Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr./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 SandyGeorgia 22:48, 27 June 2009.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

 * Nominator(s): Midnightdreary (talk), María ( habla con migo ) 

A collaborative effort for the past few months, recognizing Dr. Holmes's upcoming bicentennial in August. We'd love to hear what people think. Co-nominated by: María ( habla con migo ) and Midnightdreary (talk) 15:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. I commented on this article at the peer review, and since then it has been further improved.  It is throughly researched and well organized, giving an excellent encyclopedic treatment of its subject.  Well done!  -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:41, 15 June 2009 (UTC)


 * May I suggest making the citation style consistent? Most are in the form "Small, 49–50" or "Weinstein, 29", but others are "Holmes, Oliver Wendell. The Autocrat at the Breakfast-Table. Boston: Houghton, Mifflin, 1916: 7". I would support with that minor change. Stifle (talk) 13:21, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Typically, I only grant short form to sources which are used multiple times. Sources which are cited only once don't seem to need the same treatment because, ultimately, they take up more space rather than less. Any other thoughts on this? --Midnightdreary (talk) 13:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Just what I was going to say; sources that are only used once, such as Autocrat, are listed in full in the "Notes" so as to not overwhelm the "References" section with less-used works. This is common practice, and I believe it's in keeping with the MOS. :) María ( habla  con migo ) 13:36, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * If that's the normal standard, then I have no objections and unconditionally support. Stifle (talk) 14:32, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Image review: all images are verifiably in public domain or appropriately licensed. Jappalang (talk) 14:51, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:04, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Support. I peer-reviewed this article in mid-May, and I thought it excellent. The article has been improved since then, and all of my concerns have been addressed. I'm happy to support this fine addition to the encyclopedia. Finetooth (talk) 17:41, 21 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Please doublecheck spacing on ellipses per WP:MOS. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:44, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.