Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/History of Cape Colony from 1806 to 1870/archive1

History of Cape Colony from 1806 to 1870
This is pretty much a self-nom. I think this article is very comprehensive about a fairly interesting yet little known historical topic. I know this article is a part of a series, and thus usually not preferred for a Featured Article, but I think this is able to stand on its on two legs. Thanks! Páll 02:35, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Very interesting. Just because this isn't the kind of article we normally nominate doesn't mean it isn't worthy. Support. Mike H 04:31, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. If the dates had been completely arbitrary, the fact that this article is one in a series might have been problematic. But as it is now, I believe it deserves to be a FA. Good job. Phils 11:12, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. I knew you would push this article to FA. Good job :) --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 11:47, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Comments. The intro-graph seems a bit odd. Starting with "After war broke out again" makes that article dependant on what occured before, or at least makes it akward. Also the sentence structure there is a little choppy and hard to follow. You might also want to make a quick note whhat continent we are talking about. I had to look at the main article to find out that this colony was in South Africa (although that's what i would have guessed). Besides that the article is nice. BrokenSegue 22:11, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I fixed the intro paragraph and it now has a proper beginning. Thanks! Páll 16:29, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * The reason the article begins without a main sentence is because this article is a part of a series, so it takes up where the last article left off. Could you please provide some examples of how the text is choppy and hard to follow? I'm not sure a note of what continent is necessary, seeing as there are several maps that clearly show South Africa. Páll 22:30, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Just because an article is in a series doesn't mean that it shouldn't be readable independent of the other articles. As to the maps, if you look at them they all show a small penisula but give little context,a cut out map would be nice [it's a minor concern really]. As to the choppy writing, the one thing I noticed was the two sentences starting with the word after in the first graph. I didn't object because it is clear that the article is well thought out and will be featured with a little pruning. BrokenSegue 01:00, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for fixing up the intro, I Support now. BrokenSegue 03:13, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. Good article, but I have one main objection: the lead section. It should give a summary of the topic, and also introduce the topic. Right now, you actually need to go to another article first to get the introduction; there is no summary of the article. For example, we do not learn where the Cape Colony is/was, or why the article only deals from 1806 to 1870 (why these "magical" years?). As a minor objection, I would get rid of the "history" caption (as this is a "history of" article already) and then make all current subsections top level sections. Jeronimo 10:55, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I fixed the intro paragraph and it now has a proper beginning. Thanks! Páll 16:29, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support. Jeronimo 07:28, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Object due to the absence of a proper lead section. Enthusiastically support when/if that's fixed. Everyking 12:21, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * I fixed the intro paragraph and it now has a proper beginning. Thanks! Páll 16:29, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Support now. Everyking 22:43, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Object
 * infoxbox is mighty ugly
 * Tightened and brightened this. Better? jengod 07:58, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)
 * not all years are wikilinked
 * "the British Secretary for the Colonies, Lord Glenelg, declared that "the great evil of the Cape Colony consists in its magnitude" and demanded that the boundary be moved back to the Fish River, and eventually had d'Urban dismissed from office in 1837." - where did he write that? to a newspaper of the day? Did he write it to someone in particular? Also doesnt' flow.
 * Cleaned up and clarified. Páll 08:31, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * "The colonists did what they could to save life, but thousands perished miserably. In their extreme famine many of the Amaxosa turned to cannibalism, and one instance of parents eating their own child is authenticated." - who was it authenticated by, can we have more details?
 * Also clarified that it is according to the book War of the Axe. Páll 08:31, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Use Template:Citenewsauthor, Template:Citenews or Template messages/Sources of articles/Generic citations for the references section.
 * Just waiting for you to fix that! Páll 08:31, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Apart from these things, excellent work! - Ta bu shi da yu 06:17, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Object. Although it's already been accepted, have requested that this article be removed as a feature article until the objections have been taken care of - see link on the article's talk page. Greenman 2 July 2005 18:43 (UTC)