Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Terry Sanford/archive1

Terry Sanford

 * Nominator(s): Indy beetle (talk) 12:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

This article is about Terry Sanford, one of the most important United States governors in the 20th century. Arguably the earliest New South governor, he was the first Southern governor to call for an end to racially discriminatory employment and also put education at the top of the North Carolina political agenda for decades. He thereafter served as president of a university and was in the U.S. Senate for one term. This article was originally an FA from 2008 until I had it delisted in 2019 for obvious lack in comprehensiveness. After three years of work, I think it's ready for reconsideration. -Indy beetle (talk) 12:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC) (t &#183; c)  buidhe  12:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Image review
 * No licensing issues found
 * Why isn't File:Terry Sanford, 1961-1965 (8408755490).jpg the header image? Seems better quality
 * I think a photo which shows the actual subject is preferable to a painting which tries to replicate the subject. The file for the painting may be higher resolution, but it doesn't actually have as much detail of Sanford's face and has kind of an airbrushed look to it (because it is a painting). -Indy beetle (talk) 00:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Other comments
 * Oppose based on length/summary style—13108 words. Greater use of summary style would benefit the article and enable the reader to get to the main points expressed more concisely. Some sections especially "Race relations and civil rights" are really long and will be hard to parse for mobile viewers. Recommend using summary style to reduce length or breaking up with subheadings. For example, you could split off an article Governorship of Terry Sanford, similar to presidency articles.
 * Readable prose size is 80 kB, which falls into WP:SIZERULE category of 60+ kB Probably should be divided (although the scope of a topic can sometimes justify the added reading material). It is fair that I could trim down some of the governorship sections, but I'd argue that Sanford should justify a larger than typical scope, considering his career was three major acts (governor, Duke president, and senator) which have been written about extensively. GA Jimmy Carter is 88 kB. FA Harry S. Truman is 82 kb, FA Mitt Romney is 88 kB. FA George W. Romney is 69 kB, which I can probably work this down towards. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: currently have gotten it down to 75 kB. -Indy beetle (talk) 00:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * 73 kB. -Indy beetle (talk) 08:46, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

HF
Will review soon. Hog Farm Talk 15:26, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm not going to be able to get this all in one go due to current work situation, so just some quick thoughts for now ...


 * Drop the congressional bioguide EL as it's being used as a source
 * Done.
 * Campbell 2017 needs the editors
 * Done.
 * The dates of his Ethics Committee chairmanship need cited
 * Couldn't find the information to back up the exact dates (the ones given here may have been wrong), some of the info out there is contradictory, so removed from infobox.
 * " though their home was rented. " - note sure this is necessary; the mention of the rent issue in the next sentence doesn't really need this introduction
 * Removed.
 * Not sure that it's the best to list 1942-1960 as the dates of his military service as he appears to have been out of duty in 1946 and 1947?
 * Clarified his dates of service.

More to come tomorrow. Hog Farm Talk 04:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)


 * "In the first 1948 Democratic gubernatorial primary, Sanford voted for R. Mayne Albright. During the runoff election he supported W. Kerr Scott, and after Scott was elected governor he appointed Sanford to a position in the North Carolina State Ports Authority" - it's not super clear what this signifies without stating what Albright and Scott based their platforms on, especially for Albright which we don't even get a link for
 * Albright is worthy of an article, but that is for another time. He took the urban liberal and labor union vote, while populist Scott got the farm vote. The important thing here is Sanford made a connection with Scott and was rewarded for it, so I've trimmed out the part about Albright.
 * Early political career - did Sanford have established views on segregation? He supported Graham who is stated to have supported civil rights, but then also supported Kerr Scott and helped write speeches for Scott about separate but equal
 * You'll see later in the article that Sanford had considered racism to be immoral since he was student at the University of North Carolina where, tellingly, Graham was university president. His early public actions with regards to racism and segregation were largely moved by pragmatism it would seem; during the 1960 campaign for governor he framed himself as a moderate segregationist but stood staunchly opposed to the racist candidacy of Beverly Lake. I don't recall seeing any of his biographers or other serious writers consider him a true segregationist, and he despised the tactics of Lake, George Wallace, and Jimmy Carter (when ran he deceptively for Governor of Georgia as a segregationist). Sanford only really dealt with racial issues when he became governor, and in those times he became increasingly convinced that the social and economic marginalization of black people was bad for the state.

Ready for the governorship section; hopefully can finish this off in a couple days but very busy with work so I can't commit to a firm timeline. Hog Farm Talk 04:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay; work was really hectic last week.


 * "and for displaying a lack of familiarity with certain issues" - such as?
 * At one point Gavin excused an earlier mistake involving how to fund teacher pay (he did not realize you would need a significant tax hike to pay for a 50% wage increase for all public teachers) by saying that he couldn't turn to Democrats in the state budget office to give him information on the state budget. Sanford pointed out that the state budget and related info was a matter of public record. Sanford said, "He doesn't know his position, I don't know it and no one knows it." Gavin also said he supported one interest group's education improvement plan but not another advocacy group's plan, despite the fact that both plans were identical. This felt like extraneous detail to include.
 * Did he only serve one term as gov. by choice or by term limits (apologies if it's in there and I missed it)
 * By constitution; added.
 * "He traveled to Washington D.C." - Should there be a comma after Washington? I've got no idea how that works with the MOS
 * It would appear so. Commas added.

Ready for Senate career now; sorry this is taking so long. Hog Farm Talk 01:33, 29 May 2022 (UTC)


 * "and thought the body its wasted time," - I'm struggling to figure out exactly what this is trying to say, can it be rephrased?
 * I've removed this, since Sanford's quote thereafter really captures his feelings on the Senate.

Support - it's a longer one, but I didn't see anything that was really bloated or off-topic. I don't see the length as a concern, and I'm comfortable with the sourcing (spot checks not done) and the prose. Hog Farm Talk 04:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Kavyansh
Moved to talk page on 05:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC). – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 05:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, length is not a major issue for me. The article currently is ~75,000 characters. We had James Longstreet promoted some 8 months ago, which is over 96,000 characters. So, while the article is very long, we can take exceptions for people like Sanford and Longstreet. – Kavyansh.Singh (talk) 11:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Oppose by Gog the Mild
Recusing to review. Oppose on criterion 4. Recommend that the nomination be withdrawn to be rewritten in summary style. Over 12,000 words is far too long. Almost every section is prolix. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:54, 5 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Request to withdraw. The concerns about length aren't going anywhere. At the beginning of the the review the article had a readable prose size of 80kB, it is now at 72 kB. It would take more time than is desirable for an open review to trim further. That all said, if FA reviewers and coords are going to treat length limits as a hard and fast thing, they might as well incorporate that explicitly into the criteria (or create some "FAC outcomes" page). Why this at 72kB fails due to length concerns but James Longstreet at 93kB gets passed last October (currently now at 94kB) after having so many eyes on it has no logical explanation. Arbitrariness rules the day. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:47, 5 June 2022 (UTC)