Wikipedia:Featured article review/Uncle Tom's Cabin/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article review. Please do not modify it. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page or at Wikipedia talk:Featured article review. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was kept by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 2:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC).

Uncle Tom's Cabin

 * Notified: SouthernNights, Rjensen, Jmabel, WikiProject Novels, WikiProject United States, WikiProject African diaspora, WikiProject Women's history, WikiProject Women writers, diff for talk page notification

I am nominating this featured article for review because the issues RetiredDuke brought up in February have not been addressed. The biggest issue for me is the significant uncited text in the article. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  07:52, 4 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment. As the article's original author, I agree the article needs a cleanup with more citations added. I'm willing to do that. However, the next few weeks are really packed for me. Any way we could hold off on this two-week process until after the holidays? Or alternately, any way some other editors could help out? I essentially haven't edited the article in nearly 10 years and will need some time to sort out issues and fix them. As a side note, this has been listed as one of the most vital literary articles on Wikipedia and it would be a shame to have it removed from FA status without an attempt to address these concerns.--SouthernNights (talk) 13:01, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree completely it would be better to improve the article to FA status. would it be possible to put this FAR on hold until January as requested above? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  13:23, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * On hold. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:25, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Many thanks. I'll have time to work on this after December 21 or so. I can likely sort out these issues with a week of research and editing. And as a final note, the article was originally promoted to FA status thanks to the amazing feedback of Adrianne Wadewitz, one of the best literary editors Wikipedia has ever seen. Since Adrianne sadly passed away far too young, I'd like to work to keep this article at FA status in honor of her original feedback and help on it.--SouthernNights (talk) 13:39, 4 December 2021 (UTC)

Happy to leave here on hold till then - we've left others open for 6+ months before. and if anyone else wants to chip in before then....bonus.Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:33, 4 December 2021 (UTC)


 * No edits, reinstated FAR. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  16:14, 19 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I had a personal issue which prevented me from finishing my work in a timely manner. That said, I've done a ton of research and will try to integrate that into the FAR process. My apologies for not getting this done when I said I would. --SouthernNights (talk) 16:34, 19 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I've now cleaned up and reworked the article per the issues originally raised (summarized here on the article's talk page). This included editing the entire article, updating and adding new sources, deleting original research, and much more. Let me know what people think. I'd originally done the research for all this back in December but then didn't have the time to make the edits. I'm sure there's more work needed on this article b/c it's so large and complex, so if people see something share it here. Best, --SouthernNights (talk) 21:08, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Update: Although there has been a lot of improvement thanks to SouthernNights edits, there is still considerable uncited content that will need to get referenced or removed. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  21:47, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, re original list. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  21:50, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * The Publlications section has a lot of stubby paragraphs. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  21:52, 20 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I've inserted all of the requested citations in the article (or, if the unsourced statement couldn't be supported with a reliable citation, removed the statement). I've also gone through and re-edited the article to smooth out and clean up more of the prose.--SouthernNights (talk) 14:23, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing issues still present:
 * Any other changes needed to keep the article at featured status? --SouthernNights (talk) 19:03, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Citing 19th century sources such as "J. E. Dunn (August 31, 1896). "About Uncle Tom's Cabin: A Louisianian Says Meredith Calhoun Was Not a Model for Legree". The Washington Post." Not only do such sources not meet the high-quality sourcing requirement, a recent scholarly source could tell you what the current view is on various theories.
 * There are other questionable sources cited such as BookRags.com
 * Page numbers needed for some books cited
 * The references section needs cleanup and a consistent citation style, but the substantive sourcing issues should be resolved first. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  19:17, 25 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I removed that dated citation and added citations to all the requested places. As for the references using a consistent citation style, is there a bot we can use for that, or is there someone with expertise in this area who can help?--SouthernNights (talk) 17:57, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * There are still other 19th century sources cited:
 * "Parton, James (October 1867). "International Copyright". The Atlantic. Retrieved January 6, 2009."
 * "Old Uncle Tom". Weekly Arizona Miner (Prescott, Arizona). August 2, 1878. p. 1 – via Chronicling America.
 * "Oberlin and a noted resident". Democrat and Chronicle (Rochester, New York). January 12, 1885. p. 4 – via newspapers.com.
 * Edwards, J. Passmore (1852). Uncle Tom's Companions: Or, A Supplement to Uncle Tom's Cabin: Being Startling Incidents in the Lives of Celebrated Fugitive Slaves. London: Edwards & Co. pp. 75–77.
 * "From the Boston Traveler". The New York Times. Vol. XXXI, no. 9616. July 3, 1882. Retrieved October 19, 2020.
 * There is no bot that can fix the citation issues, all that one has to do is pick one citation format (I recommend sfn) and make sure the article consistently follows it. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  18:49, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * If you can bring the article to a place where Buidhe is satisfied on the sourcing, and everyone else is satisfied with prose, I am willing to help standardize the format. I don't have time to undertake that work until/unless everything else here is squared away. Please ping me if/when we reach that point. My preferred style would be to move to sfns on books or for very long journal articles where page number citations are needed, and leaving everything else in ref tags. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  19:15, 26 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks to both of you for sharing this info and for your help on this. As an FYI, it'll be a few days before I can make a new round of citation updates b/c I'm swamped with other work. Once I get this new work completed I'll let everyone know.--SouthernNights (talk) 20:19, 26 February 2022 (UTC)

