Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tintin in America/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 not promoted by User:Ian Rose 10:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC).

Tintin in America

 * Nominator(s): Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:11, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe it fits the necessary criteria. In the last few months, I have pulled both Tintin in the Land of the Soviets and Tintin in the Congo up to FAC, and now I hope to do the same for this article, which explores the third volume of The Adventures of Tintin. Midnightblueowl (talk) 11:11, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Comment:
 * In sentences with overuse of "Tintin", consider calling the comics just (in) America, Congo and Adventures.
 * ("The Little Twentieth") -- why both quotes and italics?
 * It's been the standard procedure with both Soviets and Congo beforehand. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:50, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * FYI you don't really need the references in the plot--it's clear that it is a summary of the comic.
 * I have included such references in the FA articles for both Soviets and Congo. I appreciate that it is not necessarily common practice in Wikipedia, but there is certainly nothing prohibiting it, and I have found that it prevents anonymous users coming along and dramatically expanding the synopsis sections with unnecessary trivia (which has been a problem on these Tintin articles). Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:01, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Any commentary etc on the TV episode?
 * Unfortunately I have been unable to locate any within the Tintinological literature. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:50, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
 * "Pursuing a gangster across the country, he encounters a tribe of Blackfoot Natives."--this is abrupt. You should expand it. And why highlight only the meeting with the Natives?
 * Agreed. Changed to "Pursuing a gangster across the country, he encounters a tribe of Blackfoot Natives before defeating the Chicago crime syndicate." Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:01, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Overlinking of common words--lynch mob, oil etc.
 * I'd agree with oil being de-linked, but I think that "lynch mob" would be an unusual enough concept to warrant linking. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:01, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Wouldn't the 1932 original comic be in the public domain? You should add more pics then.
 * Definitely not. European copyright law is not the same as American.  I ran into this when I uploaded some images from Frans Masereel's 25 Images of a Man's Passion, assuming they were public domain since they were published in 1918.  Turns out they'll be under copyright in Europe until 2044—death plus 70 years—so the imaes had to be deleted from Commons.  Hergé died in 1983, so that means copyright will last until 2053, at least in Europe. Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:50, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Long sentences: "Georges Remi—best known...", "Written in the context...", "The Lofficiers believed..."
 * "although during initial serialisation..." -- IMHO, this should be removed; the previous sentence is a much better end to the para (in a droll sort of way).
 * You should use File:Al Capone-around 1935.jpg. Mugshots are dull.
 * Done. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:01, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

These are minor quibbles for a very good article. I'll try to give it a copyedit and support in the coming week.—indopug (talk) 14:44, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Image review
 * Blackfoot caption shouldn't end in period
 * I've changed the caption, so that the year in which the photograph was taken is now near the start of the sentence. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * File:Acaponeh.jpg: source link is dead. Nikkimaria (talk) 17:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That image has been replaced by a different image of Al Capone. Midnightblueowl (talk) 13:10, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Comment As a fan of The Adventures of Tintin, I am pleased to see that somebody is paying attention to this kind of article. The article looks good -- it is well-researched and -written, the images check out, there are no dead links -- I've just spotted some minor niggles, however.
 * What was the year of publication for the front cover in the infobox?
 * "refuse to believe" -- replace with "reject''.
 * Done, Midnightblueowl (talk)
 * Link "Brussels", "wigwam" and "anti-American sentiment".
 * When Michael Farr referred to wigwams, he was wrong; actually it was the tipi featured in this story, so I've corrected that, and added the necessary links. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * You used "revolving around" in two successive sentences. Perhaps you could replace the first instance with "concerning".
 * I can only locate one instance of this in the text.... Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * That's because I murdered the poor thing ...;) Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:54, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Merci bien, Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * "There,...in the Congo." -- remove the superfluous "in the Congo".
 * Removed, Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
 * "The story was renamed" -- sorry, how does this work? Do you mean the story was renamed after Herge expanded the original Tintin in Chicago? --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 06:52, 20 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I've re-written that sentence in the hope of making it clearer to the reader: the text now reads "Part way through serialisation, as Tintin left Chicago and headed west, Hergé changed the title of the serial to Les Aventures de Tintin, reporter, en Amérique (The Adventures of Tintin, Reporter, in America)." Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:19, 26 October 2013 (UTC)

