Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Warren County, Indiana/archive2


 * 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 SandyGeorgia 04:07, 19 February 2011.

Warren County, Indiana

 * Nominator(s): Omnedon (talk) 18:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because it has gone through a recent peer review and I believe it is now ready to be considered for featured article status. The first nomination was done prematurely due to my own unfamiliarity with the process; the peer review resulted in many good suggestions which have been implemented. Omnedon (talk) 18:00, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

Sources comments:
 * Ref 1: Where does the linked source support the cited statement?
 * The original reference was the "GR|6" template which is commonly used on articles like this, but it's not specific enough, so there is now a reference to the "Find a County" page for Warren County.
 * The ref confirms the county seat and the foundation of the county in 1827 but does not mention the other facts in the cited sentence. However, these are trivial in nature and can be accpted as fact. Brianboulton (talk) 18:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ref 5: Again, the linked page does not provide the relevant information. It's a login page which requires a password. Is this a subscription service?
 * The "Indiana Township Association" site underwent an overhaul recently, and some of the pages I had used no longer work; actually this is a broader issue, because some of the pages that no longer exist have been cited in many township articles. I'll find a better and more specific reference to replace it, and will provide an update here when that's been done.  Update: The townships references have been fixed.
 * Ref 32: A page ref (p. 10) would be helpful - it's a large website. Also, the normal
 * Good point; I added the page number. Did the second part of your comment get lost?
 * Yes, and I've no idea now what it was! Brianboulton (talk) 18:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ref 35: Some misuse of cite web template evident here. "Purdue Extension-Warren County" should not be in the author field it is the publisher of this material, the authorship of which is unknown. It would be useful to give the publishing body its full name: Purdue University Cooperative Extension Service, as per 40. I notice other cases where your cite web formatting confuses author with publisher, e.g. 37, 38 etc
 * I believe those have been resolved.
 * Ref 56: Stick to the "Goodspeed 1883" format
 * Fixed.
 * Ref 87: Give the correct publisher name (St.Vincent Williamsport Hospital)
 * Fixed.
 * Refs 99, 100: Give the full publisher name ("Government of Indiana") rather than the IN.gov website name
 * Fixed.

Other than these points, sources generally look OK. Brianboulton (talk) 13:13, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe all but one of the issues has been resolved, and the last one is in progress. Thanks for finding these! Omnedon (talk) 14:15, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The last issue, involving townships, should now be resolved. Omnedon (talk) 14:57, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I apologise for the delay in making these strikes, but all sources issues are resolved now. Brianboulton (talk) 18:37, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Disambig/External Link check - no dabs or dead external links. -- Pres N  21:14, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Comment: I think that Timeline of Warren County, Indiana history could be merged into this article. Reywas92 Talk 22:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Disagree for a few reasons: articles shouldn't be too in depth (and the timeline, appropriately, is detailed), plus the key historical information is already present in the main article. Huwmanbeing  &#9728;  &#9733;  18:35, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Support Good feedback on sources and links; any other items? If not, I support FA. Huwmanbeing &#9728;  &#9733;  11:41, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Comments from NortyNort:
 * Geography


 * "Liberty Township has three unincorporated towns: Carbondale, Judyville and Kramer (near the site of the old Mudlavia Hotel). In the northeast corner of the county, Green Hill in Medina Township was the childhood home of former astronaut Donald E. Williams." Donald Williams is mentioned in Notable people, seems out place up in this section.


 * Government


 * "Each of the townships has a trustee who administers rural fire protection and ambulance service, provides poor relief, manages cemetery care, performs farm assessment, and so on." Suggest moving the "and" towards the end of the sentence and replace "and so on" with "among other duties".


 * Climate chart

and min. temperatures in °F
 * precipitation totals in inches
 * source: The Weather Channel
 * I believe the beginning of each note ("average", "precipitation", "source") should be capitalized.

