Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Pah Wongso Pendekar Boediman/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 Graham Beards via FACBot (talk) 08:07, 27 November 2014 (UTC).

Pah Wongso Pendekar Boediman

 * Nominator(s): — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Pah Wongso was a bit of an oddball, in many ways rather similar to myself. Although of ethnic European (Dutch, rather) heritage, he was very close with the indigenous and ethnic Chinese communities in the Indies and later Indonesia, and married an ethnic Chinese woman. His work promoting education for poor youth and raising funds to help war-torn China in 1938 led him to have great popularity within the Chinese diaspora community, and as such the Chinese-owned Star Film produced two films starring him. This article is about the first of these, Pah Wongso Pendekar Boediman, and features (among other things) perhaps the most detailed plot synopsis of the film published since the 1940s. I hope you enjoy reviewing it as much as I enjoyed writing it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:16, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

Support and comments from Jim
Too few nitpicks in this very readable article to defer support, just three comments Jimfbleak - talk to me?  10:40, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Batavia—better linked at first occurrence rather than in "Production"
 * Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * silat—not italicised in its own article, although personally I wouldn't call it an English word
 * See my response regarding this issue in Si Ronda, here. In short, English sources seem to italicise silat on first use like this or italicise it throughout. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * only successful because of Wijnhamer's existing fame—"existing" is redundant
 * Meant to emphasise that this was the popularity/fame he had as a philanthropist before the film (his court trial was reported in both Sumatra and Java, which is interesting since it was a fairly small charge, and he knocked the sentence down to a 25-cent fine). Tried trimming it anyways, to see how it works. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the review! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:41, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt
Comment Leaning support. A few comments.
 * Plot
 * The phrase "returns his affections" or a variant is used twice. Given that it is rather old-fashioned, I'd cut it to once.  "loves him in return" would be an example.
 * Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk)
 * "Hoping to eliminate any competition" I don't see how "any" is justified, as it would not deter a third suitor except possibly through intimidation. Suggest change "any" to "his" ("rival" might be considered an alternative for competition)
 * Done. I'd also considered "the", but I've gone with "his" here. — Crisco 1492 (talk)
 * "Wisnoe is arrested". A short sentence, easily mergeable into either the one preceding or following.
 * Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * "a battle to the death". I assume I know who won, but perhaps spell it out.  I imagine he also wins Siti's hand?
 * Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Production
 * "At the time, the Hollywood characters of Charlie Chan and Mr. Moto were popular in the Indies, as were imported detective films; however, no films in that genre had yet been produced domestically" I have several questions about this passage. First, are you considering the Chan/Moto style of film as not a detective series?  In which case, it should be "genres". Or if you are considering it as such, I'd put an "other" before "imported". The sentence may benefit from a rewrite in any case. I'd also like to know, if known, why they were successful, given their Asian stereotyping, which in the case of Chan at least must have been clear to an ethnic Chinese audience. Even given that people were less hypersensitive about such things in that era, it strikes me as odd.  If known, can a brief explanation be inserted as to why they were successful (which also lets the reader decide to what extent Pah Wong followed that formula for success)?
 * Let me check to see if the reason for these characters' popularity is in my sources. Added "in general" to indicate that these are over and above Mr. Moto and Chan. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Nothing. I checked Biran, and S' article in Pertjatoeran Doenia dan Film, as well as the biography of Djamaluddin Malik. None of them give a reason, although S notes that Sherlock Holmes, Raffles (Lord Lister), and Nick Carter (all Caucasian) had been popular some time before that. I can think of several possible reasons, but including them would be OR. There does not seem to be anything on Jstor (the only article which refers Pah Wongso is already cited here), and I have not found anything on Google either. Archived newspapers from the Indies don't give a reason, but I note that this popularity extended to Dutch-language comics. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:36, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * " the Red Cross' aid" possibly simplify to "Red Cross aid" without the "the".
 * I agree. Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * " to act as criminals" there's a bit of a double entendre here that I'm sure you don't want. Suggest "appear" for "act".
 * Perform as, perhaps, to avoid repeating "appear" (which is used in the next sentence)? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Release etc.
 * it was also screened internationally, including in China, Singapore and British Malaya" a bit clunky. Cannot the bit about "internationally" be deleted?  It's surely implied by the next words.  Unless you are hinting there may have been other countries it was screened in as well.
 * Simplified. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Well done.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:56, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. One comment left to deal with; I'll see what I can get. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:10, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Alright, I've tried addressing that last comment, but no luck. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:03, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Wehwalt, did you have anything more to add? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:44, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Support Sorry for the delay, I've been short on time recently.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:22, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
 * No worries. Thank you for reviewing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:08, 14 November 2014 (UTC)

