Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Siege of Malakand


 * 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.

Siege of Malakand
An interesting topic with some wonderfully accessible sources. Very quickly written which left me with a couple of prose and spelling issues but most of these have been fixed. Very well referenced I feel, though the references section is a little complicated as a result. This, and possibly a slight weakness in the aftermath section along with one or two remaining minor issues may still exist, however I hope that this FAC will help iron out these one or two remaining kinks.

Please remember to check back after commenting as I will be continually addressing all your points and queries :) thanks! SGGH speak! 12:11, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Oppose. The first sentence is quite long to be readable. Generally I don't like the lead as it doesn't have a summarized background, despite of casus belli in the infobox. Also there is an iscription near the Pashtun tribes in the combatants, which doesn't seem to be a Pashtun banner of that time. Should be removed IMHO. --Brand спойт 14:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * There isn't a Pashtun banner at the time that I could find, so I choose "Pashtun" in their written language, but I can try to find something more suitable. I will also work on the leading sentence, though the Durand line bisecting Pashtun lands is a good summary of what is a fairly simple background story I felt... do you have further suggestions re: that? SGGH speak! 17:01, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have worked on the lead's first few lines, but to be honest I would prefer you put forward your ideas about the lead yourself, as I'm not sure how better to briefly explain the background in a more effective way than what is already in place, without loosing the "briefness" of it. SGGH speak! 17:06, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Moderate support. A quite pleasant stuff as for me. Technically however, it would be much better if there would be any map or diagram.  --Brand спойт 21:55, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'll get on it. SGGH speak! 22:03, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Haven't found a map as of yet, but have found a new references format which I spotted on the Tony Blair which I have incorporated. SGGH speak! 13:44, 14 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Support, I really enjoyed the article and I think that meets the criteria of an FA. Tony the Marine 23:57, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment, I really dislike the scrolling box for notes... this is the first article I've seen it on but I think it's needless, ugly, unhelpful, figured I'd mention that here. gren グレン 03:36, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I had never seen it before I found Tony Blair's article. I chose it for practicality to shrink the percentage of the article taken up by notes, I don't actually know what the concensus is on using it, will try to find out! SGGH speak! 09:12, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Just put them into 3 columns to save space. SeleneFN 22:02, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * That's true, though not everyone's browsers seem to support that. SGGH speak! 22:03, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I would say it is commonpractice on about a third of all FAs. At any rate, the scroll box is very out-of-place with the typical Wikipedia formatting. SeleneFN 23:46, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Okay, I'll set it as a columns. SGGH speak! 14:51, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Done SGGH speak! 21:10, 16 June 2007 (UTC)
 * comment Find a better term for the local people than 'natives' which has got to still carry all all the racist/imperialist connotations that it did during the colonial period. Just because it might be used in old quotations does not mean it needs to be used in current narrative Hmains 02:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have tried to replace the word native, and have one in one or two cases, however 90% of the time the word is part of terms like the "native infantry" or "native casualties" used to refer to Pashtun forces fighting as levies in the ranks of the British garrison. I'm finding this use a little unavoidable without causing great confusion as to what Pashtun peoples I am refering to, and saying "Pashtun forces who fought for the British" every time seems redundant. Do you have any suggestions? The above is me just talking utter crap. It's all sorted now, I replaced the one correct use of the word native with indigenous, and the rest with the correct reference to sepoys or Indian troops in the british army where appropriate. That's just me being half asleep. Thanks Hmains SGGH speak! 18:18, 17 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Support: I passed the article to GA, and found it an easy-to-read and well-referenced article. Alientraveller 16:46, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

*Oppose No Vote The lead is poor. It should be a succinct summary of the whole article. We don’t need to know how much W.C made for his newspaper article. Details like this should not be in the lead! I have tweaked the lead somewhat, what do you think? :It is better if the numbers one through nine are spelled out; use figures for numbers 10 and above.
 * I think I have fixed most of these, but will keep looking.

Sentences without full-stops, unwanted spaces, surplus commas, sentences that don't start with capital letters etc, etc
 * I have gone through the article and fixed all that I could find, and will continue searching

Something particularly desirable for battle articles aiming for FA status. At least a good quality map of the region so we know where we are.
 * I will try and find one of the Malakand region or at least of the NWFP, but detailed maps of the immediate surrounding area have been very hard to find.
 * I have included a map of the NWFP but that is all I can get a hold of at the moment... I have made a map. SGGH speak! 14:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Needs a thorough check and copyedit throughout eg:

:Why is the latter part of this sentence in quotation marks?
 * Because it is a direct quote from the source.

:Do you mean 'They were' successful?
 * Yeah, fixed.

:Needs quite a bit of work and polish for FA but has potential. Raymond Palmer 12:48, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
 * tweaked to flow better
 * I have addressed your comments with bold replies. SGGH speak! 14:06, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

....anyone? SGGH speak! 21:53, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

*Still Oppose I'm afraid. In places the writing is poor and not yet ready - in my opinion - for FA status.