Support This article's prose uses a lot of semi-colons which I didn't mind because I use them a lot as well. In a few instances, it may be difficult for some readers. Image copyrights look OK. Doesn't seem like the most exciting place in America but this article is a big improvement over the last FAC and aside from the comments above, I support it.--NortyNort (Holla) 05:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the input and support, NortyNort. Your first two comments have been addressed; both are good points.  The third relates to content that is controlled by the "climate chart" template, so I will check into that separately. Omnedon (talk) 05:58, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem! Great article. I saw you asked about the capitalization on the template talk page. I am not sure if I am right or the template effects the FAC in that way. It seems right based off of other infoboxes.--NortyNort (Holla) 09:19, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and tested it in the template's sandbox, and decided to be bold and made the change. If someone disagrees we can discuss it on the template's talk page and can put it back if necessary, but that seems unlikely.  I think it looks better now. Omnedon (talk) 14:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I think it looks much better anyway. Good luck with the FAC.--NortyNort (Holla) 03:08, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Support Comment  &mdash; While comprehensive, some small things I noted as being absent: By the way, that SVG map of Warren County is amazing. How did you do that? ​​​​​​ ​​ Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship
 * Warren County's representation in the federal and state governments (presumbably this would be relevant to the Government section)
 * the Köppen climate classification code (i.e. Dfa, Dfb). A source may also be needed for the climate classification.
 * Thanks very much for the input; those are good points. I've added a section about legislative districts and am working on the climate classification issue.  As for the map -- mapping is a hobby of mine, and a few years ago I developed some PHP MapScript code that uses freely-available mapping data (such as is supplied by the U. S. Census) to auto-generate maps of counties, township, populated places, et cetera, specifically for Wikipedia.  This county map was generated that way (though it typically requires some manual repositioning of labels to make them look good).  I'm willing to make others if people need them; there are samples on my userpage. Omnedon (talk) 20:22, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe the climate classification issue has now been addressed. Omnedon (talk) 20:48, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I found no other problems, though you may want to link "Indiana Senate" and "Indiana House" for us non-Hoosiers. Eventually, I might see if you can do a few maps for Pennsylvania, but for now I have no issues with changing to "support". ​​​​​​ ​​ Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 21:53, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I've linked those, which I should have done to start with. As for the maps, if you do need anything like that, just let me know.  Thanks.  Omnedon (talk) 23:32, 23 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, I forgot to mention this in my comments but nice map. You should be getting paid for that!--NortyNort (Holla) 02:09, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Comment Agree with Norty Nort regarding the map! I have a few things:
 * Lede:
 * Why is it particularly relevant when the final county was established? Virginia has been making counties and cities for 400 years and we still can't stop from changing stuff.
 * It's not especially relevant to this county; it is just there to establish context -- that this county was formed in 1827, whereas the last county was formed 30 years later. However, it's not vital. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC) I've removed this phrase. Omnedon (talk) 12:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "to the north and west". Perhaps better "in the northern and western parts"
 * Good point; I've changed that. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * HIstory:
 * "boundary between the Miami and Kickapoo tribes." I am uncomfortable with this term.  Perhaps phrase it in terms of the areas occupied by the tribes?
 * That is the term ("boundary") used by the source book from 1883, but I'll see what can be done with it. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "passed through Warren County on its way to and from Tippecanoe County." Perhaps "passed through what is now Warren County on its way to and from the battle site."
 * Yes, that's more clear; I've changed it. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * A mention of when Indiana achieved statehood may be helpful in clarifying the sequence of events.
 * That is now included, and it does help. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "The Potawatomi Trail of Death". I would move this term to the end of the paragraph and begin by explaining what happened.  It should finish with "came to be known as the Potawatomi Trail of Death".  As it is, I felt ambushed by a fairly "shocking" term without any preparation it was coming.
 * That's a valid point. In giving a brief summary of a county's history, it's hard to make each paragraph flow naturally into the next, but this was an important historical event that needed to be mentioned.  I'll try to improve on the presentation and preparation.  Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)   Update: this has been re-written. Omnedon (talk) 02:27, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Banks of the river: Perhaps better to relate it to the left or right bank of the river, rather than descriptors like Fountain County.
 * I've used "eastern" and "western", as "right" and "left" would be relative. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Conventionally, it is determined as you face downstream. Thus you have a Right Bank and a Left Bank in Paris.  What you have now is fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:25, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, well, I never did parlay-voo. I didn't know that about the right and left bank, so I've learned something. Omnedon (talk) 01:53, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * they in turn superseded the canal and made it possible for towns to conduct trade without direct access to water routes." Perhaps "they rendered canals obsolete and allowed trade to reach towns which lacked water connections."
 * That's an improvement, thanks. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "In 1869" "In 1872". Don't begin consecutive sentences the same way unless there's a good reason, which I don't see.
 * I generally try to avoid doing that, but somehow I didn't catch this one. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * " before being removed". The customary term when a railroad no longer runs is "abandoned", perhaps you meant to stress that they actually took up the rails.
 * Yes, in this case the rails were actually taken up, not simply abandoned. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * The description of the railroads running through Warren County seems very dry indeed. Can anything be done to make it more engaging?


