Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Eric A. Havelock

Eric A. Havelock
Self-nomination. This is intended as a general-purpose introduction to a very scholarly subject. My goal was to have material that would be of interest to readers on multiple levels, so I recognize that some of it gets a bit technical. I had some useful help with the lead from a peer review, which is here. Please note that, as far as I know, neither additional biographical material nor a usable photograph of Havelock is likely to be forthcoming. All of Havelock's personal effects, papers, and photos are in the Yale archive, from whence nothing ever emerges. I'd be grateful for any advice for improving the article. Chick Bowen 00:41, 4 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Support Pop some external links at the bottom if you have them tho! Nice article. --PopUpPirate 01:01, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks! I put in some external links--there's some good stuff out there, actually.  Chick Bowen 01:19, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose The article is very well written, but the intro seems weak. Reading the intro leaves me with a fuzzy feeling that I still don't know the basics of the man. For instance, it doesn't state clearly what Havelock's profession was (professor, essayist, teacher, etc). The lead is my only concern. --NormanEinstein 02:18, 4 March 2006 (UTC) Support. The changes help. Looks good. --NormanEinstein 02:56, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I've put information about his principal university positions into the lead. I hope that's clearer.  Let me know if there's anything else.  Thanks.  Chick Bowen 02:39, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support It's a good read, has plenty of cites, a fact check on a dozen footnotes appears to demonstrate that they are correct to the associated content. Very encyclopedic and stable.--MONGO 04:42, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, NormanEinstein and MONGO, much appreciated. Chick Bowen 18:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment A picture of the man would be awfully nice. If you can get one, the Infobox Biography template would be appropriate to add. Also, I see one or two identical references, which you can combine using the  and   syntax. Circeus 15:33, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your edits to the article, Circeus. I would love to find a picture.  Do you feel strongly about the double references issue?  I'm used to print, so I prefer things to be closer to traditional Chicago style, and also that the references will function as regular endnotes if the article is printed out.  Do others see it as inefficient or redundant?  Let me know if so and I'll make the fix.  Chick Bowen 18:00, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Wonderful article!--Bcrowell 21:36, 4 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Oppose, every biographical article should include a picture of the subject, except for individuals of whom no picture seems to exist (e.g. Matthew_Brettingham). I consider any other biographical article to fail criterion (2b). A fair-use image would be well justified here. Andrew Levine 03:41, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you've misunderstood what I said above. It's not that I can't find a free picture, it's that I can't find a picture at all.  As I've said, I would love to find a photograph of Havelock.  If you can help, please do.  Thanks.  Chick Bowen 03:43, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, critera 4 states that "including images is not a prerequisite for a featured article", and though it would be great to find an image, it does seem as if no pictures seem to exist of Havelock also. AndyZ 13:24, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Criteria 4's "images are not a prerequisite" really only applies to subjects which pictures can't illustrate well (like Psychosis). However, in this case I did indeed misunderstand what Chick said about "no usable picture" and since none seems to exist, I am striking my oppose. Andrew Levine 20:40, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I understand the confusion now. When I said that I meant that there are apparently pictures locked away in the Yale archives (at least one of the items catalogued there is a box of photographs).  But there's no way Yale is going to let us scan any of those pictures, so they wouldn't do us any good, fair use or no fair use.  Thanks for striking your oppose, Andrew.  Chick Bowen 21:01, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. That's a fine piece of work.  I hope you do locate a photograph of Havelock, but this is good enough to feature without it.  Regards, 68.101.254.59 06:23, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Beautiful article! &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 01:38, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * By the way, one may want to ignore the "voting to delete" I wrote in my last edit summary. I seem to be hanging around WP:AFD a bit too much! Sorry about that; this article is fantastic! &mdash;Eternal Equinox | talk 01:54, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Support. Very well written, but I would like to see a photo of the man as the lead photo. Staxringold 12:02, 8 March 2006 (UTC)