Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/London and North Western Railway War Memorial/archive2

London and North Western Railway War Memorial

 * Nominator(s): HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 17:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

After a hiatus of a few months while the day job was insane, I'd like to bring this one back here to get it its star and make it my 30th FA. The day job is still manic so responses might sometimes take a few days but I should be in a position to see this one through. I believe I've addressed everything that needed addressing from the previous FAC but I'm open to all feedback. The article covers a monument that has stood in the same spot for 100 years next month while everything around it has been demolished and rebuilt. I think my favourite thing about this article is the variety and quality of the images available to illustrate it. Thank you for your time! HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 17:56, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Support from Hawkeye7
I supported this article at A-class and at its previous FAC in April, and support its promotion. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  20:10, 23 September 2021 (UTC)

Image review - pass
All images have appropriate licences: Hawkeye7  (discuss)  18:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * File:Euston cenotaph.JPG, File:LNWR War Memorial, Euston - northwest statue 01.jpg, File:LNWR War Memorial, Euston - northeast statue 01.jpg, File:LNWR War Memorial, Euston - southeast statue 01.jpg, File:LNWR War Memorial, Euston - southwest statue 01.jpg are the work of Wikipedian photographers
 * File:Euston old Station entrance no arch geograph-2991077-by-Ben-Brooksbank (cropped).jpg
 * File:Euston old Station entrance no arch geograph-2991077-by-Ben-Brooksbank.jpg and File:Bus and London and North Western Railway War Memorial at Euston station (Geograph-6678664-by-Alan-Murray-Rust).jpg Geograph UK under CC licence.
 * File:Drawing of London and North Western Railway War Memorial in The Builder.jpg PD in UK because author died before 1950. PD in US because published in 1920.

Source review -pass
Hawkeye7  (discuss)  18:54, 6 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Sources are all high quality.
 * Spot checks performed on footnotes 6, 10, 11, 15 (both), 19 and 20.
 * Does Darroch not come with an OCLC? Gog the Mild (talk) 14:14, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * managed to find it but it wasn't easy! HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 15:17, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
 * If it were easy, it wouldn't need you. ;-) Gog the Mild (talk) 15:32, 16 October 2021 (UTC)

Comment Support from Tim riley
I have no doubt I'll be supporting the elevation of this article, but a few quibbles first: I enjoyed this article – a pleasure to read for one who has used Euston a lot over the past 50 years.  Tim riley  talk   19:38, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
 * In an article written in the Queen's English it seems a shame to use an American/tabloidese false title such as "Art historian Gabriel Koureas". A definite article would lift the prose into stylish BrE.
 * I dislike definite articles in cases like this. He's not the art historian (I'm reasonably sure there's more than one art historian!), but in this case the sentence is easily restructured.
 * Ref 15 seems to cover a lot, but if it supports "The unveiling ceremony was possibly the largest for a railway company war memorial", fine.
 * I have a Fowlerian distaste for "prior to" rather than a plain English "before", but to each his own.
 * "preferring instead to focus on the company's war record and the actions of railwaymen who had received decorations in order to smooth industrial relations" – one sees what you mean, of course, but they didn't actually receive decorations in order to smooth industrial relations. It might be clearer to rejig on the lines of "Lawrence wrote back that such explanation was "neither necessary nor desirable". To smooth industrial relations he preferred to focus on the company's war record and the actions of railwaymen who had received decorations".
 * Fair point. Done.
 * "Maintenance of the memorial is the responsibility of Network Rail" – WP:DATED? Might be better to add "at 2021" or some such, given the perpetually shifting reassignment of responsibility for every bit of the railways since privatisation.
 * Another good point, especially as NR may soon disappear.
 * ISBNs – the MoS bids us use the hyphenated ISBNS (not sure why).
 * As Hawkeye says, they're not required. I have no strong feelings, but if none of them have hyphens, the hyphens can't be inconsistent!
 * Thank you,, I'm glad you found it interesting. HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 17:12, 27 September 2021 (UTC)

Fine! After a final read-through I am now happy to add my support for the elevation of this article to FA. It is clear, balanced, evidently comprehensive, well and widely sourced, excellently illustrated and a pleasure to read. Meets all the FA criteria in my view, and I look forward to seeing it on the front page. –  Tim riley  talk   17:22, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The hyphenated ISBN is advocated in WP:ISBN but WP:ISBN is not actually part of the MOS. It's painful to reformat ISBNs by hand, so I ordered the MilHistBot to do it; but Harry can feel free to revert. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  21:09, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments Support from Zawed
I was another editor that supported the promotion of this article to A-class for the MilHist project. Taking a look at it again with fresh eyes, I still think it is great shape and worthy of promotion. Just a few things I picked up, the first two being in the lead: An excellent article and I anticipate supporting its promotion to FA. Zawed (talk) 08:05, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * There is something a little jarring for me in this phrase: "a First World War memorial outside Euston railway station". I think putting "located" ahead of outside would improve the flow
 * That works fine.
 * "over a third of the company's workforce; over 3,000 were killed." the consecutive use of "over" is also jarring. As an alternative, perhaps "nearly 4,000 were killed? Or would that be a little too inaccurate?
 * Another alternative would be to replace one "over" with "more than". Thryduulf (talk) 14:54, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I've reworded the whole sentence; we can stand to lose some "overs".
 * "He was adamant that the memorial was to honour the dead and not in any way a victory monument." should there be a "be" or "be considered" ahead of " a victory monument"?
 * I put a "was" in front of "not in any way"; does that improve readability?
 * Thanks, . HJ Mitchell &#124; Penny for your thoughts? 17:24, 28 September 2021 (UTC)
 * All good, adding my support. Zawed (talk) 19:20, 28 September 2021 (UTC)

Comments Support from Kavyansh.Singh
Overall, this is an excellent article, and I'll support soon after these relatively minor comments suggestions are addressed. Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 15:59, 12 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "cost around £12,500..." Suggesting to use Template:Inflation
 * I'm ambivalent about these because I'm not sure the result they produce is meaningful.
 * Up-to you then, though I think that it might be helpful.
 * "R. L. Boulton & Sons" It currently links to a page, which is redirected to Richard Lockwood Boulton. Can we directly link it to Richard Lockwood Boulton
 * This Would be in contravention of WP:NOTBROKEN, which explicitly discourages bypassing redirects and lists several reasons against doing so.
 * "contains the further inscription" should we add a colon symbol to the end of this para?
 * I generally dislike colons in prose, but this one is probably necessary. Done.
 * "Second World War" can be linked
 * That feels like overlinking. MOS:OVERLINK discourages links to "Everyday words understood by most readers in context" and I think most English speakers have at least a basic understanding of what WWII was.
 * Although I don't think that it might be over-linking, but its up-to you.
 * "without distraction"." Reference are not in order. 4 should be before 11.
 * Fixed.
 * "(home of another major works)" Why can't we just say "(home of Wolverton railway works)"?
 * I'd prefer to avoid repeating the place name so close to its first mention.
 * Thank you very much for your review. :) HJ Mitchell</b> &#124; <span style="color: navy; font-family: Times New Roman" title="(Talk page)">Penny for your thoughts? 08:39, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @ Most of your replies were satisfactory, and I support promotion of this article to featured article status. Would appreciate if you could take a look at this nomination. Thanks!  Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 08:53, 14 October 2021 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 15:25, 16 October 2021 (UTC)