 * "the county's population generally receded " Perhaps, "declined"?
 * You're right, that's a more applicable term; I've changed it. Omnedon (talk) 00:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Geography
 * Waterfall: Surely you are not going to make the reader click to find out how high it is?  And don't forget metric as well.
 * I've provided more detail there. Omnedon (talk) 00:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * When were Pike and Prairie formed? If you don't have that info, I suggest being less detailed about the others, you are not obliged to be so detailed in a summary style article.
 * This is something I had intended to get back to, very early in the development of this article, and somehow never did. I found those years. Omnedon (talk) 01:19, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "for one reason or another" Delete the phrase.
 * Good call. Sometimes one fails to see how a phrase doesn't add any useful content to a sentence until someone else points it out. Omnedon (talk) 00:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "a portion of the town extends across the state line " Do you mean an Indiana municipality has say on what goes on across the state line?  If you simply mean that the built up area continues into Illinois, then avoid using the word "town" there.
 * No, it's an Illinois town, but there was an unintended and misleading implication there, so I've fixed that. Omnedon (talk) 00:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * In the next paragraph, if any reduction of the number of times "town" and its forms can be used, I'd be very grateful. Also in the next.  If they aren't legally towns, consider "communities" "settlements", "villages" "hamlets".  I think you get the drift.
 * Good point. As I looked at it from this perspective -- yes, "town" was much overused.  I think you'll find this better now. Omnedon (talk) 02:10, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Climate.
 * Just as a thought, the description of the tornado in Hedrick could easily be transplanted either the History or Geography sections, and would liven up some rather dry material.
 * I agree that it could fit in one of those other sections; I considered doing that at the time, but felt that since this was also weather-related, it could add a bit more interest to a smaller section that seemed to need it. Does that make sense?  Omnedon (talk) 02:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, so leave it. Questions of thoughtful editorial judgment should not be disturbed at FAC.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Great Blizzard of 1978. If it just generally affected it, and you can't say anything specific about what happned locally that would be interesting to the reader, I would omit the reference to this.
 * I see your point. I've added a couple of details to that; does that help make it more relevant? Omnedon (talk) 02:43, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, quite good.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:13, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Transportation
 * "Construction on the new State Road 63 began in the late 1960s" If you mean its upgrading from (presumably) two lane status to four and rerouting, I would make that clearer to the reader.  I think that you put the information in the wrong order, but I'm not sure.
 * That's a good point; I've added more detail. Omnedon (talk) 00:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Economy
 * "has greater crop yields per acre than over 90% ..." As we Americans love superlatives, let us therefore Praise Warren County for being in the top ten percent of counties in Indiana in crop yields!
 * Well, I guess I don't see this as praise, or as a superlative. It's simply a statement of the productivity of the farmland and the importance of farming to the county.  However, I'd gladly rephrase it; I'm just not quite sure what to address.  Would you have a suggestion on how better to present this statistic? Omnedon (talk) 01:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I was being a bit cute. I would say that you should rephrase it as instead of better than 90 percent, say it is in the top ten percent as more natural to the reader.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:34, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, OK. :-) Now that you put it that way, that phrasing would be more matter-of-fact.  I'll re-phrase. Omnedon (talk) 01:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * "etc." rephrase to avoid. Etc. should be used only in the greatest extremity in formal writing.
 * I've done that. Omnedon (talk) 00:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Education
 * As state residency no doubt affects tuition, it might be wise to list the closest Indiana public community college and four-year school.
 * Purdue is mentioned and is in a neighboring Indiana county. I've restructured that paragraph a bit and added several nearby Ivy Tech Community College campuses. Omnedon (talk) 00:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Are the two libraries under a common authority?
 * No, I don't believe so; the Williamsport library has its own board, and I believe the West Lebanon one does as well (though it is smaller). (Yes, I've checked, and it has its own board too.) Omnedon (talk) 01:01, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Notable people
 * Could some rewrite in this section be done? I'm afraid it comes across as a bit disjointed and listy.
 * To some extent I think the section calls for a list of sorts. Not a bulleted list, of course; but I'm not sure how else that could be approached without making it more difficult to absorb.  There really isn't much connection to show among those people, except that they're all from the same county.  Some paragraphs could be expanded a bit, perhaps, to make them a bit more interesting. Omnedon (talk) 17:54, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Let's see if anyone else complains about it, if not let it be.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:28, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Government
 * "poor relief" Does this actually take place at this low level of government, or is this simply historical and today nominal?
 * In fact the trustee does literally provide poor relief. The trustee can help residents with power or heating bills, for example, and in some cases distributes "government cheese" to those that need it.  I'll see if I can say a bit more about this without going into too much detail. Omnedon (talk) 00:51, 1 February 2011 (UTC)


