Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hudson Sesquicentennial 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 Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 19:40, 1 June 2018.

Hudson Sesquicentennial half dollar

 * Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

This article is about... another commemorative half dollar, but one that became controversial when the price was run up by coin dealers, as too often happened. Enjoy. Wehwalt (talk) 23:55, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

Sources review

 * One very small presentational point: I don't think 28 citations justifies 4 columns, and I'd reduce this to two. Otherwise, the sources are all of appropriate high quality, providing comprehensive voberage of the subject.

I intend to carry out  a prose review in a few days, but I will be mainly offline during the next 24 hours. Brianboulton (talk) 21:37, 13 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Ive removed the columns. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:23, 19 May 2018 (UTC)

General review

 * Lead, second para: I question the use of the conjunction "though". The purpose of "though" is to qualify or mitigate a statement with further information. In this case, "and" seems the more appropriate conjunction – if, indeed, the matter of the Rhode Island half-dollar is worthy of mention in the lead.
 * Background etc
 * Link Albany?
 * "it was the responsible official or group to be designated by the Mayor of Hudson": I'm not sure that I fully understand this phrasing. Should it be "In the case of the Hudson half dollar, the responsible official or group was to be designated by the Mayor of Hudson"?
 * "the two versions passed" – can you explain why two versions?


 * Preparation
 * The first sentence, which contains a massive subordinate clause, is hard to read as presently written. I wonder if all the info provided is really necessary? Could we perhaps omit the wording from "charged with..." to "including coins", leaving us with: "On the day Roosevelt signed the legislation, Congressman Goodwin wrote to Charles Moore, chairman of the Commission of Fine Arts,   requesting the names of suitable artists to design the coin."
 * "The company apparently contacted the Mint for advice as Chief Engraver Sinnock wrote on May 23." Again, curious phrasing. At the very least, there should be a comma after "advice", and perhaps add "to them" after "wrote"?
 * "Beach quoted this passage" – what passage?


 * Design
 * "The seal design comes from the fact that Hudson was a whaling port" – a bit clunky; pehaps "The seal design reflects Hudson's character as a whaling port..."
 * "the quint device" – presumably "quaint"
 * Likewise "Straightforward faire" – "fare", surely?


 * Production
 * "bought 1,000 more" – delete "more"
 * "and the Hudson piece was among those described to Congress..." – described in what sense? Also, "described" in the passive form normally requires an "as".

Not much else to say about this seemingly rather squalid episode, though at least nobody died. I'll be happy to support when these points are attended to. Brianboulton (talk) 15:26, 20 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I think I've gotten everything. Thank you for the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:03, 21 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the support.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * For some reason my intended support doesn't seem to have regiserede, so here it is. Brianboulton (talk) 21:00, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

Support
I've done my level best to find anything to carp at, but I failed. Excellent piece, evidently comprehensive, widely sourced, properly illustrated, and eminently readable. Clearly FA quality in my view. I worry that Wehwalt seems on the verge of taking over control of the entire US currency, but that need not prevent the promotion of this article.  Tim riley  talk    17:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the reviewing support.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Support. I found a typo to fix, but otherwise have the same report as Tim riley. Like some others, the PCGS Coin guide has vastly superior photos we could add as an EL. Courcelles (talk) 18:23, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I will add it as an EL later today.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:36, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Support. I could find nothing to comment on, great job Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:37, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:21, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Image review
No ALT text that I can see. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:47, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * File:Hudson Sesquicentennial obverse.jpg: Use seems fine, the license may want to indicate what copyright/license the photographer (for such a 3D object they have an additional copyright) has.
 * File:Hudson Sesquicentennial reverse.jpg: Use seems fine, the license may want to indicate what copyright/license the photographer (for such a 3D object they have an additional copyright) has.
 * Thank you for the review. I'm not sure how to add alt text to infobox images. As for the images, did not leave explicit licenses on their images but when I asked for guidance at WT:MCQ a while back, the response I got was that uploading the image in that way indicated an intent to make them available per the Four Freedoms and that explanation has generally passed when I've had to use their images.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:01, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Sent a few notifiers for Bobby131313. It seems like Infobox coin does not allow ALT text. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:28, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

-- Laser brain  (talk)  19:40, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.