Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rainilaiarivony/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 Ian Rose 13:45, 6 April 2012.

Rainilaiarivony

 * Nominator(s): Lemurbaby (talk) 06:14, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Vital Article (level 4). Meet Rainilaiarivony, Prime Minister of Madagascar for 31 years (1864-95) in the run-up to French colonization and the only Malagasy biography to be classified as a Vital Article. He lived through a period of rapid modernization: as a child his father amputated his fingers to ward off an ill fate, but by the end of his career he oversaw a well-organized modern state with a British-trained army and the most advanced school system in Sub-Saharan Africa. The article has passed GA and I believe it meets the FA criteria. Thank you for reviewing and offering your comments. Lemurbaby (talk) 06:14, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

Source review - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Seem to be relying rather heavily on a single biography - what steps have you taken to look for a wider variety of sources?
 * There are only two biographies on Rainilaiarivony The biography I used is the only one that exists for Rainilaiarivony. (The other book that looks like a biography, "La prédiction, ou, La vie de Rainilaiarivony", is actually a work of fiction based on his life.) The "Rainilaiarivony, un homme d'etat malgache" biography is mainly used as a source for details in the period of his life when Rainilaiarivony was not Prime Minister (childhood, family life details, exile details). All the secondary sources I've found on Rainilaiarivony mainly discuss his tenure as Prime Minister, with a sentence or two to mention his exile and his military career. My understanding is we are encouraged to avoid primary sources, which are just about the only other place I could have found detailed information about these other periods of his life. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Primary sources are a mixed bag... Personally, I recommend finding the best secondary sources to build the bulk of the article around, and then use primary sources (depending on their age and other factors) to help fill in the gaps.  Also, if primary sources with new details were published after the secondary sources, often their content is worth mentioning. –  Maky  « talk » 06:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The primary sources I've found primarily discussed his time as Prime Minister but didn't add more helpful detail (in light of the scope of the article as it's written currently). Much more detailed info is available on the reforms he made as Prime Minister if a summary style is not what we need here. But for the other periods of his life (except perhaps during his exile, which lasted only months) I've found conflicting information in the primary sources. For example, one of them said only one finger was amputated. So I thought it best to rely on a biography that did that research and compared all the primary sources the author could find (including many in archives overseas that I can't access) to do the synthesis and present the most correct information for these periods. Lemurbaby (talk) 03:07, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've gone through and replaced a few of the Chapus & Mondain refs with others where there were sources of equivalent quality that could provide evidence for the content.Lemurbaby (talk) 08:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Many other additional refs have now been added as well. Lemurbaby (talk) 07:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Karthala Éditions or Editions Karthala or Karthala Editions? Nikkimaria (talk) 17:44, 29 February 2012 (UTC)
 * Changed all to Karthala Editions per google books info pages. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:12, 1 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Support Comments from Jim an interesting article, no major problems, but some nitpicks.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  09:16, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I made these changes], please check (some cosmetic, a couple of typos).
 * Thank you for catching the typos and smoothing out the prose here. Lemurbaby (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I thought this was article was somewhat underlinked, can you check if any further wikilinks would assist your readers?
 * I've gone through and added quite a few links. Good suggestion! Lemurbaby (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * There are three occurrences of "promoted" and two of "power" in the first paragraph of the lead, can you vary a bit?
 * Fixed. Lemurbaby (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * With a few pennies he invested... &mdash; reads a little oddly, can it be rephrased?
 * Fixed. Lemurbaby (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Valiant and strategic &mdash; pov?
 * Reworded - I think it works better now. Lemurbaby (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Upon learning of the death of this respected figure &mdash; We are some way from the subject of this sentence, I think you need to repeat the name.
 * Changed a bit. Lemurbaby (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi Jim, and thanks for taking the time to comment here. I always appreciate your input. Lemurbaby (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No further concerns, changed to support  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  06:41, 10 March 2012 (UTC)

Support Comments  by Maky

I performed the GAN review (treating it as a FAC), so my comments will focus comprehensiveness and a source check. I have recently acquired two books about Madagascar's history, one of which is cited (source review) and one that is not (comprehensiveness check). First the comprehensiveness check:

My source is:

