Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William McKinley/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 promoted by Ucucha 16:09, 28 March 2012.

William McKinley

 * Co-nominators: Coemgenus and Wehwalt 23:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Wehwalt and I have done a complete rewrite of this article, along with some assistance from Rjensen and Cmguy777. After a thorough and helpful peer review, we think it's ready for featured status. --Coemgenus (talk) 23:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Coemgenus. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Since it's a co-nomination, I'm not sure I can submit it for WikiCup, even if I wanted to. --Coemgenus (talk) 00:08, 17 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I will not be submitting this to Wikicup. --Coemgenus (talk) 17:58, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Support: (subject to image and sources verifications). I carried out a detailed peer review of this truly impressive article. It is long but not, I believe, unreasonably so, after some 2000 words were pruned during the run-up to this FAC. In terms of the FA criteria it meets all requirementa: deeply researched, elegantly written, fully comprehensive and professionally presented. If you do nothing else, listen to the soundfile and hear McKinley – the real McKinley – speaking in 1896. And you might also be thankful that Supreme Court judges are nowadays appointed on the basis of slightly sounder legal credentials (assuming of course that they are). Brianboulton (talk) 12:17, 17 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Will try to do a full review, the first few sections look ok, just a couple missing commas. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, looks very well written so far, just a couple questions and a comment for now.
 * You mention that he voted for Lincoln and then ran for County Attorney as a republican, do we know why he was a Republican at that time?
 * It mentions earlier that his family was abolitionist, and that McKinley served in the Union Army -- both strongly correlated with being a Republican in those days. --Coemgenus (talk) 10:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that does make sense. Mark Arsten (talk) 17:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "The case raised McKinley's standing among laborers, a crucial part of the Stark County electorate" Did labor typically vote Democrat at that time?
 * Not terribly. Voting blocs were more ethnic than occupation based prior to 1896.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Interesting, didn't realize that. Mark Arsten (talk) 01:18, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Certainly the rich and well-off professionals favored the Republicans. However, in the working classes, ethnicity was a major factor.  I would talk to Rjensen if you are interested, he knows more about it than me.--Wehwalt (talk) 01:36, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "the McKinley Tariff of 1890, which though heavily amended in the Senate, imposed a number of protective tariffs" It may just be me, but the "which though" part sounds a bit odd. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:17, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll play with it. The point was, McKinley's careful tariff schedules were altered through the influence of special interests in the Senate.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Revised version looks good. Mark Arsten (talk) 22:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Mos quibble: in the Gerrymandering and defeat for re-election section Gerrymandering is linked within a quote.
 * "Among the possible candidates spoken of were McKinley, Reed, and the aging." I think a name might be left out here.
 * "Hanna established an unofficial McKinley headquarters near the convention hall, though no active effort was made to covert delegates to McKinley's cause." Is "covert" being used correctly here? Mark Arsten (talk) 22:42, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Should be convert. Slipped through all this way!--Wehwalt (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Prose quibble: in the third paragraph of the Governor of Ohio section you start consecutive sentences with "Although...".
 * Perhaps consider blocking the quote by Stanley Jones in the Obtaining the nomination section.
 * "Thousands of partisans came from Canton and surrounding towns that evening to hear McKinley speak from his front porch." Wow, must have had a large front yard!
 * He did, but he gave several speeches. I'm sure they blocked off North Market Street to carriages.  Hopefully none of his neighbors were Democrats!  They would have had a hard summer.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "The issue bitterly divided the Democratic Party; President Cleveland firmly supported the gold standard; but an increasing number of rural Democrats wanted silver, especially in the South and West." Just checking, but the double semi is ok, right?
 * "I have to think when I speak" Again, just checking, but do we usually note that the italics are in the original?
 * Might be worth putting in a hidden comment. I'll correct the other things.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "On November 3, 1896, the voters had their say in most of the nation." Did some states vote on different days then?
 * Yes, Maine, Vermont, and Florida. Maine and Vermont are mentioned.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Ah yes, silly me. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:12, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * I added some more commas, hopefully not too many. Mark Arsten (talk) 23:16, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your work so far. I think we're caught up.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:51, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Ok, back again--this is a long article.