Despite further attacks during the night of July 28/29, the British recorded only two killed from the sepoy ranks and the severe wounded of a Lieutenant Ford

Blood arrived at Nowshera on July 31 1897 to take command, and on August 1, 1897 he was informed that the Pashtun forces had turned their attention to the nearby British fort of Chakdara, a small, under garrisoned fort with few supplies that had itself been holding out with 200 men since the first attacks in Malakand began, and had recently sent the signal "Help us" to the British forces.

The relief force assembled at 04.30am on August 2 with low morale, however with the use diversionary attacks the force was successful in breaking out of the Pashtun encirclement without loss, creating confusion amongst the Pashtun forces "like ants in a disturbed ant–hill" as observed Blood

The siege of Malakand was Winston Churchill's first experience of actual combat, which he later described in several newspaper columns for which he originally received £5 per column from The Daily Telegraph.[18], and that were eventually compiled into his first published book: 

Back in Nowshera, the 11th Bengal Lancers were woken by telegrams describing the situation

There is a mixture of British and US spelling eg: reconnoiter US rumor US centre UK neighbouring UK

These errors, amongst others, prevent the article reaching FA status, IMO. Raymond Palmer 23:10, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
 * I have addressed the above errors and have spellchecked the article with my software set to US rather than UK spelling, and have gone through it by eye as well. SGGH speak! 08:53, 30 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment. Support
 * Make sure that all measurements are in both standard and metric (1,519 mile border). See WP:Convert '''fixed quoted example, I think that is the only one)
 * There are other instances. Do a search for "miles" and "yards" in the text and you'll find them. Karanacs 18:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Fixed all those with distanes over 10, things like three miles or two miles I have left as they are, as supplying the km distance is less important as the differences are less at such shorter distances. SGGH speak! 20:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Karanacs 14:31, 2 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The sentence that begins "Commanded by COlonel Shalch" is very long and should be reworded fixed
 * Quotations inside other quotations should use single quotes ' ' rather than double " ". fixed instances of this double quotation mark occuring
 * Need a citation immediately after the Churchill quotation that describes the camp. I know citation 19 is supposed to cover it, but the quotation should also have its own citation fixed
 * After you introduce a person, subsequent references to them should use only their last name, not title and last name. (for example, Major Deane should be referred to as just Deane) I have fixed many of these, i have left a couple in if there is a significant gap between the two mentionings, just to make sure the reader can follow who is who and make things easier
 * Section headings should not begin with "The" fixed
 * "A Lieutenant Watling" should just be "Lieutenant Watling" fixed
 * "Back in Nowshera" should be more formal "In Nowshera" fixed
 * Dates in section Relieving Chakdara are not wikilinked I have wikilinked those dates that are not wikilinked in the lines immediatly above


 * Oppose—Linking and hyphen/dash issues (the requirements for professional formatting and MOS compliance, respectively). 1a, too.
 * Please read MOS on hyphens and dashes and fix the whole article. '''I have read MoS and fixed all the dashes as per my understandinf of the MoS
 * If you must link the names of countries, please don't do it more than once (e.g., "Afghanistan"—and "Kabul" isn't even linked!). done
 * "when relief column"—"a"? done
 * Remove "own" from the last sentence in the lead? fixed
 * Should this be in BrEng? Why "center"? Standard MoS always seems to prefer American English, so I changed it so, I'm British and originaly wrote it in English before changing it for FAC
 * Audit the whole article for the use of commas: " As the Tsar's troops began to subdue one Khanate after another the British feared that Afghanistan would ...". Comma after "another". And why not avoid commas here: " It was with these thoughts in mind that, in 1838, the British launched the First Anglo-Afghan War and attempted to impose ..." --> " It was with these thoughts in mind that the British launched the First Anglo-Afghan War in 1838 and attempted to impose ..." fixed those highlighted, working through the rest now

These are just examples of why the whole text needs attention by copy-editors. Tony 14:52, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I will get on those shortly. It would help if other editors fixed such minor problems when they found them also. Wikipedia is a collective edit, I don't own this article and we should all be working together. SGGH speak! 15:45, 6 July 2007 (UTC)


 * (1) Do NOT strike through reviewers' text. Read the instructions.
 * (2) No thanks, I won't edit it for you; it's your nomination, so you find people to work "together", as you say.
 * (3) These were examples, not the finish of the issue. You need to find people who are interested in this kind of topic (research edit histories of related articles) and who can copy-edit. Tony 11:24, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Fair enough SGGH speak! 19:19, 8 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment, This article is a "featured article" as is. I believe that it the relentless scrutiny going on is ridicules. It is easy to criticize someone else's work instead of helping to improve it as we as members of the Wikipedia community should. The article already passed peer review and that is good enough for me. User:SGGH, keep up your excellent and valued work here. Tony the Marine 19:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks Tony, it's okay... the other Tony has a point I just got a little stressed. Back to the FAC! SGGH speak! 20:58, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Comment -This FAC has been on the board for over a month. Could a closing administrator please make a final determination as to the status of this article already? Thank you. Tony the Marine 20:41, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Support as per "Comment" above. Antonio Martin 05:54, 9 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment a see also section has been added by another user. I personally am not a fan of these for FAs, and neither of my other FA articles had them, and it was recommended that they didn't in their FACs, I was wondering if anyone else will lend their views? SGGH speak! 19:53, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.