Support : This article is excellent. The prose is clear and vivid, and I can't find any copyediting problems (which is unusual in an article of this length). The sourcing is top-notch. All aspects have been fully covered, and the article is organized and balanced well. This is truly among the best Wikipedia has to offer. – Quadell (talk) 17:17, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Leaning Support. I don't mean to give mixed signals. This is still a very strong candidate, with very engaging prose. But the claim that the work has an anti-American or anti-capitalist slant should really be resolved with clear sources. (See below.) – Quadell (talk) 15:30, 7 November 2013 (UTC)


 * From this version:

Georges Remi—best known under the pen name Hergé—was employed as editor and illustrator of Le Petit Vingtième ("The Little Twentieth"), a children's supplement to Le XXe Siècle ("The 20th Century"), a staunchly Roman Catholic, conservative Belgian newspaper based in Hergé's native Brussels. Run by the Abbé Norbert Wallez, the paper described itself as a "Catholic Newspaper for Doctrine and Information" and disseminated a far-right, fascist viewpoint. According to Tintinologist Harry Thompson, such political ideas were common in Belgium at the time, and Hergé's milieu was permeated with conservative ideas revolving around "patriotism, Catholicism, strict morality, discipline, and naivety". In 1929, Hergé began The Adventures of Tintin comic for Le Petit Vingtième, revolving around the exploits of fictional Belgian reporter Tintin. I would not give the prose such a glowing review. I stopped after finding "revolving around" in consecutive sentences. Also, it seems we don't trust the reader to pick up on the conservative, staunchly Roman Catholic the first time round, so we say the same thing three or four different ways. I stopped there and suggest a prose audit. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 19:30, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * (Since the above comment is indented and has an edit summary of "disagree", I'm treating it as a reply to me.) I agree that using the phrase "revolving around" twice is less than ideal and should be changed. It's also possible that the description of the editorial slant would be improved by cutting redundancy... but to be honest, the lead's description of the work as both "conservative" and "anti-capitalist" was surprising to me, and I looked forward to having the paper's position clearly spelled out in this section. I would not recommend removing too much information in the name of brevity. On the whole, I stand by my assessment of the article. – Quadell (talk) 20:02, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd feel better about it if a competent copyeditor (such as you) went through the article thoroughly. The "disagree" edit summary was prompted more by 's review; since he is also a competent copyeditor, and mentioned that he would copyedit ten days ago, I was hoping he (or you) would.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:52, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Sounds great. At some point in the next few days, I will do the most thorough c/e I can do. – Quadell (talk) 21:15, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

As requested, a thorough copyedit follows. (I printed the article on Thursday and copyedited it, and by now over half of the issues I identified were already fixed by Curly Turkey on Friday. Thanks!)


 * The lead is a good summary of the article, but in says the series was "bolstered by publicity stunts", though only one publicity stunt is mentioned in the body. (Since the body only devotes two sentences to the stunt, and it's not explained in any detail, it might be best to leave it out. Alternately, it would be good to expand information on the stunt in the body.)
 * I've replaced the offending sentence with the subtly different "bolstered by a publicity stunt". Unfortunately, there is not enough published information available in the Anglophone Tintinological literature to expand on the information in the article's body. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:04, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * In the synopsis, I think you should say Tintin evades a "wildfire", not a "wild fire".
 * Done! Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:04, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * The background section is quite informative, and nearly all minor issues I found have already been resolved. But "shared these views, viewing" is still a bit awkward.
 * I have changed "views" to "opinions". Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:20, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * In "Research", consider the following sentence: "Hergé would also have been aware of American cinema, providing another influence on his depiction of the country, while cinematic imagery provided a key influence on his illustrations." This could use some clean-up. It's wordier than it needs to be, it duplicates key words, and it uses the subjunctive unnecessarily. Try something clear and direct, like "Hergé's depiction of the country was also influenced by American cinema, and many of his illustrations were based on cinematic imagery."
 * Replaced. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:09, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * In "Original publication", the text says "Tintin in America marked a diminished role for Snowy". It didn't just mark it. A better wording would be clearer. What would you think of this? "The dog Snowy was given a diminished role in Tintin in America, which contained the last instance..."
 * I've re-written this sentence as "The dog Snowy was given a diminished role in Tintin in America, which contained the last instance in the Adventures in which Tintin and Snowy have a conversation where they are able to understand each other." Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Also, this section contains the brief mention of the publicity stunt. It really isn't clear to me what happened here. Curly Turkey's minor rewording helped, but I would still recommend a further rewording, with more information added if possible. Consider this: "Wallez organised a publicity stunt to mark the culmination of Tintin in America, in which an actor portraying Tintin arrived in Brussels [and... something. Spoke to a crowd?] Similar stunts had been orchestrated to support the prior two Adventures, but this one proved the most popular yet."
 * The problem here lies in the original Anglophone sources; they don't really explain the scenario very well at all. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