 * "The wealthy Vice President leased a residence close to the White House" Was there a Vice President's residence at that time?
 * No, not until 1974. --Coemgenus (talk) 00:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "The outbreak of war also led to change of McKinley's cabinet..." Sounds a bit awkward to me.
 * "with some members favoring annexation" Might want to rephrase here.
 * "and the cause gained momentum as the United States embroiled in war with Spain." Is there a word left out here?
 * I fixed these three, I think. --Coemgenus (talk) 00:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * MOS quibble: quote in wikilink at end of "Peace and territorial gain" section.
 * I'm not sure what you mean here. --Coemgenus (talk) 00:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * lol, I mixed that up. I mean that manifest destiny is linked inside a quotation near the end of the section, the MOS recommends against it. It's frequently done though. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Oh, I see. I never knew that was a problem.  I can take it out, I guess, but it's a useful link to non-U.S. readers who might not have heard the term.  Not a big deal, though, I'll de-link if you think it's important.  --Coemgenus (talk) 01:43, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "Along with his Supreme Court appointment, McKinley appointed six judges to the United States Courts of Appeals, and 28 judges to the United States district courts." Were any of them particularly notable/controversial?
 * As far as his biographers have written, no, I don't think so -- unless Wehwalt noticed anything in his research. --Coemgenus (talk) 00:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Coemgenus, it might be worth mentioning Day's appointment as a circuit court judge after leaving the post of Secy of State.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:47, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "McKinley appointmented several black postmasters" typo? Mark Arsten (talk) 00:12, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Fixed. I read that half a dozen times and never saw it! --Coemgenus (talk) 00:24, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, easy to overlook things like that. I really respect you guys for working on such a long article. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:46, 23 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "Bryan's campaigning failed to excite the voters as it had in 1896, and McKinley never doubted that he would be re-elected." Pardon my ignorance, but was there public opinion polling back then? Or was popularity gauged by crowd size, etc.?
 * There was some sort of polling. I recall a mention of Hanna measuring public opinion in Iowa in August 1896 and being afraid McKinley might lose the election, and doing it again in October and being reassured.  McKinley always, even as president, kept his ear close to the ground and I think it was more his calculations as a politician than any sampling.  Certainly, polling wasn't done outside an actual campaign.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "Although McKinley enjoyed meeting the public, Cortelyou was concerned with his security" Do we know why Cortelyou was concerned?
 * Basically the anarchist threat.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:53, 24 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "These officials included Cortelyou, who served in three Cabinet positions under Roosevelt, Dawes, who became vice president under Coolidge, William Howard Taft, who succeeded Roosevelt as president, and Day, who was elevated to the Supreme Court by Roosevelt and remained there almost twenty years." Not a vital issue, but I'd suggest replacing commas 2, 4, and 6 with semicolons.
 * "The decision in 1898–1899 to annex these lands also involved issues of race, with many Democrats and some Republicans reluctant to see more non-whites incorporated into the United States; this has affected studies of McKinley's decision ever since." I might just be unusually dense today, but I don't really follow what this sentence is saying.
 * Is the endash in the last picture caption intentional?
 * Alright, that's all I see, sorry for taking so long to finish the review. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:31, 24 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've addressed the things you've asked for, one way or another. Thanks for undertaking such a long review.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:04, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Sources and images - spotchecks not done. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Alright, all the fixes look good to me, I'm more than willing to Support this outstanding article. Mark Arsten (talk) 00:55, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * No direct citations to Croly 1912, though there is an in-text attribution to him
 * Correct. I've removed the citation.  Croly is quoted in Horner; it was in the reference section because at one time we had some material dealing with Hanna's actions after McKinley was shot, but that was removed in cutting the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:40, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Be consistent in whether states are abbreviated or not
 * Publisher for Jensen?
 * Be consistent in when state names are included
 * Location for McKinley publication?
 * Retrieval dates aren't required for Google Books links, but if you're going to include them you should do so consistently
 * Kent State University Press or The Kent State University Press?
 * Check page notation for Semonche
 * be consistent in whether you provide publishers and locations for journals
 * Why the "+" in Klinghard page notation?
 * Can we avoid the repetition of "seen" in the Blaine cartoon caption?
 * I have fixed all from here up; Coemgenus will do the files.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * File:William_McKinley_campaign_speech_1896.ogg: source link returns 404 error
 * I've updated the link.