I've removed the other 19th century citations and replaced them with modern ones. Any other places that need citations either added or updated? If not, okay if we move to standardizing the citation style across the entire article?--SouthernNights (talk) 17:57, 6 March 2022 (UTC)


 * if other concerns are addressed, I can work on citations.  are you OK with sfns on all book sources, but ref tags on everything else (that is, those that don't need short notes with page nos)? Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  02:03, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not really sure what to say, although I don't see anything egregious in the current version, literature is not the main area I edit so I don't feel confident in asserting the content has no issues. (t &#183; c)  buidhe  03:14, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * What I want to know at this point is, if I spend an entire day cleaning up citations, am I going to find that I was cleaning up an FA that was never going to be salvaged anyway. I recognize you can't definitively make a declaration at this point, but if anyone knows of any deficiencies in the article now that would prevent it being kept as an FA, I'd appreciate knowing that before I work on cleaning up citations, so my time is not misspent.  (And, since you haven't responded, if you don't have a preferred citation style, shall I use my preference, which is easier for me?) Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  17:35, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * , I don't have a preferred citation style so I'll use whichever you prefer (meaning I'm okay with sfns on all book sources and ref tags on everything else)., my work at Wikipedia has mainly focused on literary topics and I heavily researched the update to this article for the FAR. I feel very confident the article's content is solid and will hold up for years to come.--SouthernNights (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