 * One part is confusing to me. The "Later alterations" section begins "When the story was translated into English by Michael Turner and Leslie Lonsdale-Cooper", and it seems to imply that the second (1945) version was translated. It doesn't say so explicitly though, and doesn't mention a year of translation, so I can't be sure. It describes many differences made in the story. But the "social commentary was toned down" image clearly shows two separate panels, one before the changes of the second edition, and one after... and both are in English. I don't understand which (if either) is Turner and Lonsdale-Cooper's version.
 * The colour version was the first to be translated into English by Turner and Lonsdale-Cooper. Many years later, they also translated the original black-and-white copy. I will make this more explicit in the text of the article, Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:08, 31 October 2013 (UTC)


 * The phrase "believing it a retrograde step" isn't really clear or useful. I'd be inclined to omit.
 * Agreed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * In the critical analysis section, the word "remaining" seems like the wrong choice. If your third work is better than the first two, it might "prove to be" the greatest success in a long time, and/or it might "remain" your best work "for a long time", but it didn't "remain" the best "in" a long time.
 * Agreed, and I have replaced with "representing". Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:52, 29 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Finally, the article frequently refers to the newspaper (or comic or Hergé or Wallez) as being "anti-American" or critical of "American capitalism": in the lead, in "Background", in "Original publication", in "Later alterations and releases", and in "Critical analysis". But it isn't explained how the comic or newspaper is anti-American or anti-capitalist. Yes, there is one scene where "red Indians" are forced off their land by the U.S. army, but nothing in the "Synopsis" describes anything that clearly looks like a criticism of capitalism or America in general. Americans, after all, throw Tintin a "banquet in his honour" and later a "ticker-tape parade", and it's American factory workers who save his life. The article also describes the author as being fond of many aspects of U.S. culture, so I'm not sure where the anti-U.S. slant is supposed to lie. It's hard to see anything in the synopsis critical of capitalism itself (especially when one bears in mind that Hergé also wrote for a department store while this comic was being created). I think the article could better explain why the comic is considered "Anti-American" or "critical of American capitalism", and should explicitly and unambiguously source the claim, if it's going to be such a prevalent claim in the article.