 * You might want to make clear whether the decennial reappartionment has taken place yet. Simply state which census the current apportionment is based on.
 * It's based on the 2000 census, so I've specified that. Omnedon (talk) 03:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Generally quite good, will look it over when these are considered.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for the thoughtful review; it's much appreciated. There are still a couple of points that require some more in-depth rewriting, but beyond those, I hope I've addressed your concerns.  This page will be updated when the remaining issues have been dealt with. Omnedon (talk) 13:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Comments:
 * I grew up in Indiana, so it was a pleasure to read about a county in the state. Thanks for taking the time to write about it. I've given the article a thorough copy edit, but since I'm not as knowledgeable about the county, you might want to take a look at my edits to see if anything was changed to something incorrect.
 * I don't think the clause "the 92nd and final county was established in 1859" really fits in the lede; it's good information, but I don't think that detail fits in an introduction.
 * Yes, Wehwalt suggested the same thing above. I've removed that. Omnedon (talk) 12:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * "founder William Harrison"; was this William Henry Harrison, and what was he the founder of? Was it the town?
 * He was the founder of the town, so I've specified that; it wasn't the famous William Henry Harrison, though. Omnedon (talk) 12:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * For the courthouse costs and other prices, a modern inflation equivalent would be nice; it'd put them in context.
 * I'm not quite sure how to come up with those. There is a template for inflation, but it specifically says that it is "incapable of inflating Capital expenses, government expenses, ..."  There are so many factors that affect this, especially considering the different way in which people lived in, say, 1830; and I would think it would become more and more subjective as one pushed farther into the past.  Any thoughts? Omnedon (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * You may wish to consult with User:Fifelfoo, who I know has strong views on the subject.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've contacted him via his talk page. Omnedon (talk) 14:46, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * With help from Fifelfoo, I have now added modern equivalent costs for the courthouses. Omnedon (talk) 16:27, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Is there a stub that could be wikilinked to "side-cuts"?
 * There doesn't seem to be an article that deals with this, yet a Google search turns up many uses of the term in connection with canals. Williamsport was called "Side-Cut City" early in its history because of this connection with the canal.  I guess the problem is that canals like this are such a thing of the past... Omnedon (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * What is a "coal branch" railroad?
 * I've clarified that. It was built specifically to carry coal. Omnedon (talk) 12:29, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * In the history section, I'd be interested in seeing some information on the growth of manufacturing in the county. The economy section lists some factories; when were they built?
 * I'll see what I can find. The problem there might be the ability to cite sources that specify these details, since county history compilations are few and far between, and since these local companies are unlikely to have produced anything I can cite. Omnedon (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * "along the state line here" ... should that be "along the state line near the town"?
 * I've re-written that, as the road is also a street within the combined community. Omnedon (talk) 12:57, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Should it be "former Olin" factory/facility/building?
 * Good point. I've said "former Olin factory complex, as there are multiple buildings. Omnedon (talk) 12:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * When talking about the colleges and universities, I'd suggest limiting yourself to only neighboring counties. I'm not sure which in that list meet in that criteria.
 * Purdue is in a neighboring county, as is DACC. The University of Illinois is not, but it's less than an hour from some parts of the county and is very well known, so I felt it was significant enough to mention.  As for Ivy Tech, it was suggested that community colleges should be mentioned; but only one campus is in a neighboring county, so I've removed the other two. Omnedon (talk) 12:39, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * In the media section, what radio/TV stations does the county receive? Is it within the Indianapolis or Chicago markets, or something else? Are there any AM radio stations serving the area?
 * There is now a paragraph on radio and TV stations and the market area. Omnedon (talk) 15:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That's about it from me. It's a pretty clean article, and feel free to send me a message if you have any questions, comments or concerns about what I've written. JKBrooks85 (talk) 12:02, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much for the detailed comments, and for the copyedit which tightened up the language considerably. Regarding the latter, I've made just three very minor changes which are detailed in the article's history.  I hope I've addressed your concerns here; if you have any other suggestions or aren't satisfied with what I've done so far, just let me know.  Omnedon (talk) 13:22, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Support concerns satisfactorily addressed.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:52, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Support — The issues I raised have been addressed or are being addressed. I think the article is comprehensive, flows well, and is readable to English speakers of moderate skill. To improve readability, I suggest introducing second-order headers in the history and geography sections, but this suggestion is minor. I don't see any reason why this article should not be an FA. JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:16, 1 February 2011 (UTC)
 * We used to have those second-level section headers, but during a peer review it was suggested that they be removed and allow the prose to flow from one paragraph to the next. I can see benefits both ways, and it's a bit of a judgment call. Omnedon (talk) 16:43, 2 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Oppose as yet. I still think it needs a bit of sifting through. I'm not opposing now. The prose is not wonderful. Here are a few examples from the lead. I haven't gone through the rest, but someone else needs to copy-edit it with a little distance from the original writing.
