Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Franklin half dollar/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 SandyGeorgia 20:13, 4 August 2011.

Franklin half dollar

 * Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because... I believe it meets the criteria. As often seemed to happen, there was some controversy over the design of the Franklin half dollar, which shows the Liberty Bell on its reverse (tails side). The Commission of Fine Arts disapproved the design as they felt showing the crack in the Liberty Bell would lead to jokes. The Treasury was sensible enough to ignore the disapproval and issue the coin. Enjoy.Wehwalt (talk) 22:44, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Sources are fine; spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:37, 22 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Media Review You again? Right then, let's get to work. As with last time, the mint medals could really use a do-over (with a camera rather than a scanner, if possible, to eliminate those vertical lines). That's not really a major issue, but it would be nice if you had the time. The only major issue is File:Sesquicentennial american independence half dollar commemorative reverse.jpg seems to have lost all of its information in a transfer to Commons. I'll try and salvate it, but its heavily dependent on getting access to what was there before the move.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  04:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I fixed it as best I could. The admin that was lucky enough to be pestered by me into researching deleted contributions was unable to come up with the pre-transfer to commons page, and therefore we were unable to get our hands on the original upload data. It shouldn't be an issue. On a related note, the uploader of that image, Bobby131313, (who you appear to know), ran into some trouble and could use some concentrated kindness (see my post and the thread it is a part of for details). He's too valuable to lose.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  05:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * For everyone except the nominator, the TLDR for all of this is that the mint medals could use a quality boost but the media review gets an "all clear".  S ven M anguard   Wha?  05:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, will do on the medals and will go see what is up with Bobby, I'm worried now.--Wehwalt (talk) 08:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I have left him a note. I hope he returns.  He's a pro and a good guy.  Thank both of you for your reviews; I know the work you do is often not appreciated, but it is here.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:18, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Actual photos of the medals introduced. --Wehwalt (talk) 12:06, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * The new image works well and I trust Wehwalt on the copyright of it. I also checked the captions since I recently was reminded that it's part of the image review, and they're also good, as best as I can tell.
 * The one thing that I'm going to mention is that the Nellie Tayloe Ross mint medal is crooked. I tried to rotate it, but I couldn't fix it without creating a bunch of white space in the corners, so I left it alone. Considering how much of a fuss I've made over mint medals lately, I'm not even going to ask him to do anything, that's up to him, and I'd rather him not see my signature and trigger disgust/anger/annoyance. I just wanted to mention that I noticed it. The medals do look much better as photographs though, the detail comes out much better.  S ven M anguard   Wha?  18:53, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You are right and I'll fix that.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:26, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Please don't hate me. :D  S ven M anguard   Wha?  20:56, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your work. We are all doing this to improve the project, if we cannot give each other constructive criticism without resentment, we might as well go home now.  Oh, wait ... Thanks, I've rephotographed Nellie.  I'm not a good photographer, but I do my best.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:21, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, it's straight now. I'm guessing that the wooden curved thing that the coins are on is there to prevent the oils of your fingers from damaging the coins, or something along that vein?  S ven M anguard   Wha?  22:55, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's the arm of an outdoor teak chair.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments
 * Lead
 * "Mint director" should be probably capitalized, like in other numismatic articles
 * Background and selection
 * "Numismatic writer Don Taxay later discovered that Sinnock had based his LIberty Bell (as depicted on both the Sesquicentennial half dollar and the Franklin half)"
 * Collecting
 * "the Mint recut the master die before beginning the 1960 coinage, improving quality.[22]"