All in all, I still feel the article is a great candidate with vivid and clear prose throughout, but these issues should be dealt with. – Quadell (talk) 14:02, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: If the sources don't contain much about the "publicity stunt", then there's not much you can do there. And although the translation situation is confusing to me, it's not an inaccuracy (so far as I can tell), so it's of lesser importance. The only remaining significant issue is the sourcing of the claim that the work is "anti-American" or critical of "American capitalism". – Quadell (talk) 14:57, 31 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Subsequent follow-up: After reading some of the sources for spot-checks (see below), I can see that the sources do indeed refer to Hergé as "anticapitalist" and describe his works' themes as including "rejection of materialism... and the almighty dollar". I do still wish the clause "Although Tintin in America and much of Hergé's earlier work displayed anti-American sentiment" had an explicit cite. Assouline p. 32 touches on it, but doesn't support the entire strong claim. Does Peeters (2012) p. 56 cover it? (I can't see that page.) – Quadell (talk) 15:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments, leaning oppose : This looks like a good piece of work generally, but there are quite a few issues for me. Just from the lead and first two sections, I've found quite a few things. None of them are major, but I would have hoped to find less so far into a nomination. Perhaps some of them are nit-picky, but there's something just not sitting right with me. In addition to the concerns of Quadell above, this is pushing me towards oppose at the moment; however, this is not set in stone, and I hope to switch to support. A very good piece of work, certainly, but I can't yet say that this represents our best work. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ”The story tells of young Belgian reporter Tintin and his fox terrier Snowy who travel to the United States”: This is something of a specialist one (and it’s all Tim Riley’s fault for pointing it out to me!) but “…of young Belgian reporter…” sounds like a tabloid report, and it would be better written as “…of the young Belgian reporter”. There are several similar examples.
 * I agree with you that including words like "of the..." sounds better, but when bringing the articles about the previous two Tintin stories up to FA, I encountered editors who wanted the prose stripped down to bare minimum, removing such words. So I feel like I'm in a limbo situation here. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Just because another article does this does not make it correct. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sarastro1: you're not seriously arguing that your personal preference here is "correct", are you? This is where Midnightblueowl feels in limbo: plenty of knowlegeable editors disagree on this point, and you're willing to take a hard line over a stylistic choice you disagree with. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:03, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm sure you aren't suggesting that I'm opposing on this one point. There are several unaddressed points here which are not stylistic choices, and they have not been touched (or even acknowledged by the nominator) in over a week. If these could be cleared up, maybe we could move forward. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:28, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm suggesting no such thing, otherwise I'd've responded to your oppose and not here. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:46, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ”Following Tintin in the Congo and bolstered by a publicity stunt”: I wonder if “publicity stunt” reaches the required level of formality for an encyclopaedia. But I can’t think of a better phrase.
 * I'm not sure I can either; in that case should we leave it as is ? Or does anyone else have any suggestions ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ”Following Tintin in the Congo and bolstered by a publicity stunt, Tintin in America was a commercial success, appearing in book form shortly after its conclusion”: I’ve a few little issues here.
 * “Following Tintin in the Congo…” Following what? It’s plot? It’s structure? It’s writing? It’s publication? It’s success?
 * Fair point, I meant its publication; I shall try to clarify this in the article's prose. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * “appearing in book form shortly after its conclusion” may be a little abrupt for anyone venturing here unaware of the publication history. A little re-working is needed here, so that it says something like “it appeared in book form shortly after the final instalment concluded”.
 * Excellent re-wording, done! Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:01, 13 November 2013 (UTC) 
 * ”and the series became a defining part of the Franco-Belgian comics tradition”: Do we mean the “series” of Tintin in America, or the Tintin series in general? If the latter, how is this relevant to the lead of this particular story? And how does a series become a defining part of a tradition? It might establish a tradition, or become part of a tradition, but I can’t quite accept “become part” of a tradition, or a “defining part”.
 * This refers to The Adventures of Tintin as a whole. In this instance, the wording is following on from the example set in our articles for Tintin in the Land of the Soviets and Tintin in the Congo, both of which have attained FA status. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Maybe so, but this really is not clear. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ”The story was adapted for a 1991 episode of the Ellipse/Nelvana animated series The Adventures of Tintin.”: Why is this important enough for the lead when other information is omitted?
 * I really think that this information is important enough for the lede. After all, the Ellipse/Nelvana series was very popular, and would have attracted more attention than the other adaptation mentioned in the text. Many of Wikipedia's readers probably came to the series through this particular cartoon series. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Does the lead cover the article to the extent required by WP:LEAD? For example, there is nothing from the critical analysis or adaptations sections.
 * But the lede does cover the adaptations section, by referring to the Ellipse/Nelvana cartoon adaptation ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:01, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't. Look at the Table of Contents. Where is the mention of "research" or "critical analysis" in the lead? Sarastro1 (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I think “Tintin” is overused in the plot section. Could a few of these be replaced with “he”?
 * ”He is kidnapped by gangsters and brought before mobster boss Al Capone”: Again, I think “the mobster boss” is less tabloidly.
 * ”After escaping, Tintin discovers a source of underground petroleum.”: Presumably on their land?
 * ”Tracing the kidnappers to a local mansion, Tintin hides in a suit of armour and frees Snowy from the dungeon.”: These three events almost seem unconnected. If we are not saying how he enters the mansion, gets into the dungeon and frees Snowy, I don’t see that we need to be told that he hides in armour.
