Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Proseminar in Homophile Studies/archive1

Proseminar in Homophile Studies

 * Nominator(s): Urve (talk) 03:40, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

This article is about Louis Crompton's controversial 1970 class, the Proseminar in Homophile Studies, one of the first classes about homosexuality in the United States. While most Nebraska residents probably didn't have strong feelings about the class, one state senator—Terry Carpenter—was intensely opposed to it, and tried his hand at banning the class. He failed. After a successful GA nomination with comments by, a PR with comments by , and a private review by a subject-matter expert, I feel this is FA worthy. Comments welcome. Thanks, Urve (talk) 03:40, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Image review from Dracophyllum
One image that is apparently own work – not impossible that it is though. Reverse image search turns up nothing. So Support as to images.  Draco phyllum  03:48, 22 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Appreciate it, thank you. Quite nice we could have a Wikimedian take a picture of Crompton so long ago. Urve (talk) 05:49, 22 October 2021 (UTC)

Oppose - sorry. The article is a slog to the read. The prose is convoluted and rambling in places. I'm having to read every sentence twice. I think it needs more work. Take this sentence for example: Would probably read better like this: And this sentence, for example: -Graham Beards (talk) 08:24, 26 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "As for the students, registration in the course totaled 34 undergraduate and graduate enrollees, mostly students of anthropology and sociology; exactly half of them were women."
 * "Thirty-four students enrolled on the course, mostly undergraduates and graduates studying anthropology and sociology, half of whom were women."
 * "Otherwise, while six members of the NIMH task force on homosexuality made "strong written endorsements" of the course, and Magrath compared some reactions to the course to World War I-era policies that forbade the teaching of any language other than English in public schools, state Senator Terry Carpenter from Scottsbluff was strongly opposed to the course", is too  long and has to be re-read to be understood.
 * Thanks, . It's good to hear that my writing isn't working for everyone and that I can improve. I've made some adjustments, which includes a bit of restructuring re: Carpenter, to help aid in readability. Is this an improvement? Anything else that gives you pause? Urve (talk) 09:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * It's certainly an improvement, but sadly we are not there yet. The article reads like an essay rather than an encyclopaedia article. I think you would benefit from reading User:Tony1/How to improve your writing, particularly the sections on redundancy. Also, take a look at WP:PLUSING - I saw a fused participles, which are unprofessional. Here's a few more problems:

— Graham Beards (talk) 10:57, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * "In the fall semester of 1970, professor Louis Crompton and others taught the Proseminar in Homophile Studies at the University of Nebraska–Lincoln, one of the first courses in the United States about homosexuality." You need to repeat upfront the subject of the article (which is usually a definition). I suggest something like, "The Proseminar in Homophile Studies was taught in the fall 1970 at the University of Nebraska by professor Louis Crompton and others. It was one of the first courses in the United States about homosexuality"
 * Spot the redundancies here, "The course attempted to understand homosexuality through interdisciplinary means, using many disciplines within the social sciences and the humanities." and here "Crompton was listed as an instructor for the course".
 * Here, " It was cross-listed between the psychology, anthropology, sociology, and English departments", "cross-listed" is jargon.
 * Fused participles; "with the board of regents saying" and " with Cole acting" and "with Crompton studying" and "with Cole responding".
 * Here "the hearing was alongside other sexuality-related issues", I suggest "covered" rather than "was alongside".
 * This sounds like jargon, "Cole offered public comment at the legislature".
 * "Spot the redundancy "The course was only offered for one semester in its initial form" (try "initially").
 * Here: "they suggested that other universities devise their homosexuality-related curricula after it." I suggest, "based on it".
 * This sounds like slang, "he was not tapped to become"
 * Thank you. I've done a first pass for redundancy, but will keep at it with that page's tips. Can you speak more to your concerns about this reading as an essay? I am too close to the prose to read it objectively, so some pointers from someone with a better grasp on prose would be appreciated. Urve (talk) 11:42, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * FAC is not supposed to be the venue for this amount of work on articles (that's for Peer Review) and I am reluctant to continue here. I suggest you withdraw the nomination, work at your pace away from FAC and invite editors new to the article to comment. You can re-nominate when you think all the issues have been addressed. Graham Beards (talk) 12:19, 27 October 2021 (UTC)
 * I can't know what the issues are if, after I ask what you mean, I am not told. Since this is not helpful, withdraw, please. Urve (talk) 03:20, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
 * , I'll action this withdrawal request. For now I think it would be beneficial to, as you say, keep at it with writing guide tips, and then return to PR to try and get some more eyes on the article before considering another nomination here. As a first-time nominator you'd also be eligible for the FAC Mentoring Scheme -- if that appeals you could even try that first and if a mentor comes forward, be guided by them. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:04, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 05:05, 28 October 2021 (UTC)