Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Peter van Geersdaele/archive1

Peter van Geersdaele

 * Nominator(s): Usernameunique (talk) 21:47, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Peter van Geersdaele was, as a colleague remembered him, "the last of the team of conservators and specialist craftsmen who responded to a challenge that had left archaeologists daunted". Spending the bulk of his career at the British Museum, he led the moulding, and subsequent fibreglass reconstruction, of the impression of the Sutton Hoo ship-burial. He later worked briefly for Parks Canada; finally retiring after a last move to the National Maritime Museum, he was appointed an Officer of the Order of the British Empire in recognition of his services to museums.

This article is a concise and complete account of van Geersadele’s recorded contributions to archaeology and museums. It has been expanded to include a more broader take on his life with the obituaries that followed his death last year, and is the most comprehensive take on his life available. Recently reviewed by, it is ready to be nominated here. Usernameunique (talk) 21:47, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

Sources review

 * No spotchecks carried out
 * Links to sources all working
 * Formats: a few nitpicks:
 * Gooderham: You've repeated a typo ("Counil") from the source – I don't think you have to do that.
 * Good catch; I probably just copied and pasted originally, and didn't notice. I've added a "[sic]" in the title.
 * I think the "Family Notices" source needs a publisher. This notice originally appeared in the East Anglian Daily Times which is evidently the publisher of this website.
 * Added East Anglian Daily Times as the publisher. I'd cite directly to the newspaper (and include the link as a courtesy link), but I haven't (yet) been able to find a copy as it appeared in print.
 * Actually, Archant publish the website, the EADT is the work. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 17:55, 30 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Fixed, thanks. --Usernameunique (talk) 05:15, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The Painter source seems to be out of alphabetical sequence in the bibliography.
 * Fixed.

Brianboulton (talk) 17:01, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Quality/reliability: no issues, sources meet the necessary FA criteria.
 * Thanks, . Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 17:32, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

Support from TRM
As noted in the nomination comments, I reviewed it at GAN and applied my usual "slightly more like FAC criteria than GAN criteria" approach which I knew the nominator wouldn't object to. I can't see any good reason right now why this shouldn't be passed as FA, I've gone over it one more time for comprehensiveness, MOS compliance, etc, and can't see anything which stands out. Good work, I hope the dying FAC process will provide some other input from content reviewers to stop this failing through lack of interest. Good work and good luck. The Rambling Man (Staying alive since 2005!) 15:30, 11 October 2019 (UTC)

Coord note
Minimal (if valuable) commentary after a month -- pls seek some more reviews or I'm afraid we'll have to close as no consensus. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:50, 13 October 2019 (UTC)

Coordinator comment - As Ian noted, this has received minimal review and doesn't seem to be heading in the right direction at present. Therefore, I will be archiving it shortly and it may be re-nominated after the customary two-week waiting period. In the mean time, please action feedback as appropriate. -- Laser brain  (talk)  11:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC) -- Laser brain  (talk)  11:42, 21 October 2019 (UTC)