Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lewis and Clark Exposition 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 Ian Rose (talk) 06:45, 27 July 2014 (diff).

Lewis and Clark Exposition dollar

 * Nominator(s): Wehwalt (talk) 17:02, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

This article is about... a fairly obscure gold commemorative, the only "two-headed" US coin, and about the preparation for which not much is known, due to lack of surviving records. Still, it's an interesting tale, featuring Farran Zerbe, numismatic promoter, who's mostly remembered positively these days but who was controversial in his timeWehwalt (talk) 17:02, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done
 * Some of the details in the infobox are unsourced
 * There are a number of HarvErrors that need correcting
 * FN7 title needs endash. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:40, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Those things are fixed. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:55, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

A few comments:
 * The article is still listed at GAN. I thought that concurrent GAN and FAC was disallowed?
 * I think, just "President Thomas Jefferson" rather than "American President..."
 * Do we know William Clark's military rank?
 * "a fair to be held in Portland, located along the party's route." Not clear if it's the fair or Portland that's on the route; a little rewording would clarify.
 * There are issues arising from image overcrowding. For example, the Zerbe portrait, supposedly placed in the "Inception" section, appears in my display under the "Design" heading, with the top of the photo extending across the wording. I don't know how this can be fixed other than by reducing the number of images, though possibly some repositioning could sort it out? However, there's not a lot of text  to play with.
 * "Numismatic references that discuss the matter..." – we usually identify our sources; any reason for this form?
 * Production: this sentence had me muddled: "The Mint struck 35,000 plus assay pieces in March and June in anticipation of further orders, doing so as the Philadelphia Mint shut down in the summer in that era before air conditioning, but as none were forthcoming, the additional 25,000 were melted". I can follow what happened, but bthe detil about the lack of air-conditioning (or "air cooling" as it was known then) is a bit distractinng and, I think, unnecessary. Recommend delete all between "doing so" and "air conditioning".
 * We are told, later, that 40,003 were melted. The extra 15,000 melts are not identified until the next section, but here I'd say something like: "of which a total of 40,003 were melted".
 * "The 1905 long traded for less..." Wording could do with clarification, e.g. "The 1905 coin traded for many years for less..."

The image overcrowding is likely to be the only significant issue – the others are easily dealt with. Welcome back, Messrs Zerbe and Meeker (he crops up everywhere). Brianboulton (talk) 22:46, 9 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Meeker appears by author's privilege, I am afraid! I tried for an image of him there but my expert didn't have anything useful.  Just as well.  I've made the recommended changes and withdrawn the GAN (I thought it had passed).  Thank you for the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:15, 10 July 2014 (UTC)

Support: The images are better deployed; that of Sacajawea seems only marginally relevant and could be dropped without detriment. Otherwise, all well. Brianboulton (talk) 12:11, 11 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and the support. I will think over the image, but that is where the money went, what there was of it.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:13, 11 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Image review (prose later)
 * File:1904 Lewis and Clark dollar obverse.jpg - Fine
 * File:1904 Lewis and Clark dollar reverse.jpg - Fine
 * File:Lewis and clark-expedition.jpg - On my laptop this is sandwiching with the infobox. Since we have images of both Lewis and Clark, do we need this?
 * File:Meriweather Lewis-Charles Willson Peale.jpg and File:William Clark-Charles Willson Peale.jpg are fine. How would you feel about moving their relative positions, having Lewis on the right and Clark on the left?
 * I'd oppose it. Lewis and Clark, Lewis and Clark.  The reader will expect to see Lewis first.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)
 * I had a feeling you'd say that. ;) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * File:Farran Zerbe (ca. 1908).jpg - Looks okay
 * File:Lewis clark ad.jpg - Fine (although I'd be explicit and say "undetermined" for authorship before adding the conjecture)
 * File:Money of the world portland.jpg - Fine (although I'd be explicit and say "undetermined" for authorship before adding the conjecture)
 * File:Pdx washpark sacajawea s.jpeg - Fine, though I agree with Brian that we could possibly lose this. Anywho, do we have a link for Cooper? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:40, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, we do. Alice Cooper (sculptor). We have an article on the sculpture too: Sacajawea and Jean-Baptiste — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:44, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * As it is what the profits (if any) from the coin went towards, I'd like to keep it. The rest, I've followed your recommendations, except as noted above.  Thank you for the image review.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * explorers's or explorers'?
 * Any way to avoid that white space in #Production?
 * None that I see. Feel free to play with it if you are inclined.


 * CN tag added — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:44, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Note deleted, and I've rephrased around the explorers's. The article simply doesn't have a lot of vertical space, and Zerbe needs to be where we talk about him, more or less. Thank you for the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 05:26, 14 July 2014 (UTC)


 * Support on prose and images. Another great coin article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:23, 14 July 2014 (UTC)

Support Comments 
 * Details of the preparation of the commemorative dollar are lost: the Mint destroyed many records in the 1960s. This reads awkwardly; is there any reason for the colon? I'd drop that and just use a conjunction to link the two parts together.
 * Why the empty Notes section?
 * Does Flynn have an ISBN or OCLC number rather than an ASIN?
 * Add |lastauthoramp=1 to the bibliography templates for your multi-author works to get them to match the format used in your citations.
 * Otherwise up to your usual standard of excellence.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:37, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Those things are done.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:54, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * You're quite welcome.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:34, 27 July 2014 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 06:45, 27 July 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.