That the photograph is of Canadian subjects does not make it a Canadian photograph, however.  Do you know where/when this photograph was first published?  That would be important in determining in what jurisdictions, if any, it's in the public domain. Steve Smith (talk) 21:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)


 * To my knowledge, it was printed in late fall 1944 in the CCF's  The New Commonwealth Abebenjoe (talk) 21:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * It may have also been published in an October 1944 issue of the CCF-friendly Glace Bay Gazette. In the 1970s, I remember seeing this photo when I was a child in one of these papers, as they were at my Uncle and Aunt's home in Cape Breton. I immediately recognized the photo when I saw it on the LAC website. The newspapers are likely buried somewhere in the Beaton Institute at Cape Breton University. So I'm not exactly sure which paper published it first, but it was definitely in Canada, in the fall of 1944.Abebenjoe (talk) 22:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'm comfortable saying that that was first published in Canada and therefore entered the public domain here January 1, 1945, soon enough to slip in under the copyright renewal date of January 1, 1996. So no problem with these images. Steve Smith (talk) 01:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Just noticed the photo that Steve Smith was mentioning. Yes, that image with M.J. Coldwell and David Lewis is also in the public domain, as stated for the same reasons as the previous photos: pre-1949 photographs have expired copyright, therefore public domain. That wasn't one of the photos I added to the article, but I'll look into the province of Ontario's archives, and see if there are any other notices on it. I do know by looking at the authorship of the photo, Gilbert and Milne, that their photos are generally in the public domain at the archives, but as I said earlier, I'll check if there are any special exemptions.Abebenjoe (talk) 20:53, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That image is indeed in the public domain in Canada. However, because the United States does not use the rule of the shorter term, that doesn't make it in the public domain in the U.S.  Canadian photographs dating from before 1946 are in the public domain in the U.S. (by reason of being in the public domain in the source country as at 1996), but that's not true of this photograph. Steve Smith (talk) 21:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Just checked the Archives Ontario page. Although the copyright has expired, Wikipedia may have to ask permission to use their copy.  Here's a link to their copyright and usage page if you want to make a decision, one way or the other http://www.archives.gov.on.ca/english/archival-records/csg_108_copyright.aspx  If you decide that we need permission, then it will take about two weeks, but shouldn't be much of a problem, as there is no further copyright claims on the photo, it would merely be permission to use their copy.  What I find confusing on their copyright page is the criteria for photographic material. It seems to be omitted, as it appears that they are only mentioning the copyright for written materials, which states that the copyright expires 50 years after the death of the author, which isn't the case with pre-1949 photographs, to my limited legal understanding, as I'm obviously not a lawyer.Abebenjoe (talk) 21:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Those terms aren't an issue, as the photograph is in the public domain in Canada. The problem is that to be used as free on Wikipedia, it must be in the public domain in the United States, and I don't see evidence that this image is. Steve Smith (talk) 21:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Since it is in the public domain in Canada, and both Lewis and Coldwell are dead, Coldwell in 1974, and Lewis in 1981, is there a fair-use tag that can be used to satisfy USA copyright?Abebenjoe (talk) 21:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, I don't think so. You'd have a fair use claim on a single low resolution image of Lewis if there were no free ones available, but there are (see above).  I don't think this image is critical enough to the article to clear criterion 8 of the non-free content criteria. Steve Smith (talk) 01:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Fine, but I think it may be one or the only picture we have of M.J. Coldwell. Haven't checked his article in a while, but I know this image was used in at least one iteration of that article.Abebenjoe (talk) 01:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * As for using"David", his first name, it is to avoid confusion with his son Stephen Lewis. The only other time I used his first name was when his father was mentioned in the same section. Can't call them both by their last name.Abebenjoe (talk) 21:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That doesn't appear to be the case with the fourth and fifth paragraphs of "Early life in Canada", the first paragraph of "Labour club", or the second paragraph of "Leader of the NDP". Steve Smith (talk) 01:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * I'll check it out, but usually either Stephen or Moishe was in the same paragraph or section.Abebenjoe (talk) 01:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Fixed some of the first name issues. Added cite news template to the The Isis articles.Abebenjoe (talk) 03:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Well Steve, if you are willing to spend some time on the article, outside FAC, then please, by all means, see what you can do with it. I'll see if I can get some photo clearances from the Douglas--Coldwell Institute  Foundation in the meantime, as I believe they hold copyright on many of the photos of Lewis from the 1950s to his death.Abebenjoe (talk) 03:28, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:29, 10 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 18:40, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.