 * It has several thorough copyedits from several uninvolved editors, both as part of a previous peer review and as part of the process here. In some cases, editors may disagree as to what's best, and you'll find examples of this in my responses below; but I think it has been improved by all of those copyedits.  I believe I've promptly responded to every issue that has been raised so far; if you feel there are further issues I'll gladly do my best to resolve them. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 1) Circular rep at the opening: "Warren County is a county". You can link "county" in the third sentence.
 * 2) *I've done that, and it is an improvement. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 3) A county "holds" people? Sounds like a jail.
 * 4) *This was part of a large copyedit done by another reviewer above. The original phrasing was "the population was 8,419". What would you suggest? Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC) I've changed this to "the county was home to" instead of "the county held". Omnedon (talk) 22:21, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 5) 8.9 /km2—no gap.
 * 6) *This is produced by the "convert" template, so if there is an issue then it is with the template, which I can check into; I've queried this at the template's talk page. I've used that template throughout the article to ensure consistency. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 7) **I've tried a work-around using the nowrap template and entering the data by hand rather than relying in this case on convert. I think it looks better. Finetooth (talk) 00:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 8) "The county has four incorporated towns with a total population of about 3,000 and also has many small unincorporated communities." That means about 3,000 total in four towns (av. 750 per town)? OK. But try ellipsis, too: "The county has four incorporated towns with a total population of about 3,000, and many small unincorporated communities."
 * 9) *It does mean 3,000 total in four towns, but does not mean an average of 750 per town; the towns are of varying sizes. I've added a comma there as you suggested. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 10) **It surely does mean an average of 750: 3000 divided by four. An average doesn't mean all four have exactly 750, of course. This would not go into the text, but I just wanted to ensure that you're aware of what average means! Tony   (talk)  09:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 11) "It is divided into twelve townships which provide local services to the residents." I think MOSNUM recommends 12 (> one digit). "It" could refer to "a total population" or "the county": which? Comma is better. Possibly "Warren County covers/includes 12 townships, which provide local services." Who else would they provide local services to? New Yorkers?
 * 12) *I've clarified "county" and changed to 12. I'm not sure I agree that the comma improves this, though; in this case I feel the comma breaks the flow of the sentence unnecessarily. It doesn't really "cover 12 townships", since the townships are political subdivisions of the county, hence the term "divided into"; does that make sense?  I have removed the word "local", though, as you're right that this would be assumed. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC) In re-reviewing, I've changed to "local services" without mentioning "residents" per your comment. Omnedon (talk) 13:16, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 13) New para: "Much of its land is given over to agriculture, especially on the open prairie in the northern and western parts; the county's farmland is among the most productive in the state." Better not to use a pronoun to back-refer across a para break. Why not: "Much of the land in the county is given over to agriculture, especially on the open prairie in the northern and western parts, where the farmland is among the most productive in the state." (Maybe my change of meaning is not desirable ... now the rich farmland is on the prairies only.)
 * 14) *Again, a previous copyedit above changed this from "Much of the land" to "Much of its land". I've moved to "Much of the land in the county" as you suggest, which I do feel is clearer.  And it's true that not all of the good farmland is in the northern and western parts, hence the separation of the two statements. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 15) "the three elementary schools and one high school provide both education and employment." Remove "the". I think the back-connection is a little forced. Why not finish the lead on "in the county"?
 * 16) *The school sentence may not be vital, but I included them as part of an effort to summarize the article in the lead. I've removed "the" as you suggested, though. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 17) **Struck me as not flowing well ... a bit forced, as though you arbitrarily chose a couple of details to include. There are schools in every county: is it worth highlighting? And don't schools always "provide both education and employment"? Bit lame, that's all. Like saying there's a railway station "that provides public transport". Tony   (talk)  09:21, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 18) ***In looking at this further, I've gone ahead and removed that phase, and "education" is now simply listed along with the other general job categories like "manufacturing". Omnedon (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 19) "many of the Miami"—many members of? Tony   (talk)  07:41, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * 20) *I've changed this to the shorter "many Miami", which would be similar to "many Indians" or "many New Yorkers", but I'm open to your suggestion as well. Omnedon (talk) 13:13, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Generally good tweaks, which I see have been applied. I've read through subsequent sections and identified/applied several other small adjustments, mostly punctuation, minor improvements to sentence structure, etc.  Looks good. Huwmanbeing  &#9728;  &#9733;  21:17, 5 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Some really good images, detail-rich. Why not boost their size? Like the first two? See if you like it now. Maybe the map is too in-your-face now, but if you return to smaller left-side formatting, could it be at least 260px? It's quite a hoot to have an old map of a county like that, usable in one of our articles. Could the caption give a little more information? On the other hand, a few images are a bit lame: the corner shot in Pine Village, and the railroad crossing sign. Oh well, I guess if there's nothing else. The corner shot is a little small. You like left-side images? They're ok where there's no clutter factor, as here. Do experiment with wider and narrower windows in preview mode to see the effects, if you're dealing with a more crowded image environment in the future. Galleries not a favourite of mine, but it's not a deal-breaker: why not put thumbnails down the right side of "Notable people"?