Sandy Georgia (Talk)  02:56, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * List of citation issues :
 * In the Bibliography section, we need ISBNs for the version of the books that the page numbers are provided for.
 * The page ranges on Lott are too broad for verification; SouthernNights, once I'm done (and you will see now how easy it is to locate the sfns for Lott and change the page numbers as needed, use p for one page and pp for a range) those need to be narrowed down.
 * Wilson: is the text cited to the Frontcover, or is there a missing page number ?
 * I am moving sources that are not used to Further reading: those will need to be checked and pruned.
 * There are missing page numbers on books.
 * You mentioned that Awadewit had helped on this article; her early work contained original research. Is this text verified by the source, or is a conclusion drawn by the writer?  We need a page number to an independent source that makes this claim from this author: "The novels either implied or directly stated that African Americans were a childlike people[100] unable to live their lives without being directly overseen by white people.[page needed][101]"
 * Some laxity in sources making this slow work: is Rosenthal the editor or the author? There was a missing "A" on the book title, but without an ISBN, I can't be sure what we're looking at.
 * From this, it appears that Rosenthal is Editor, and all of the Rosenthal sources should be citing a chapter. If so, I need the chapter info on each Rosenthal citation to write the sfns correctly. Marianne Noble, "The Ecstasies of Sentimental Wounding in Uncle Tom's Cabin," from Debra J. Rosenthal (ed.), A Routledge Literary Sourcebook on Harriet Beecher Stowe's Uncle Tom's Cabin, Routledge, 2003, p. 58. The remaining Rosenthal citations all reference Rosenthal's intro materials, not specific essays.
 * The article says the Tompkins book is In Sensational Designs, but Worldcat says it is Sensational Designs ... 
 * Similar to Lott, the page ranges on Tompkins are too broad for verification and need to be individually adjusted.
 * All corrected except this one: de Rosa 2003, On p. 121, de Rosa quotes Tompkins 1985, pp. 122–146 that Stowe's strategy was to destroy slavery through the "saving power of Christian love". In that essay, Tompkins also writes: "Stowe conceived her book as an instrument for bringing about the day when the world would be ruled not by force, but by Christian love.". Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  03:55, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I am seeing a bigger problem ahead: none of the journal articles cited list page ranges, so without looking each one up, we don't know whether those page ranges are too large for verification. And, they aren't easily looked up, as they are also lacking DOIs or any sort of ID. Journal articles with broad page ranges need specific page numbers, as with books.
 * Some of the Appiah Gates page nos are 44, and a bunch others are 544: please check that that is not a typo.
 * There is a mixture of citation styles, so I have templated the lot to create consistency.
 * There is a sourcing that needs scrutiny as to high quality for an FA; hard to tell what they are, consolidating list:
 * https://public.wsu.edu/~campbelld/amlit/domestic.htm
 * I'm pretty sure that SparkNotes is not a high-quality source suitable for a Featured article; someone will need to doublecheck this.
 * Is The Complete Idiot's Guide to American Literature a high-quality source suitable for a Featured article? (I don't know, but I suspect not.)
 * https://news.virginia.edu/content/story-uncle-tom-s-cabin-spread-novel-theater-and-screen
 * https://www.c-span.org/classroom/document/?5045
 * http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/interpret/exhibits/winship/winship.html
 * https://web.archive.org/web/20080827202631/http://www.kuce.org/kt/session1/bg.html
 * http://utc.iath.virginia.edu/onstage/films/cameos/hollywood.html (and many more similar)
 * "Stowe acknowledged in 1853 that Henson's writings inspired Uncle Tom's Cabin.[20][21]" The first citation does not fully verify the text ( "A last instance parallel with that of Uncle Tom is to be found in the published memoirs of the venerable Josiah Henson..." ... a parallel between is not the same as one having inspired the other), and the second is not freely accessible for verification, so I have added a request quote.
 * Removed, Sandy Georgia (Talk)  03:56, 10 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Eight hours, and I have not finished the citation cleanup; stopping for the night at the "Reactions to the novel" section, will finish another day. There are a number of obstacles for this article to retain status: the almost total absence of ISBNs, several places I had to place maintenance tags, and the article quality is variable, with patches of poor sourcing and prose that is not at FA standard, or both. It will take more than SouthernNights and my citation cleanup for this article to retain its star. Mañana. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  04:19, 10 March 2022 (UTC)

I have finished converting all that I can do; the journals are only partially done, as specific page numbers are needed on many of them. , here are samples of how the journal citations need to be fixed, with the full page range listed as a source, but the specific page number supporting the text used as an sfn: Nichols, and Jones, only a two-page article, so page nos not needed. From the list I left above, the ISBN work is the most daunting, and I can't help on that. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  20:29, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I'll dig into the these issues this weekend and see what I can do. However, I may not be able to address all this over the weekend. As for the ISBNs, according to citing sources that is optional for books. Why are we trying to add all the ISBNs if they're optional and the books can be looked up with the info already provided?--SouthernNights (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * There is no hurry. On books that have more than one edition, we need to know which edition the page numbers are cited to, and that comes with an ISBN. It's kinda hard to verify content if you're using page numbers from the wrong edition of a book :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  21:23, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Also,, may have a more generalized answer to the query about ISBNs; she is more up on that than I am. And, it's equally important that you break down some of the long page ranges to something manageable, that the reader can actually verify (on both books and long journal articles).  Now that an sfn system is place, that should be easier to do, as you just have to change the page nos on the sfn p= or pp= parameter. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  21:25, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * In addition to helping to determine editions, ISBNs also allow for more easy access to full text / locating print copies. Nikkimaria (talk) 22:17, 11 March 2022 (UTC)
 * As an FYI, I have major non-Wikipedia projects due, so I may not be able to get to theses item for a week or two (I was overly optimistic when I said I'd have time this weekend).--SouthernNights (talk) 12:55, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * any plan now for continuing? Sandy Georgia (Talk)  10:42, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes. I'm finishing up my non-Wikipedia work that's under deadline. I'll have time middle of next week to return to the article. I believe I can resolve the remaining issues in a day or two once I have the time to get into it.--SouthernNights (talk) 15:17, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Good progress made; the list above needs to be reviewed, and there is still one citation needed tag. Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  04:00, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I still have more work on the article but it may be a few days before I can finish.--SouthernNights (talk) 13:27, 10 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I think all the issues have been resolved, but if I missed anything let me know. The only thing I didn't change from the citations lists above was to remove the University of Virginia's Uncle Tom's Cabin and American Culture: A Multi-Media Archive as a citation. This is an incredibly reliable and detailed resource, being edited by a professor at the University of Virginia's Dept. of English with funding for the archive provided by both the National Endowment for the Humanities and the National Endowment for the Arts. As further proof of this multi-media archive being a reliable source, it has been cited a number of times in academic literature. --SouthernNights (talk) 16:37, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Agreed. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  17:15, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

