Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Indian Head cent/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 GrahamColm via Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:00, 29 September 2014 (UTC).

Indian Head cent

 * Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 15:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

This article is about... a coin that was was in Americans' pockets for most of a century, counting the time that it circulated after they stopped making them. Widely disregarded at the time as too common, it is today both admired and widely collected. The article has had a most searching GAN by .Wehwalt (talk) 15:57, 20 August 2014 (UTC)

Images: Captions that are not complete sentences shouldn't end in periods. Licensing is fine. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:38, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review, as always. I know which one you are talking about; the GAN reviewer felt it was a sentence, and I am accordingly not inclined to change it. --Wehwalt (talk) 00:47, 26 August 2014 (UTC)(the one of the Civil War token)

Support Comments 
 * By providing an exact date, which is actually later than I'd have thought, it almost sounds like something specific happened that caused the silver coinage to disappear. But I rather expect that that was the culmination of a gradual process; am I correct? If so, you might want to change commerce in June 1862 to "by" June 1862. Canada was mostly using US silver and gold coins at that point, though they had issued their own coppers by then and there were also some provincial copper issues.
 * Not really gradual, though Carothers indicates there may have been some hoarding by merchants by the start of 1862, though more in anticipation of a shortage of change than in an attempt to profit. But in June, the value of silver coins vs. paper or gold rose to the point where it was worth exporting them to Canada, where they could be exchanged for gold on a par basis as Canada remained on the gold standard. "The operation became profitable as soon as the gold discount on paper exceeded the costs of collecting silver, shipping it, and bringing back the gold." p. 155.


 * beginning in 1874, the Mint re-issued these, lowering the demand for new cents. Maybe I'm over-thinking this, but the Mint didn't recoin these, but just pulled them out from whatever vault they'd been sitting since being redeemed?
 * Yes, exactly. I'll clarify.  Only the bronze ones, the copper-nickel ones were melted.


 * I'd shorten United States Post Office Department to the Post Office.
 * In late 1908, Roosevelt sat for sculptor shouldn't this be "sent"?
 * No, sat. Brenner was designing a Isthmian Canal Commission medal to be given to (American) employees of multiple years' service. Roosevelt appeared on them.


 * Minor point, but suffixes like LLC and Inc. need not be included in the bibliographical cites. Not actionable here, but you could save yourself some typing in the future.
 * Put Mackenzie's title in title case. Other sources and cites look good.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:12, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * I've taken care of those, other than the LLC which I shall leave as is for now. Thank you for the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:32, 30 August 2014 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I thought that I'd supported already.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:37, 26 September 2014 (UTC)


 * AND THEIR NAME IS LEGION, - All caps in the original? I cracked up reading this, BTW.
 * Yes. Snowden and coin collectors of the time had an interesting relationship. Did you get the "blizzard" joke?


 * According to Breen - Introduce him?
 * linked.


 * James Longacre did often sketch his elder daughter, and there are resemblances between the depictions of Sarah Longacre and the various representations of Liberty on Longacre' - can we avoid repeating "Longacre" so much?
 * Pared down to one.


 * , and did any wish to order in bulk, they could be purchased at a discount - what does this add? Also, would "anyone" work better?
 * I think it's interesting that money could be bought for less than face value.


 * Many of these tokens were made of bronze, copper with an admixture of tin and zinc to strengthen it, - why not just link bronze and leave out the definition?
 * Done.


 * Redesign and change of composition (1859–1864) - a fairly long section... perhaps split along the lines of "Redesign" and "Change of composition"? Trimming some of the politics might help too.
 * I think it's useful information, and if the reader is reading this, he's here for the history. Split.


 * but at Roosevelt's request, developed it for the double eagle after learning that under the 1873 act, an eagle could not appear on the cent. - feels like this could be simplified
 * I think the objection is to the triple use of eagle, so I've eliminated one of them.


 * Standardize whether or not you nowrap dates. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:49, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Axed. I think I've got everything.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:07, 1 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Support - Excellent article. Fifty years condensed into 27k characters. Good work. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:17, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review and the support.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:50, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. Nice work. - Dank (push to talk) 20:09, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your work and kind words.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:41, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Happy to help. - Dank (push to talk) 11:15, 21 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Support after a thorough reading. Nice work on this and well-written. It's a minor point, but "Cent-sized Civil War token, which was issued privately as federal coinage was hoarded." is indeed not a complete sentence. It contains only a noun phrase ("cent-sized Civil War token") and a dependent clause ("which was issued privately as federal coinage was hoarded"). A complete sentence must contain an independent clause. --Spike Wilbury (talk) 20:39, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
 * i'll look that over  Thank you indeed for the review and the support.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:26, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

Graham Colm (talk) 18:56, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.