 * Agree the historical map's a very nice element, though in its enlarged state it seems intrusive. I'd suggest reducing it down somewhat and allowing the text to flow around it. Galleries aren't ideal but I think are preferable here; inline with short paragraphs the images lead to irregular white spaces and breaks. Huwmanbeing &#9728;  &#9733;  14:53, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've adjusted some image sizes; the 1877 map caption has been adjusted, and I've decreased the size, but it's larger than it was originally. Omnedon (talk) 16:09, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I experimented with this some more, and in fact I think having the notable people images down the right side does work, so I've gone with that -- no more gallery. Omnedon (talk) 02:21, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

One of the drawbacks in US geographical articles is the prefabrication: it's all very formulaic. Trust me, I've gnomed plenty of them, and there are thousands upon thousands. I get sick of seeing all of the races/nationalities linked, for example, and they all go to the same target article (what does this mean: "0.44% of the population were Hispanic or Latino of any race"); and "population density" linked? Often "poverty", and "marriage" (I see that is linked here: why????). A featured article can serve to break this mould.
 * The census reference for the "Hispanic or Latino" statement provides a combined total for Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban and "other Hispanic or Latino"; it then provides a breakdown for each. However, in this article it may make sense just to omit "of any race", since the breakdown isn't specified.  On the more general point, I agree that these sections are formulaic; a consistent presentation isn't bad in itself, but I believe the demographics sections were autogenerated years ago and the unmodified versions do have issues.  That section in this article has been fixed up some in recent months, but I'll see what other improvements can be made. Omnedon (talk) 16:50, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there are three disadvantages to the formula: (1) it doesn't account for local conditions, or at least discourages editors from thinking about how article structure best suits them; (2) it virally duplicates bad habits; and (3) it packages information in a standardised way that WP has been criticised for. However, this is a good model for how to use the formula well. Tony   (talk)  13:30, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