 * File:William_McKinley_1897_inauguration.ogg needs US PD tag, as does File:General_Hayes.jpg and File:Standard_of_the_Governor_of_Ohio.svg/File:Seal_of_Ohio.svg/File:Seal_of_Ohio.png
 * Where is the Seal of Ohio? I couldn't find it.  The rest are now marked PD-US.
 * Maybe she is talking about the flag of Ohio in one of the navboxes at the foot of the article? As it was adopted shortly after McKinley's death, it's PD-US on the grounds of pre-1923 display.  I can source that to McElroy if there's a need.--Wehwalt (talk) 09:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


 * File:The_Administration's_Promises_Have_Been_Kept.jpg: any more specific source info available?
 * I've found an independent source, establishing pre-1923 publication and added it to the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:16, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


 * File:McKinley_Grave.JPG: if monument was from 1907, what does 1938 date refer to?
 * That was my fault. I was working on the licensing of several of the images, and that got carried over from the stamp.  Carelessness.  It's been corrected.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:00, 20 March 2012 (UTC)


 * File:Official_White_House_portrait_of_William_McKinley.jpg: source? Is this a photo of the portrait, taken from a book or website?
 * Don't know, but I sourced it to the White House Historical Assn. website.
 * I don't know where the photo came from, but the painting was in a book as early as 1901, and sources concerning the painter, August Benziger, who unaccountably lacks a Wikipedia article, say he painted it as part of a two-painting commission given by Vice President Hobart in 1897. So it's PD by virtue of pre-1923 display and publication, and I've adjusted the matter accordingly.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * It seems the official portraits used to be on the White House website, but they recently changed their layout. Now they're at the WHHHA website, but the files on Wiki still link to the old site.  --Coemgenus (talk) 10:03, 22 March 2012 (UTC)


 * File:Philippines_flag_original.png is sourced to itself. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * As I understand it, the .png is sourced to the .svg, which is an original creation of User:Seav, which he released into the public domain. I've adjusted the tags to make this more clear. --Coemgenus (talk) 10:05, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
 * ✄ ✄ ✄ — Alarbus (talk) 11:23, 21 March 2012 (UTC)


 * Small comment Could the lead sentence "McKinley's presidency began a period of over a third of a century dominated by the Republican Party, but ended with his assassination in September 1901." be reworded? I know what it is intended to mean, but on first glance (to me) it reads like this is saying the 1/3 century period of Republican control ended with his assassination. Staxringold talkcontribs 13:14, 20 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I've juggled the sentence a bit.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:22, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Support - The most interesting 1hr 47 minutes of my day. A well written peice and one to be proud of. -- Cassianto (talk) 11:17, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the kind words and for reviewing and supporting.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:44, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Support from Noleander. A fine article. I found a few things which I was preparing to note here, but I realized that they were all just wording preferences which could go either way, and would not necessarily improve the article. One that does bear mentioning: Otherwise, great work! --Noleander (talk) 19:14, 23 March 2012 (UTC)
 * "although McKinley's work was altered through the influence of special interests in the Senate, imposed a number of protective tariffs on foreign goods ..." - I cannot parse that. It looks like a word is missing before "imposed".   Even if it is what the editor intended, it should probably be re-worded so other readers do not suffer the same misapprehension.
 * My carelessness in making a previous change a reviewer requested. Fixed.  Thanks for reviewing both this and the assassination article!--Wehwalt (talk) 19:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Support – I have tried my hardest to find fault with this article, but have failed. I can usually manage at least a few typos, but no! This article seems to me to pass all FA criteria with flying colours. And I learned a lot, too, and enjoyed a well written and interesting article. Bravo! Tim riley (talk) 22:20, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Delegate's comments - I think we should let this nomination run for a few more days. But I won't be insisting on any spotchecks on this occasion. My apologies to the nominators, I know what it is like to be kept waiting. Graham Colm (talk) 22:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