SouthernNights has updated this 2007 FA to bring it to modern standards; as you have time, might you read through and suggest if there are any issues remaining? Sandy Georgia (Talk)  17:17, 16 April 2022 (UTC)


 * There is still issues with citation consistency. Some journal refs are cited using sfn referencing, others are inline. Suggest converting all to sfn with specific page numbers.
 * I will work on those (was waiting for SouthernNights to finish). Sandy Georgia (Talk)  17:37, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've moved all journals to sfns and indicated where page nos are missing. Sandy Georgia (Talk)  18:24, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The characters section is not entirely sourced.
 * Are the lead citations necessary? Is this info cited in the body or not? (t &#183; c)  buidhe  17:33, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I can work on the character sourcing. And yes, I believe we should have the lead citations even though the info is also cited in the body b/c the manual of style says the lead should be "carefully sourced."--SouthernNights (talk) 17:47, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I would recommend a higher-quality source than this archived article for the claims about Josiah Henson in the Sources section. AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 14:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
 * What does "Tom and Eva begin to relate to one another" mean? AleatoryPonderings (???) (!!!) 14:05, 17 April 2022 (UTC)


 * I resolved all the new issues that were raised. --SouthernNights (talk) 16:19, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Nice work, ! From this diff of the changes you made, the Vicary book needs to be standardized to the same format as the other sources (does it need a page no?), and you need to use p for a single page number and pp for a range.  Could you adjust those faulty ps and pps? I won't be able to review for at least a week; perhaps others will look in as you finalize the changes here:   Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  16:44, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I just made those corrections you mentioned. As an FYI, the Vicary source is an online reference, not a book (the American National Biography Online from Oxford University Press is a subscriber-based online resource). But I changed this source's style to the cite web style we already used in the article. Will that work?--SouthernNights (talk) 16:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I can give this a read through soon. I read the book in high school, we'll see how much I remember I guess. Hog Farm Talk 16:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, HF! SouthernNights, you're in good hands with the other reviewers here.  As I will be away at a wedding, the  can consider me satisfied once B, HF, Z and AP are ... Sandy Georgia  (Talk)  18:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've started work on FAR talk page. Hog Farm Talk 06:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * I've finished my read-through. Just have a few content/prose questions and one concern about image licensing (I don't think the Babb movie poster meets the non-free content guidelines). Hog Farm Talk 18:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)


 * A late response to the ping: the content seems fine; a comment on the structure. The last 4 paras of "Literary significance and theories" - i.e. the theories - seem a bit out of place where they are. I think they'd fit better with Major themes. (If they are not all "major", perhaps a Themes section with Major themes and Theories as subsections? Just a thought.) Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 03:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)


 * All edits and suggestions have been completed. Are we good to go with the FAR? --SouthernNights (talk) 14:01, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I hope to be able to read through later today; Hog Farm is on a break; . Sandy Georgia (Talk)  15:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The themes section looks good now, but just noticing it isn't summarized in the lead; style and literary reception aren't, either. (Looking at the article history, the lead is largely unchanged from the 2007 GA version, at which time those 3 sections were not in the article.) Can it be reworked to cover those sections? A more minor comment: I don't think lead citations are needed unless the material is controversial; even then, 3 refs after a sentence seems like overkill. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 03:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I disagree about the lead. The themes and style are covered by this sentence: "She wrote the sentimental novel to depict the reality of slavery while also asserting that Christian love could overcome slavery." The style section essentially discusses sentimental novels while the major theme is the reality of slavery and Christian love.--SouthernNights (talk) 13:39, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure it gives due weight to the literary reaction or to those sections, looking at their relative emphasis in the body. (As noted above, the lead predates the addition of those sections!) Anyway, I have no issues with the body, so I'm not going to oppose based on this. Olivaw-Daneel (talk) 19:51, 22 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep; my concerns have been addressed. Hog Farm Talk 13:20, 18 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep looks like the article has seen major improvement, any remaining issues are not worth taking the article to FAR over so I guess this can be closed (t &#183; c)  buidhe  20:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Nikkimaria (talk) 02:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.