4 year old ... best spelled out, says MoS, unless two or more digits or at the start of a sentence. U. S. ... if you must dot it (Chicago MoS says not to, now), it certainly can't be spaced. "sheriff, coroner, auditor, treasurer, recorder, surveyor and circuit court clerk"—which of these really needs to be linked? Perhaps "recorder" (is that "archivist"?), and "circuit court judge"; but not the others, I think.
 * I've changed "4" to "four". In "Notable people" I changed "U. S." to "United States".  I left "U.S. Route" for now, as that seems to be standard practice; do you have an opinion on that particular usage? Omnedon (talk) 13:42, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * As for the county position links -- I understand that plain English words don't normally need linking, but these are the names of positions which might not be clear to some readers (as in "recorder"). I guess I don't quite see the objection to those links, but I'm certainly willing to discuss.  (The recorder deals with public records with a primary focus on real estate deeds.) Omnedon (talk) 17:09, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The temperature graph has no metric units. BTW, how can the usual table for temperatures be fixed so that the metric equivalents, when minus temperatures, are rendered with a proper minus sign and not a hyphen?
 * I'm checking into the "negative" issue at Template talk:Climate chart. When you say the graph has no metric units, what do you mean?  It does specify degrees Celsius at the bottom, as well as millimeters of precipitation...  But perhaps I'm missing something here. Omnedon (talk) 14:44, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you please help to discourage these viral habits in town and county articles? Tony  (talk)  08:55, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe all your points above have been addressed, but if I have missed something, or you have further thoughts, please let me know. Thanks! Omnedon (talk) 19:16, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Climate chart: I didn't notice the metric button at the bottom: it's good!
 * Race: it all makes me uncomfortable. The POV, inevitably, is that race counts. Race is not usually explicated in settlement articles in other countries. I raised the matter at WikiProject US, but nothing came out of it. Tony   (talk)  13:30, 17 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I see what you mean. Actually, the more I look at the "Demographics" section, the more I wonder if the whole section could just be discarded.  The population and density are mentioned and cited in the lead, and the historical population table is of some interest, but I wonder how much of the rest is really useful here; and it's all available from the census website.  However, I would not want to make the article less comprehensive... Omnedon (talk) 14:36, 17 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Support, it's a good read overall. One small thing stood out at me. You mention two specific weather events, but don't mention the broad weather patterns in the county. Also, there is no mention of flooding ever. IDK, it's just because I'm a weather geek, but it's something I noticed. Overall elsewhere, it was good. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 16:17, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much. I'll see what other information I can find about weather.  When you refer to broad weather patterns, and since you are especially interested in weather, what sort of thing did you have in mind?  I do talk about the Köppen climate classification code, but perhaps that's not enough detail.  Certainly the Wabash River does flood at times, but I don't believe there has ever been a massive, damaging flood such as one hears about in some parts of the country; for one thing, most of the lower-lying areas on either side of the river are simply fields and people expect them to be flooded at times.  Also, it's not a heavily-populated area.  However, if I can find information about historical Wabash water levels, I'll try to include that.  Omnedon (talk) 18:56, 8 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Needs checking for accuracy of sourcing. I did one random spot check. Ref 116 does not support the text it follows. The government page linked to that source supports some of the text, but not completely: I don't see "farm assessment" listed anywhere and "provide insulin to the poor" seems different from general "poor relief". -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  21:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That is actually supported by reference number 6, which is cited in the lead statement about townships; but somehow that reference was not applied in the "government" section (which I've fixed). That reference states, "The township trustee, as administrator of that assistance, is responsible for the oversight and care of all poor individuals in the township as long as the individuals remain in the trustee’s charge."  Does that help? Omnedon (talk) 22:56, 8 February 2011 (UTC) I discovered that the trustee's duties involving assessment was just recently transferred to the county assessor, so I have updated that. Omnedon (talk) 23:06, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've just gone down the whole list of references again to see if there were any other issues like this. In this case the reference was present in the article but due to my error it was not included in both places as it should have been; sorry about that.  BrianBoulton did a sources review above, but if you find any other issues with this I'll certainly do my best to resolve them speedily. Omnedon (talk) 04:28, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Great, thanks! While Brian does check for reliability and formatting of sources, his checks generally do not include more in-depth examination of accuracy, representation, and so on. Since I found an issue on the first try, it generally means a couple other spot checks are needed by an independent reviewer. I don't doubt that everything is grand, but mistakes do happen as evidenced above. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  04:57, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess it was both good and bad luck -- good that you found the issue so it could be fixed, but unfortunate that the that the first reference you happened to check had an issue! I believe this was an isolated problem, but as you say, mistakes can be made and perhaps an uninvolved editor will find something I missed.  If other issues are identified I'm confident they can be resolved quickly.  Omnedon (talk) 15:34, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've gone through the references and found no issues. Since I've contributed to the article, though, I can't be considered an entirely independent reviewer, so would someone else also be willing to do a spot-check?  Huwmanbeing  &#9728;  &#9733;  02:09, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm sure what you've done will suffice. Thanks! -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  02:17, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Image review? Spaced WP:EMDASHes throughout-- more review needed.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 19:47, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I found three occurrences of spaced em-dashes, and fixed them. Omnedon (talk) 20:44, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Cool, I see the dashes are corrected. Sandy, is there something further you had in mind that needs to be checked?  There have been a number of previous detailed reviews conducted, but if there are any areas that haven't been considered, please let us know.  Thanks,  Huwmanbeing  &#9728;  &#9733;  02:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Image review concerns as follow:
 * File:Warren County, Indiana map from 1877 atlas.png. File:Courthouse in Warren County, Indiana from 1877 atlas.png: page numbers of where these images are located within the Atlas?
 * Specified. Omnedon (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * File:Map of Warren County, Indiana.svg: "using freely-available shape data and custom-written MapScript applications"&mdash;which are the "freely-available shape data" (best to list them out)?
 * Specified. This is included as a matter of course in maps I create now; but this was one of my earlier efforts and I had not included the link to the relevant Census TIGER page for some reason. Omnedon (talk) 13:58, 13 February 2011 (UTC) Since the 2010 TIGER data is now available for Indiana, I've made a new version of this map with that data and have specified that source. Omnedon (talk) 15:27, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * File:GeorgeDWagner.jpg: What is CDV? Where comes the provenance (date, authorship, publishing) for the photograph?  If this was a private (family) photograph that was first published (made avaialble to the public) only in 1923–2002, then it could still be copyrighted.  Struck with removal of item.  Jappalang (talk) 01:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * File:Vernon L Burge, portrait.jpg: Stated on the caption p. 25 "Courtesy of the Air Force Enlisted Heritage Research Institute". "Courtesy of" does not mean the provider is the creator (it just means the item is in their possession).  The Institute collects items and although most are likely air force works, there is no guarantee all their exhibits are government creations; the Glenn Miller photograph they show is likely part of a commercial series of shots taken in 1934 and copyrighted.  It would be best to clarify the authorship and copyright status of this photograph of Burge.  Struck with removal of item.  Jappalang (talk) 01:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * -- Jappalang (talk) 12:13, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The Wagner and Burge images already existed at Commons and were already used in their respective articles, and the licensing specified by the uploaders seemed valid, so I certainly did not expect any objections; given the age of the photographs I had no reason to question what they specified. However, presently I have no way of checking these issues or answering your questions, and having no replacements available, I have simply removed those two images from this article. Omnedon (talk) 14:11, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
 * No issues with images with the above resolutions. Jappalang (talk) 01:32, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * If the desire is there for a public domain portrait of Burge, might I recommend File:Vernon Lee Burge in 1913.jpg? Jappalang (talk) 02:13, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
 * That's great -- thank you. I was unaware of that one; assuming it is in order, I'll go ahead and use it. Omnedon (talk) 02:15, 14 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Work still needed. On spot checks, still finding problems with WP:HYPHEN, WP:DASH, WP:NBSP, etc. Please get an MoS nerd to go through the whole thing with attention to detail in mind. Examples I didn't fix:
 * "World War II" probably needs a nbsp before "II"
 * "similarly-named"
 * "junior-senior school"
 * Inconsistent non-breaking spaces in "n million" statements
 * There are likely more. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  19:13, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I was not aware of the fourth bullet in point number 3 at WP:MOS; I found and fixed two other occurrences of this. I am scouring it again with issues like this in mind, and will resolve the ones you have identified too.  Thanks. Omnedon (talk) 19:14, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * The issues you identified have been resolved. Andy, do you have a suggestion on finding someone to do a check on this? Omnedon (talk) 19:20, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I've asked Finetooth, who did a peer review on this article late last year, about doing an MOS check. If that doesn't work out, I'd appreciate any suggestions on getting assistance; I understand that you would need someone else to check for these.  I believe I have a good grasp of the MOS, but I haven't internalized all the fine points yet (though I'm learning all the time, largely because of the process right here).  I don't believe there can be much left at this point, but it is certainly possible that there are a few more things to fix.  Thanks. Omnedon (talk) 19:41, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * If you ever internalize all the fine points, let me know your trick. :) Anyone who's worked around peer review or FAC for an appreciable amount of time can probably check. This is the fit and finish stuff that normally comes last—not much point in the fine folks at peer review going over it with a monocle for MoS stuff if you might make larger changes to the prose. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  19:45, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks, Andy, and what you say about peer review makes sense; I only asked Finetooth because of the former association, but perhaps it would be best just to make a general request for assistance at the FAC talk page. I'll see what works out.  Omnedon (talk) 20:00, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


 * I went through and checked spaces, dashes and hyphens. Probably missed a few, but it looks mostly ok (to me) now. Sasata (talk) 21:31, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, I didn't change any, but print-based documents (such as PDFs) don't require retrieval dates. Sasata (talk) 21:33, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your time and expertise, and for making those fixes -- and so quickly! I'll check those retrieval dates. Omnedon (talk) 21:34, 15 February 2011 (UTC)


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