Here's what I found:
 * On page 141, it says "[Rainilaiarivony] built a massive palace on the top of the rugged crest that dominates Antananarivo, alongside the royal palace, symbolizing the nature of a power that had become bicephalous." I do not see anything in the article suggesting he was responsible for the building of the Andafiavaratra Palace.
 * You're right - I will add something about the construction of the palace. He didn't build it, of course - it was one of the LMS Missionaries (William Pool I believe), who built it on his command. Prior to that he had small wooden offices near the palace. I can also add something more about his houses, property and wealth, which were extensive. Lemurbaby (talk) 05:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I have now added some material on his wealth and the palace, and may expand this a bit more. Lemurbaby (talk) 06:23, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I'm not sure if this is needed, but on page 148 it reads, "...the prime minister succeeded in imposing his authority throughout a period of reforms that inspired great enthusiasm among Protestant missionaries, at least until his government ran out of steam in the 1880s. In many ways, the establishment of a Christian government in 1869 was the centrepiece of Rainilaiarivony's tenure."  It goes on to talk about a few things his government did.  Rather than put too much of this copyrighted material on here, I'll email it to you, if you want.  Just email me through Wiki and I'll reply with a clear photo of the pages for you to read.  Again, some of it may already be covered.
 * I do mention the Protestant/English influence evident in his reforms, but let me know if you think it needs to be expanded. Lemurbaby (talk) 05:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Only as noted below in the newly added point. Also, if all the sources agree that "the establishment of a Christian government in 1869 was the centrepiece of Rainilaiarivony's tenure", then explicitly stating something to that effect might be good.  If, however, it seems like a biased statement by Christian historians and is not universally agreed upon, then what you have done is fine. –  Maky  « talk » 22:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I can't agree that the conversion of the court was the "centerpiece" of his 30-year reign. He accomplished so much, in so many areas - although many Europeans looking in from the outside at the time certainly thought the conversion was his most important accomplishment. I'd prefer to leave it as-is and let the readers decide what was the most important or interesting of his achievements. Lemurbaby (talk) 09:42, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * You are right that it is not for us to decide what is and is not most important, but if the sources largely agree with these stated assessments, it it worth mentioning that historians (either by name or a general category) generally agree that it's a highlight of his career. But in this case, it's probably not necessary. –  Maky  « talk » 04:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)


 * On page 152, there is talk of the Malagasy government being forced to pay the French government 10 million francs based on a 1885 treaty. Basically they had to take out a loan they couldn't pay, so "Prime Minister Rainilaiarivony instituted a special form of forced labour that consisted in panning for gold in the country's rivers, which was unpopular in the extreme..."  Again, I can photograph the page and send it.
 * I have now included these details in the article. Lemurbaby (talk) 08:37, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * On page 130, it talks about the loan and it's affects regarding the "haemorrhage of coin from Madagascar, as the government was obliged to pay France an indeminity of 240,000 silver piastres for cancellation of the disastrous Lambert charter." After more details, it talks about Rainilaiarivony's personal fortune.  Again, I can take a photo for the finer details, if needed.
 * The discussion about the Lambert Charter is included in the "end of the monarchy" section. I didn't include the detail about the sum of money to be paid to Lambert's heirs, but perhaps it is important to include it in light of the financial hardship and political ramifications it had. I'll put something in here shortly. Lemurbaby (talk) 06:51, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've now included mention of the severity of this debt, as well as Rainilaiarivony's fortune, in the article. Lemurbaby (talk) 08:37, 15 March 2012 (UTC)


 * On page 276, it reads: "He installed Protestantism as the official state religion by converting, together with Queen Ranavalona II, in 1869." I don't think the article says that he made Protestantism the official state religion.
 * The first paragraph on Acts as Prime Minister does discuss the conversion of the court, although I didn't use the terminology Brown selected ("state religion"). It's not quite accurate - people were free to practice whatever they wished, and Madagascar could hardly be called a Christian state. The conversions remained largely limited to the court, upper classes and certain communities within the highlands for decades after 1869. Lemurbaby (talk) 06:51, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * See the new note below. – Maky  « talk » 22:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

As for the other book I have, A History of Madagascar by Brown, it appears have I have a different version than yours. The ISBN, publisher, page count, and date are all different. Also, I couldn't find the material for the one citation you use in there (anywhere). Moreover, I'm not sure what I can say in regards to this book as a new source, mostly because the stuff that covers Rainilaiarivony's reign is probably 50 pages long, and dives into a bunch of policy, religion, and general stuff going on in the country at the time. I've been trying to read it, but trying to reconcile it with the article is only causing confusion and a massive headache. But for the most part, everything seems to check out... although if you are still in the U.S., it might be wise to see if you can pick up a copy of the book. There may be some material in there on his policies that might merit inclusion in the article. – Maky  « talk » 03:27, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Check here. This is the version I was using. Lemurbaby (talk) 05:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The covers are the same, but again, page numbers and other content appear to be different. No worries, though.  –  Maky  « talk » 22:09, 16 March 2012 (UTC)


