Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mahavira/archive3


 * 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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 11:45, 28 October 2018.

Mahavira

 * Nominator(s): Capankajsmilyo(Talk 07:52, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

This article is about the last God in Jainism and has been improved since the last nomination more than an year ago. Capankajsmilyo(Talk 07:52, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Oppose. Many of the issues I raised in the previous nomination persist - inconsistent citation formatting, prose issues, MOS problems, and a general inaccessibility to readers who are not experts on the subject. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:34, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Tony1
Prose in the lead, cr. 1a:
 * "In the Jain tradition, it is believed that Mahavira was born in the early part of the 6th century BC into a royal kshatriya family in what is now Bihar, India." Which bit is in the Jain tradition? Also, we could tell the readers very briefly what Jain is, so they don't have to divert to the link to find out. It's rather central to understanding the topic, isn't it?
 * "6th century" (which I like), but "thirty"? And later I see "24".
 * Phrasing is a little awkward. Make it as straight and simple as possible: "At the age of thirty, abandoning all worldly possessions, he left his home in pursuit of spiritual awakening and became an ascetic." –> "At the age of 30 he abandoned all worldly possessions and left home in pursuit of spiritual awakening, becoming an ascetic." The timing is unclear ... I guess it took him a while to become an ascetic, but it looks rather sudden. Could you insert "eventually" before "becoming", I wonder? You need to look at sources for when he was first noted as an ascetic. Also, I see further down that he might have been "twenty-eight", not "thirty". Um ....
 * "He preached for thirty years, and is believed by Jains to have died in the 6th century BC, though the year he is believed to have died varies by the Jain sect." Well, 30 plus 30 is 60, and you say he was born in the early part of the century. Do you need to tell us he died in the same century? "is believed ... to have died" appears twice. You don't need the second one.
 * There's a lot of "is believed to" (the "b" word occurs five times in the lead, and 20 times in the article). Needs variety throughout. Get a list of close synonyms. "probably" might sometimes be acceptable. "may have" "is likely to have", "is considered ...", plus more.
 * So he was exactly 72 at death? I'm confused about 30 plus 12.5 plus 30 ... do the last two overlap? Later, twelve and a half morphs into twelve.
 * "After he gained Kevala Jnana"—The earlier "attained" is good, but "gained" would be better as "reached", if you want a different word.
 * A big noun group: "Mahavira taught that the observance of oberving the vows"—simplify the grammar where possible.
 * Weirdly, after this train crash the second half of the lead looks OK.

I'm afraid I'm declaring: withdraw, rework, and resubmit. Nikkkimaria's post above also suggests this. Looking further down, it's quite possible to improve the prose before resubmitting.

MEMOS TO THE FAC COMMUNITY:
 * (1) This points to an urgent need for editorial (copy-editing) support of our subcontinent nominators, before nomination. I don't know the answer, but we need sterling articles on the multiple, rich traditions in this part of the world.
 * (2) This is the second nomination I've reviewed today in which the lead tries to fit in an awful lot of facts, leading to indigestion and lack of clarity. Just noting this. Tony (talk)  10:39, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Coord note
It seems again that work of the scale that should take place outside FAC is still required, so I'll archive this shortly. The nominator has tried to do the right thing by putting up for Peer Review in the past (2015 to be exact) but I think an active collaborator is probably needed, and then another go at PR prior to any future FAC nom. The collaborator might come via the FAC mentoring scheme, which you'd be eligible to try. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:44, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 11:45, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.