Comments. Some of these are explained at WP:Checklist. - Dank (push to talk)
 * "March 4, 1897 until": I fixed this one, but see WP:Checklist.
 * "McKinley's term ended with his assassination": McKinley's second term ...
 * "brevet major": brevet major
 * "Republican party's": The lowercase "p" says that the party was not called the "Republican Party" except informally; is that right?
 * "leading expert": expert
 * "together with gerrymandering it led to his defeat ...": Just a suggestion : "After his congressional district was redrawn to his disadvantage, or gerrymandered, he was defeated ..."
 * "He defeated his Democratic rival, William Jennings Bryan; McKinley ran a front porch campaign ...": He defeated his Democratic rival, William Jennings Bryan, after a low-key front-porch campaign ...
 * I don't agree that it was low-key. McKinley was making headlines with his speeches, and his candidacy (and the opposition of Bryan who was far-left for his time), greatly excited the base.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Front porch campaign begins: "A front porch campaign is a low-key electoral campaign ...". So by linking there, you're saying the campaign was low-key (and these days, a lot of readers won't understand what this means without following the link.).  I think it's important not to penalize nominators for mistakes in other articles (otherwise we'd never promote!) ... so if you believe Front porch campaign is wrong, then it's fine to leave out "low-key". In that case, I recommend "He defeated his Democratic rival, William Jennings Bryan, after a front-porch campaign ..." (and I made the edit on this one ... if I'm misunderstanding, revert it.) - Dank (push to talk) 13:18, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * If we call McKinley's 1896 campaign low key, what do we call 1900, where the only speech he gave was the acceptance of nomination speech in July in Canton? I would tend to disagree with the FPC article; a front-porch campaign is merely the manner in which the candidate chooses to present himself.  He's still seeing the same people and giving the same speeches.  He's just using a different campaign ritual.  And as I said, it tremendously fired the base, who bought uniforms (in some cases) and traveled to Canton to be a part of this hundred-day-long production number.  I wish I could find more guaranteed-PD pictures of Canton in 1896, but I was only able find the one in the article and the one in the Hanna article, just to demonstrate this.  The audio clip does help, though.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:17, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "McKinley hoped to persuade Spain to grant independence to rebellious Cuba without conflict, but when negotiation failed, led ...": ... he led
 * "McKinley was re-elected in the 1900 presidential election following another intense campaign against Bryan, which focused on ...": McKinley was re-elected over Bryan in the 1900 presidential election following another intense campaign focusing on ... [or, McKinley beat Bryan again in ... ]
 * "William, and Nancy (Allison) McKinley": William and Nancy (Allison) McKinley
 * "Scotch-Irish descent": Per that article, the term is "almost unknown" in Great Britain and Ireland, so some there will think you're making the faux-pas of calling the Scots "Scotch". "Ulster Scots descent" would probably work.
 * That would make it incomprehensible to a US audience. If the link is not sufficient we can put in a footnote.  I'm open to other ideas, though.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * A Google ngram shows Scots-Irish catching up on Scotch-Irish, with Ulster Scots way out front, so maybe "Scots-Irish (or Ulster Scots)"? I don't really have a preference. - Dank (push to talk) 22:38, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Scots-Irish, then it is.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:45, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "soon brought the men again": again brought the men
 * "where he carried out clerical duties as well as working to supply the regiment.": nonparallel
 * "as it was advanced": as it advanced - Dank (push to talk) 03:19, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Except as noted, those are done.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:27, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks, no objections. I still think the Scotch-Irish question is interesting. - Dank (push to talk) 14:04, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * I certainly see your point, but this article's written in American English, and that's the customary term.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:17, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "hotly-disputed": WP:HYPHEN and Chicago disapprove of this hyphen.
 * "January 25, 1871": needs a second comma
 * "National Convention, to which [they] were ...": at which [they] were (or, to which they went)
 * No, I think that's proper. You are a delegate to a convention from a locale.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * "the election of a Republican successor as governor, Asa Bushnell in November 1895, ...": a comma is needed after the appositive "Asa Bushnell" since there's a comma before it, but to save a comma, let's move things around: "the election in November 1895 of a Republican successor as governor, Asa Bushnell,"
 * "From its earliest days, McKinley's preparations ...": Neither "its" nor "their" sounds quite right, so reword, for instance: "From the beginning, McKinley's preparations ..."
 * "what is certainly true that in 1888 ...": missing word somewhere
 * "in the race, he decided ...": comma splice
 * "Dawes felt he was too young.": Dawes considered himself too young
 * I got down about two-thirds of the way, to William McKinley. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 19:59, 25 March 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your work.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:01, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


 * So far so good on prose per standard disclaimer, down to William McKinley. - Dank (push to talk) 22:30, 25 March 2012 (UTC)


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