 * In one of my two sources, the Christian conversion of the monarchy had other effects on the country, including a massive public conversion that upset many of the Protestant missionaries. Apparently once the Queen and Prime Minister converted, much of the public felt compelled to follow the example of their rulers, which the missionaries didn't care for since they felt that the people were adopting the faith for the wrong reasons.  Although most of the island nation is Christian, as you noted in the article Madagascar, the many people incorporate the old belief system with Christianity.  Shouldn't this be briefly included in the article due to the impact?  If needed, I can provide the quote and page number. –  Maky  « talk » 21:48, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added some discussion now about the conversion rates, the reasons for people's adoption of the new religion, and the nominal nature of the island's Christianization. I don't want to get into the missionaries' attitudes about how the conversion was going since that detail would be better included in a "history of Christianity in Madagascar" article that I"m planning to put together eventually here. I also added more detail about the other reforms he brought about, to keep that section in balance. Lemurbaby (talk) 08:44, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The changes you've made are perfect. I know it seems redundant, but there's nothing wrong with including these brief summaries when they're relevant to the subject's reforms and policies.  If anything, you can add a Further link to the section to suggest additional reading of the articles you eventually create/enhance.  But don't omit details because you plan to cover them elsewhere.  Remember, FAC is partly about being comprehensive.  –  Maky  « talk » 04:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

 Comments   Tending to Support: Great article but some minor issues/queries. I have made some minor changes, feel free to revert. I have read only up to end of the "Military career" section. Will complete review in a day or two. Completed the read.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 10:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC) -- Redtigerxyz Talk 05:06, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Rainilaiarivony's mother is not named. Then there is "The February 1852 death of Prime Minister Rainiharo (the father) left the queen without her consort" so
 * was Rainilaiarivony Ranavalona I's son or may be stepson? Confused.
 * when Rainiharo is introduced in "Early life", his relationship as Consort also needs to be added.
 * Infobox: Add Command-in-chief tenure, religion field
 * I've now included the name of Rainilaiarivony's mother. The text now clarifies that his father Rainiharo became PM five years after Rainilaiarivony's birth, and that he became the consort to the queen but retained his first wife (polygamy was allowed but not the norm). By modern Western standards you could say Rainilaiarivony was Ranavalona I's stepson (although it's not clear what if any ceremony was performed to formalize the union between Rainiharo and Ranavalona that might equate marriage) - but that's a misnomer, since in Merina society at the time these unions came together and fell apart without having any legal ramifications or familial obligations on the part of non-blood relatives. It was more common for these connections to be formalized through an "adoption" of the child in question, and I've seen no sources that claim Ranavalona adopted Rainilaiarivony or any of Rainiharo's children after taking him as consort. Regarding the inclusion of a religion field in the infobox, I think it may be best to omit it. Rainilaiarivony's conversion was largely political at the time. I've seen some sources claim he was actually atheist, although others have said he asked for a priest to absolve him and hear his genuine conversion upon his death bed. For most or even all of his life he certainly adhered to traditional Malagasy spirituality (as most, including professed Christians, continue to do there today). Given the ambiguity around his actual religious views, it seems best to leave that part out.Lemurbaby (talk) 09:32, 18 March 2012 (UTC)


 * A small section of religious beliefs may be necessary
 * I've noted that the PM's biographers believe his conversion was primarily political and may not have reflected a genuine shift in beliefs until late in life if ever. The section in his biography that discusses this also emphasizes how difficult it is to actually know what another person's religious beliefs really are, whether on the basis of words or actions. I think that's a fair point. He may have established the Court Church but certainly didn't make a huge show of being a Christian and regularly reiterated to fellow Malagasy (even students in the theological schools) that they had freedom of conscience and didn't need to convert to Christianity just because the Queen had. Lemurbaby (talk) 07:14, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Power transitions and remarriage: Ranavalona II -> III is not noted. The queen in "Deposition and exile" appears to be II, but she is in fact III. The fact that Rainilaiarivony may be have murdered Ranavalona III' husband, is needed too.
 * I have now included some information on both these points. Lemurbaby (talk) 05:12, 19 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "Radilifera, the Prime Minister's son," Rainilaiarivony' unmentioned son suddenly appears. Should be noted earlier in family"
 * "Ra" just means "sir" or "Madam" - he was mentioned as Dilifera in the family section but for the sake of consistency I've changed it now to Radilifera.