Will re-review later.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫  Share– a–  Power[citation needed] 16:13, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I fixed the capitalization errors... I figured it would have required more typing to bring them to Wehwalt's attention than to simply fix them myself. Juliancolton (talk) 16:32, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I'm uncertain what the objection is to the two other things.  Liberty Bell is always capitalized.  I have to say the Mint recut the master die because I know of no record of which engraver did the actual work.  Most likely Gasparro or Roberts.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:08, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Support Re-reviewed and nothing found. Regards.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫  Share– a–  Power[citation needed] 20:54, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Support readily. Saw this while working on my own FAC and figured it'd be interesting to read. As expected, it was easy to follow, informative, and above all, highly engaging. I could find nary a stray comma or MoS violation. Nice work as always. Juliancolton (talk) 16:31, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks much to the reviewers.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:08, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments –
 * "The coins were struck regularly until 1963; beginning in 1964 it was replaced...". Little tense conflict here between "were" and "it". Maybe change the start to "The coin was" would fix it?
 * Background and selection: Should "Ross's" be "Ross'", without the last s?
 * "due to heavy demand on the Mint for coin as the United States entered World War II." Is "coin" proper in this context? Would have expected to see something like "coinage" myself.
 * in anticipation of a new issue, which in fact did not occur." The "in fact" is a little wordiness that can safely be removed. Of course it's a fact; otherwise it wouldn't be here to start with.
 * Release and production: "The release noted Franklin's reputation for thrift, and hoped the half dollar...". Cutting out some middle material leaves "The release ... hoped", which doesn't make much sense. A possible fix would be "and expressed hope" after the comma.
 * Collecting: "as the demand for coins began which would culminate in the great coin shortage of 1964." Should "began" be moved to the end of the sentence? Seems like it may fit better there.  Giants2008  ( 27 and counting ) 02:26, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments, I'm knocking off for the night and will get to these tomorrow. I don't see anything troublesome.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:36, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Those things are done, though sometimes slightly differently than suggested.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Support: Thanks to this series I have a near-expert knowledge of American coinage history. I only wish I knew someone I could impress with it. One tiny, tiny nitpick: "close-up" as a noun requires a hyphen (in one of the picture captions). I thought the Stalin story hilarious. It also seems that designing for the Mint is a perilous business; Sinnock dies, as I remember from earlier articles did at least one of his predecessors. Nice work. Brianboulton (talk) 16:33, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'll make that change. Sinnock's successor, Gilroy Roberts was the first Mint engraver, I believe, not to die in office, in 170 years that the office had existed.  I don't believe retirement planning was big in the Engraver's Department at the Mint.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:55, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nor was a youth employment policy. Mrs Ross was born when Grant was still president. Brianboulton (talk) 23:25, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * And survived into the Carter years ... imagine if she were treated like the Engravers and hadn't been tossed out by Eisenhower!--Wehwalt (talk) 23:29, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Lead looks good according to Cryptic C62 · Talk:
 * "The Franklin half dollar is a coin struck by the United States Mint ("Mint") from 1948 to 1963." Would you be opposed to the insertion of "that was" before "struck"? I think it would make the meaning of this sentence clearer.
 * "Sinnock's designs were based on his earlier work, but his death before their completion meant they were finished by his successor, Gilroy Roberts" Two issues. First: to whom does the first "his" refer? Second, I'm not a fan of the use of "meant" in this sentence. Possible rewrite: "Sinnock's designs were based on his earlier work, but he died before their completion. The designs were completed by Sinnock's successor, Gilroy Roberts.
 * "the Mint received complaints that Sinnock's initials "JRS" on the cutoff at Franklin's shoulder were a tribute by a communist infiltrator to Joseph Stalin." I think such comments would better be described as "accusations" rather than "complaints". Also, can we lose the "by a communist infiltrator" bit? I don't like the fact that the phrase "a tribute to Joseph Stalin" is broken up by a somewhat unnecessary prepositional phrase.
 * I have two questions that are not answered by the lead: Approximately how many of these coins were produced / survive today? Is this coin still legal tender?
 * Thanks for the comments. I have no objection to any of the changes.  I have added to the article the number struck.  Yes, it is a legal tender, of course the silver or collector value far exceeds fifty cents.  By the Coinage Act of 1965, all coin minted under the authority of the United States is legal tender for an unlimited amount.  I don't know whether it is necessary to add that, but certainly it can be done.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:21, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Where was the addition regarding the number struck? My comments were specific to the lead section; I haven't read the article in its entirety. Regarding the present-day value, I do think that this would be an interesting and useful addition to the lead. Perhaps something like "While the coin is still recognized as a fifty-cent piece, a mint condition specimen may be worth as much as ${insert number here}." Whaddya think? --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I would not want to do that, as people consult people for information and they may assume that the five beat up common Franklin halves they just found in cleaning out Granny's attic are worth much more than they are. I added it further down in the body of the article.  I could leave that, and say "Almost half a billion Franklin half dollars were struck in its sixteen years." in the lede.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * A fair concern. Perhaps instead of putting a specific monetary value on it, we could add something like "While the coin is still recognized as a fifty-cent piece, mint condition specimens are often sought after as collector's pieces." I have no idea what the typical phrasing for something like this would be, but I'm sure you get the idea. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 02:46, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. Basically any Franklin is worth having, though for quite a few, just worth having long enough to take down to the local coin shop and sell it to a dealer at melt.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:44, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool beans, thanks for that. I'm happy with the lead as is. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 22:58, 3 August 2011 (UTC)


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