Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Robert Falcon Scott


 * 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 01:41, 3 April 2008.

Robert Falcon Scott
Self-nominator: Brianboulton (talk) 00:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Support – My concerns have been addressed. — Bellhalla (talk) 15:23, 29 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * All links checked out fine with the tool. All refs and footnotes look good. I corrected two small typos. I'll try to get back in a bit and review more in depth. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:00, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Brian, I did a cursory review of Robert Falcon Scott, from what I see it is excellent. Here are a few comments I have:
 * A few more comments
 * 1. It says "Scott had followed the conventional career of a naval officer in peacetime Victorian Britain, where opportunities for career advancement were rare" Is the "career advancement were rare" part really true? Was this in the Crane source?
 * The Crane citation refers to Scott's lack of predilection for polar exploration. Unfortunately I had mis-cited this to p. 92, & have now corrected it to p. 84. I haven't especially cited the lack of career opportunities for Victorian naval officers, this being clear in several narratives. Crane himself refers to the competition for the best postings. However, on reflection "rare" is perhaps too strong, so I have changed it to "limited"
 * 2. "Professionalism was considered less praisworthy" - unless there is a British spelling I don't know about, I think it's "praiseworthy".
 * You're absolutely right, this was a spelling error.
 * 3. "unforced aptitude" - I read this several times and didn't really get what this phrase means.
 * It's Huntford's phrase, which is why I cited it. It means, I suppose, natural flair. I've put it in quotes to indicated that it is a quoted phrase.
 * 4. Just a suggestion - a one liner about how difficult the trip back from the farthest south (during Discovery) was. Michael Smith's book, which I cite many times in the Thomas Crean article, says he journey home became "a desperate race against time, with the trio constantly hungry and scurvy beginning to take a grip", and it's Smith's opinion that "one lengthy blizzard at this critical stage, confining them to their tent, would probably have killed them".  From this account it appears they almost died on the way home - did you get this impression from other sources?
 * Maybe Smith is laying it on a bit, for dramatic effect? I dont know. The march is covered in some detail in Discovery Expedition, and I don't really want to extend the Scott article with another lengthy description. I have added a bit, to emphasise the arduous nature of the march, and I think that's sufficient for this article.
 * 5. "At the end of the expedition it took the combined efforts of two relief ships and liberal use of explosives to free Discovery from the ice". Smith's book says that after all the blasting was done there was still 2 miles of ice between the Discovery and the rescue ships. Then the ice suddenly broke up and drifted out to sea.  So I think your version implies they used explosives to free the ship, when in fact in the end, they were just lucky that the ice conditions changed.  I could add the Smith citation if you like.
 * Nearly all the accounts of the Discovery's escape differ to some extent, but they all refer to explosives, and I think that in this article my one-line description will do.
 * 6. There is a quote from Scott's The Voyage of the Discovery (p. 170) printed in the Michael Smith book which captures Scott's own admission of their inadequate preparation. You can decide to fit it in if you like:  "But at this time our ignorance was deplorable; we did not know how much or what proportions would be required as regards the food, how to use our cookers, how to put up our tents, or even how to put on our clothes. Not a single article of the outfit had been tested and amid the general ignorance which prevailed the lack of system was painfully apparent in everything."  This quote is really astonishing for someone in charge of the lives of 50 men!
 * Yes, I read this quote in Voyage of the Discovery. It relates to the first sentence of the second "Discovery" paragraph. The quote is a bit long, but I have inserted a footnote which refers to it.

If you would like me to add any of the above material from the Michael Smith book and cite it, I'll gladly do so. Zatoichi26 (talk) 03:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your helpful suggestions and comments, which as you can see I have largely adopted.
 * Brianboulton (talk) 11:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Support Comment - another well-written and balanced article. I'm close to supporting though I have some quibbles with the polar journey - obviously you've tried not to over dramatize it, but it comes off as somewhat dull and a little fatalistic as a result, as if they knew it was hopeless from the point they turned round.
 * OK, but you rather argue against your own case by altering Death march to Last march (which I agree is better). Anyway, I've altered the first sentence of this section, and I think that further changes lower down will give it a bit more life, although it is basically a record of a solemn and indeed tragic sequence of events.