 * Did he father any children with the Queens?
 * Apparently not, but I will try to find a reference that states this explicitly.
 * Found and added a source to support that he did not father any children with the queens. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Any monuments/remembrance/legacy in contemporary Madagascar?
 * None that I'm aware of beyond his tomb at Isotry and the Andafiavaratra Palace. At the tomb there is a small plaque for him that simply states his name, his role as Prime Minister and Commander in Chief, and the fact that he was awarded the Legion of Honor. I will try to find the detail on the Legion of Honor to include it in the article and can include the detail about the plaque at Isotry. Lemurbaby (talk) 05:12, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've added the information about the plaque. Lemurbaby (talk) 04:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

-- Redtigerxyz Talk 10:17, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I think I've responded to all your points now, Redtigerxyz. Thank you for all your comments - they've helped to strengthen the article. Lemurbaby (talk) 07:15, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Support, but just fix this "The Prime Minister regretted this necessity and was deeply saddened by it and the consequent souring of his relationships with Rasoanalina and their children after the divorce". No verb. May be split. -- Redtigerxyz Talk 17:57, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
 * The verb is saddened: PM saddened by the necessity and the souring of relationships. I will reword a bit. Lemurbaby (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Support by Ruhrfisch. I was asked to review this and find that it meets the FA criteria. While it is well written, I have a few quibbles that do not detract from my support (but should be addressed).
 * The caption is "Palace of the Prime Minister, Antananarivo" but the article refers to it as "the Andafiavaratra Palace" - the caption should make clear these are the same
 * Changed. Lemurbaby (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Protestant places of worship are almost always called churches, so temple seems odd here The Christianization of the court and the establishment of the independent royal Protestant temple on the palace grounds prompted the wide-scale conversion of hundreds of thousands of Malagasy.
 * I agree, and I've also seen it termed a chapel (not so often a church) in the literature, so I'll change it to that. Lemurbaby (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * LMS in LMS missionaries needs to be explained / spelled out
 * Done. Lemurbaby (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Missing punctuation and word? ''Beginning in 1872, Rainilaiarivony worked to modernize the army with the assistance of a British military instructor[, who] was hired to recruit, train and manage its soldiers.[27]
 * Good catch, fixed. Lemurbaby (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)


 * A bit awkward and unclear The following year a mandatory five-year military service was introduced ... To whom did this apply? I expected something more like The following year a mandatory five-year term of military service for all men aged 18 to 25 was introduced ... (just making up details)
 * Reworded. Lemurbaby (talk) 22:24, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Nicely done, image review to follow Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 14:18, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
 * All quibbles addressed, full support. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:51, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Image review The article has 5 images, three of which are clearly free. I do wonder about File:Prime Minister Rainilaiarivony of Madagascar inspecting troops.jpg and File:Rainilaiarivony funeral PS.jpg - is there any indication as to when they were published originally? While they are free in the UK (where they are located now), I think their original publication data is needed. I looked in books published prior to 1923 and could not find either (though I did find the lead image and added that info to its file). If they were not published before, then the photographer of File:Prime Minister Rainilaiarivony of Madagascar inspecting troops.jpg died in 1918 and has been dead well over 70 years, so that should be OK. File:Rainilaiarivony funeral PS.jpg is from 1900 and its author is unknown, so I do not see how it can be asserted that its author has been dead 100 years. I think both would be OK under a fair use claim if need be. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:16, 30 March 2012 (UTC)
 * According to this document, the photo of Rainilaiarivony inspecting his troops should indeed be in the public domain due to the fact that the photo was part of the London Missionary Society photo archives, and as such was not officially "published" by the original copyright holder, who has been dead for over 70 years. We can't be certain of the author of the funeral photo, so according to the same document the photo will enter public domain 120 years after its creation (1900). I jumped the gun on that, not knowing the anonymous author rule. I'm about to remove that image. All photos now remaining in the article are verified to be in the public domain. Lemurbaby (talk) 12:31, 6 April 2012 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.