Images are appropriately licensed and captioned. I might quibble that two of the three have doubled Licensing sections, but since the content is right that doesn't really matter. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:48, 25 October 2014 (UTC) Support. One minor tweak made, and one question: why does explanatory note b. carry the citation as (Barnard 2010, p. 65), rather than in the short form? - SchroCat (talk) 07:32, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nikki, fixed the double headers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * As in my previous nominations, footnotes use Harv rather than SFN because it allows for users to reach the original citation in the same number of clicks (rather than using SFN, forcing another two more clicks). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:42, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Sarastro
Another high-quality piece of work, up to the usual standards. Just a few quibbles then I'm happy to support. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Lead
 * "it followed the social worker Pah Wongso as he investigated a murder and cleared his protégé's name.": Maybe "it followed the social worker Pah Wongso as he investigated a murder to clear his protégé's name."? Not sure it’s much better, though.
 * Still trims characters, so sure. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "The first of its genre to be produced in the Indies": Perhaps "The first film of its genre…"?
 * Alright. I liked it implicit, but I agree that it could be confusing for some readers. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "Upon its release in April 1941, it received popular acclaim but mixed critical reception": Maybe better as "Released in April 1941 to popular acclaim, it had a mixed critical reception"?
 * Much simpler. Thank you. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "A sequel to this possibly lost film": I think a touch more is needed about it possibly being lost. Something as simple as "The film is possibly lost" would do to explain this to the unfamiliar.
 * How's this? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Plot
 * "Pah Wongso is a nut seller, social worker, and schoolmaster living in Batavia and taking care of the local poor.": Maybe "who takes care of the local poor"?
 * Reworked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "Wisnoe saves the life of a young woman named Siti when she is almost hit by a carriage": Something doesn’t quite work here. It makes the life-saving and the carriage-hitting almost seem unconnected, so it may be better to say how he saves her if we know.
 * None of the plot summaries I could find have it. I expect that he pulls her aside, but the most detailed review I found (on the talk page) doesn't say. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "stand out among his fellow employees": Better as "Stand out from his fellow employees"?
 * You're right. Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Are both "however"s needed in this section?
 * The second one's been trimmed. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Production
 * "a studio which Jo and Cho' had established together in Prinsenland"
 * Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "This led Jo to direct a detective film": Is "direct" the right word here?
 * Make. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Release and reception
 * "a reviewer praised the film for keeping with Hollywood's quality criteria": This sounds a bit clunky.
 * Reworked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * "The critic and filmwriter Saeroen expressed concern that the film's success was not because of its quality, and opining that it was only successful because of Wijnhamer's fame": I think this should be "opined" here. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:23, 29 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You're right. Done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:20, 29 October 2014 (UTC)

Support: My minor concerns having been addressed, I'm more than happy to support. This easily meets the criteria. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:41, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing! — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:54, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Note -- Unless I've missed it, I believe we're still awaiting e a source review, though I've had a request at WT:FAC for a little while. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:44, 12 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Right. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:59, 12 November 2014 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done
 * Be consistent in when you include locations
 * Konfiden or Konfidan? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:30, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, done. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:35, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Graham Beards (talk) 08:07, 27 November 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.