 * ”Tintin is saved when the machine workers go on strike and then apprehends the mobsters.”: Who is apprehending? Tintin or the striking workers? Some ambiguity, which makes it read a little off.
 * The third paragraph of the plot seems to jump around an awful lot. Maybe that is just the way the story goes, but I wonder if it could be smoothed somewhat.
 * "Georges Remi—best known under the pen name Hergé": Should this be "better-known"? And it should have a hyphen whatever it is.
 * Whether "best" or "better" (in the end, both are correct), it should not be hyphenated: see Rule 5. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:54, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "According to Tintinologist": I really, really dislike "Tintinologist" in an encyclopaedia article. Why not the less informal "Tintin expert"? And Harry Thompson is less known as a Tintin expert than a television producer, so I wonder about that description of him, rather than a plain "writer".
 * I admit that the term "Tintinologist" comes across as a little humorous perhaps, but it is widely used in publications on the subject, both online and in print; for this reason it is certainly the correct term to be using on Wikipedia, far more so than "Tintin expert" which I don't think I've ever seen used in the specialist literature on Hergé and his work. Furthermore, I think that Thompson should indeed be referred to as a "Tintinologist" here, because in the context of this article, it is his work on Tintin that is relevant, rather than his work in television production. Again, this is another example where I would highlight our FA articles for Land in the Soviets and Congo, which both use "Tintinologist" and refer to Thompson as such. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Humorous maybe, but this is supposed to be an encyclopaedia, and this does not, in my mind, reach the required level of formality. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "such political ideas were common in Belgium at the time": We don't actually give a time here, so maybe we could date this first paragraph.
 * Good point, I have changed this to "1930s Belgium". Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:33, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "and Hergé's milieu was permeated with conservative ideas revolving around "patriotism, Catholicism, strict morality, discipline, and naivety": This is hardly far-right or fascist.
 * True, but the Belgian fascist movement, prominently represented by the Rexists, was firmly rooted in traditional Belgian conservatism, which was staunchly patriotic and Catholic. The same is true of various other far right nationalist movements in Europe at the time. Of course, it would be ridiculous (particularly in a contemporary European context) to claim that conservatives and fascists are the same thing, but in 1930s Belgium, those distinctions were not always so clear cut. What Harry Thompson is stating with this quote is that Hergé emerged from a thoroughly right-wing milieu, which was very much conservative and centred on patriotism and Catholicism, and which certainly verged into the realms of fascism on a regular basis. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "was interested in the connection between their traditional way of life and the Belgian Scouting tradition": This is stated as a fact, but what connection is this? It seems rather unlikely.
 * Hergé certainly perceived a connection between the two, and that is what is being referred to here. The Belgian Boy Scouts spent a lot of time outdoors, camping, and living a broader active lifestyle; they perceived – rightly or wrongly – that this was the sort of lifestyle lived by the Native Americans of North America. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * We now have "perceived similarities". Perceived by who? Sarastro1 (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * "Hergé had wanted to set Tintin's first adventure in the United States and highlight the plight of the Native Americans, whom he called "Red Indians". He had been fascinated with the indigenous communities of the American continent since boyhood and was interested in the connection between their traditional way of life and the Belgian Scouting tradition. However, Wallez ordered him to set his first adventure in the Soviet Union as anti-socialist propaganda for children (Tintin in the Land of the Soviets) and commanded that the second adventure be set in the Belgian Congo to encourage colonial sentiment (Tintin in the Congo).": Redundancy, a bit clunky, and goes all over the place. What about something tighter like: "Having been fascinated by Native Americans since boyhood, Hergé wanted to set Tintin's first adventure in the United States to highlight the plight of the people he called "Red Indians". However, Wallez ordered him to set his first adventure in the Soviet Union as a piece of anti-socialist propaganda for children, and the second had to be set in the Belgian Congo to encourage colonial settlement." Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 9 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've adopted some of your re-wording, but that mention of Scouting is important as it constitutes a major part of Hergé's worldview. Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:01, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Oppose: I'm not convinced by the limited changes made after my comments. Several of the replies refer to another FAC for justification, but that is not the article in question here, and just because another FA does things a certain way does not, to my mind, make it OK to do it in another. There are also several issues above which are unaddressed after over a week. Unfortunately, I feel I have to move to oppose as I do not think the problems have been sorted. And I still have not read beyond the plot section. Sarastro1 (talk) 18:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Notes
 * I haven't seen any activity here for a while, how are things looking re. your comments, Sarastro1?
 * Midnightblueowl, in the lead you say "In 1945, it was re-drawn and coloured..." -- I assume this refers specifically to Tintin in America but given the preceding info it could be read as meaning all the Adventures of Tintin to date, so suggest you clarify...
 * I've made a correction to the prose that deals with this issue. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:32, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Did I miss a dedicated source review above? If we haven't had one, pls list a request at the top of WT:FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:30, 18 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Source review
 * The sources are all formatted impeccably, both in the footnotes and in the bibliography. Spotchecks for footnotes 13, 14, 15, 20, 27, and 33 all show the sources fully support the claims made, and the material has been fully rewritten and synthesized to avoid even the faintest whiff of plagiarism. (Which is what I've come to expect from this nominator.) – Quadell (talk) 15:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Closing comment -- I'm afraid that with no consensus after a quite lengthy review, it's time to archive this. Thank you all for your participation, and I hope to see the article back here when outstanding points have been resolved. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:37, 20 November 2013 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 13:58, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.