 * Since Wilson theorized that Evans' death had been caused in part from a brain injury incurred during one of his falls the article should mention both the diagnosis and the falls
 * This has been done, by alterations in the text and by extending a footnote.


 * Evan's decline was more marked than suggested. Scott doesn't seem that concerned for him until the 14th Feb (on the 8th and 9th the party are still relaxed enough to be geologising which in itself is worth mentioning). Even after Evan's death they haven't given up hope of getting back
 * More marked than suggested? I had said "rapid decline". As to your comment about when Scott first expressed concern for Evans: 23rd Jan "Evans is a good deal run down", 30th Jan "Evans is losing heart", 4th Feb Evans is "dull and incapable" and 6th Feb "Evans is the chief anxiety". I have extended the section dealing with Evans's decline and death, but I've left out the geologising, otherwise the section begins to get unbalanced.
 * Sorry, that wasn't very clear. I meant that you imply his decline mirrors the descent of the Beardmore (from 7 Feb), but Scott is only really anxious about him in this stage of the journey from 14 Feb (worse case...giving us serious anxiety). We then get no mention on 15 Feb, then the whole entry dedicated to him on the 16th and then the death on the 17th. I suggested the inclusion of the geologising breaks to suggest that they were by no means worn out (quote from 9 Feb) and to get away from the "Death March" feel.


 * from then on...the party’s fortunes descended into tragedy'' - does this suggest that Evans' death wasn't tragic? Poor old Evans.
 * I agree, I've amended the wording here.


 * I'd think the frostbite, snow blindness and injuries are worth mentioning rather than just a vague deteriorating physical condition.
 * Yes, I've done this.


 * The diary entry on 29th March is followed by a "Last Entry" (which we assume is made on the 29th, but there is no way to know for certain).
 * I've slightly altered this bit so as not to imply any certainty about when Scott ceased writing.


 * As far as I know only one of the letters is dated and some can be dated by the circumstances outlined in them, but there is nothing to suggest he was writing after the 24th
 * Covered in above


 * Perhaps Scott of the Antarctic (1948 film) is worth mentioning in the "Glorification" section.
 * I don't particularly like the film, and the linked wikipedia article is inadequate. But as an example of Scott-worship continuing into the post-war period, I've mentioned it.
 * No, me neither, but it probably brought the story to a new audience (and it was on TV today)


 * There are a couple of odd adjective choices too: was the RGS's hope for the Terra-Nova expedition really "pious"? Is Shackleton's main trait "bravado"?
 * Another reviewer asked about "pious". The sense is one of "well-intentioned, but probably vain". But rather than having to keep explaining this to audiences of raised eyebrows, I've deleted it. As to bravado, I simply typed in the wrong word. I meant bravura.
 * I've never come across that meaning, so I've been educated, but it is probably wise to remove it as you have done.

Yomangani talk 12:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your continuing interest in these articles. My main problem I had with these points was trying not to extend what is already a fairly long article with "expedition" details. I have attempted to write a biographical article of Scott, without falling into a reprise of the Terra Nova Expedition, hence my glossing over of some details. You will see from the above what I have done, and I hope that these meet your concerns. Do get back to me if they don't. Brianboulton (talk) 16:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I understand what you were trying to do (and you only had to see the article before you started work on it to see how bad it could be), but the Terra Nova Expedition is really what defines him to us and I felt it was a little too understated in the final section. Yomangani talk 17:18, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Support Slight oppose mainly due to a few small glitches. Also one place where I feel a source citation is needed. When these get cleared up I'll be happy to support.


 * Looks pretty good to me. I did a bit of copyediting, where I saw some places to cut wordiness. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:31, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please let me know of any remaining concerns and I'll do my best to deal with them Brianboulton (talk) 20:51, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Everything addressed. Looks better! Changing to support. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for another fine article on a great explorer. Maralia (talk) 18:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Please let me know of any further problems. And thanks for the copyedits. Brianboulton (talk) 22:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Support Well done yet again, sir. Maralia (talk) 03:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Support—oh, this is very good. Congrats. But I haven't gone through it in sufficient detail, so I may make a few comments later. TONY   (talk)  14:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.