Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Elgin, Illinois, Centennial half dollar/archive1

Comments from Cirt (addressed)
(having stumbled here from my FAC) Overall: Quite high quality and educational. Thank you for your efforts on this quality improvement project on a most interesting topic, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 02:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * 1) Please respond, below these comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
 * 2) Lede: Intro sect of appropriate size and good wording, but a couple sentences are a bit long, and make a bit too much usage of commas, and could perhaps be broken apart, to read a bit clearer and more succinctly and less run on, and these are: " The obverse depicts an idealized head of a pioneer man; the reverse shows a grouping of pioneers, and is based upon a sculptural group that Rovelstad hoped to build as a memorial to those who settled Illinois, but which was not erected in his lifetime.", and "In 1935, through his congressman, he had legislation introduced into the House of Representatives for a commemorative coin in honor of Elgin's centennial that year, which would both depict and be a source of funds for his memorial to the pioneers."
 * 3) Redlinks include: Old Spanish Trail half dollar, Mary M. O'Reilly, Charles Moore (Commission of Fine Arts), and Roanoke Island half dollar. Of course not necessary for FA, but would be nice if some or all of those were created at least as nice little sourced stubs.
 * 4) Image review: File:Elgin (Illinois) Centennial half dollar obverse.jpg = Image on Wikimedia Commons with WP:OTRS confirmation, checks out okay. File:Elgin (Illinois) Centennial half dollar reverse.jpg = Image on Wikimedia Commons, licensed as public domain, checks out. File:RovelstadPioneerFamily.jpg = Image on Wikimedia Commons, licensed as GFDL and CC-BY-SA-3.0, checks out okay.
 * 5) References and bibliography = Suggest breakout into two sects, Notes, followed by References, per WP:FNNR.
 * 6) Sourcing standards: Well-cited throughout, meticulous use of sourcing, high quality referencing.
 * 7) Structural organization: Good structure in clear organizational format.
 * 8) Just a suggestion, take it or leave it, of course, but consider adding sects including: See also, Further reading, and External links.
 * 9) There are other portals that would be relevant to add to the portal template, particularly related to arts, sculpting, visual arts, medals, things of this nature.
 * 10) Please respond, below these comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
 * Thanks. Regarding the redlinks, I am redlininking them in the same way as I do hope to get articles in on them.  I'm looking for material on O'Reilly and probably have enough on Moore for a stub, but I hate writing stubs.  As for the two commemoratives mentioned, I'm slowly working my way through the material, and at some point I'll get to them, depending on availability of material and images.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I've shortened those sentences in the lede. As for see also and so forth, I don't know what to populate them with.  As for portals, I really don't deal with them and prefer to leave them for those who deal more often with those areas to play with.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:01, 4 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Support. I'm comfortable with supporting after the responses to my comments, above. High quality article. Deserves the star. Good luck, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 20:27, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review and the support, and for the additions.--Wehwalt (talk) 04:52, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
 * You're most welcome, and my pleasure, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 04:33, 6 November 2013 (UTC)