Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Cosmo Gordon Lang/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 SandyGeorgia 22:53, 6 September 2009 [1].

Cosmo Gordon Lang

Nominator(s): Brianboulton (talk) 23:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox
  • Analysis
  • Citation bot
  • External links

Lang, according to his biographers, was an enigma. The youngest archbishop in England in recent times, be began with great promise and large expectations, but in the end, by most accounts, he fell rather short – he himself judged his career a failure. Largely forgotten now, between the wars he was a major figure in British life, and touched many national and international events. Many thanks to the helping hands who monitored the article's progress from start-class, especially those who participated in the very thorough peer review.Brianboulton (talk) 23:52, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support I thoroughly reviewed the article's prose for consistency during the peer review and see no point in doing it a second time. Compelling article about an interesting character of whom I had only briefly heard. Only point I have remaining is that I'm not entirely clear as to whether the officiating clergy at his baptism was or was not his father, perhaps that could be made a little clearer.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:17, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks. If I have any minor quibbles, I'll take them up on talk page.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:01, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Please fix the formatting of the poem "My Lord Archbishop, what a scold you are!" Ling.Nut (talk) 07:04, 26 August 2009 (UTC) I fixed it myself. Ling.Nut (talk) 07:32, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
  • "Later commentators have speculated... homosexual". I'd like to see something much better than "channel four" for this... elsewise, it's just gossip. Besides, you said "commentators" (plural). Ling.Nut (talk) 07:46, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I disagree with you about the status of the Channel 4 source. The "Monarchy" television series and the books accompanying it are the work of Dr David Starkey, a respected academic historian, and cannot be dismissed as "just gossip". Other commentators have been more circumspect about Lang's sexuality. For example, the ODNB biog gives the text of Lang's emotional letter to Wilfred Parker without specifically mentioning sexual feelings, but the letter's inclusion looks like a nudge. Lockhart is even more evasive, but he was writing in 1948 when evasion on such matters was the order of the day. The reference to possible homosexual leanings is within a balanced paragraph. However, if you think the case is not made, I will be happy to withdraw this sentence - there are more important aspects of Lang's life to argue about.Brianboulton (talk) 09:00, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • If you can find a number of sources that allege it, then fire away. But channel 4 doesn't say maybe, it says "yeah, he was gay." I'd love to log into their website and put a {{fact}} tag on such a bold, bald assertion. So.... if you can back it up further, please do so. If not, please do delete. Ling.Nut (talk) 09:31, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Well, there's this, from The Times 1 July 2003, which says: "There have been many closeted gay bishops who have served the Church well, from Cosmo Gordon Lang to..." Remember, I'm not making the claim that Lang was homosexual, I'm merely saying that some modern commentators have said he was, and we now have two quotes from what I consider reliable sources. I have also altered the text of the article slightly: "Some later commentators have suggested...". I think that is fair. Brianboulton (talk) 14:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm poking about in whatever sources I can find, now... and am wondering if the Prayer Book controversy isn't a bit under-represented in the text...
  • Mmm, I saw McKibbin giving specific stats for the defeat of the Prayer Book in the House of Commons, second time around was 266-220 (p. 277, 18n). I dunno if I would call that "narrow", though it's certainly far less than a drubbing.. can we get more specific numbers?
    • I have put in the vote figures for December 1927 and June 1928. You're right, they weren't that narrow, so I've deleted that word. Brianboulton (talk) 13:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lang knew the nature of Edward's social circle..." Yeah I know, the full details should be in the abdication crisis article, not this one. But this is unnecessarily cryptic.. a word or two of greater detail, perhaps? After all, it was prominent in his infamous speech, and there was apparently an editorial in the Times after Lang's speech which focused the brunt of its scorn on those social circles rather than the king.
    • I have added a bit more detail concerning the king's social circle. Brianboulton (talk) 13:28, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mmmm, I'm looking at Manwaring pp. 12-13, and I don't see any connection at all between Lang and the national Mission of Repentance and Hope. What did I miss?
    • The Mainwaring ref was specific to the failure of the Mission to make an impact. Lang's involvement, covered by Lockhart, has now been separately cited. Brianboulton (talk) 12:51, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Eh? Kent, John (1992). William Temple: Church, State and Society in Britain, 1880-1950, Cambridge University Press, says lang was "often unwell, and Temple, now Archbishop of York, had to stand in for him from time to time." It also says, "When he was not ill, Lang lacked energy." Did I overlook these health issues in the article?
    • I didn't think that Lang's health issues were that significant. He seems to have enjoyed good health apart from a period around 1929-32, shortly after his Canterbury appointment. I have added a line, with citations, about his illness in that period. Brianboulton (talk) 13:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have to go now, but am becoming more & more convinced that the Prayer Book issue is under-represented in the body text and the lead. I think it was one of the two greatest issues in his time as archbishop; a political and religious struggle (albeit a far lesser one than say the Investiture controversy.) Ling.Nut (talk) 11:07, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes, it was important, but in the context of an article about Lang's life, I think this issue is properly and adequately represented. Obviously there is plenty more to be said, but this topic is not the focus of this article. There does not appear to be a Wiki article on the Prayer Book revision controversies of the 1920s, but I believe that, or an article on recent Church of England History, would be a proper place for an extended discussion of the topic. Brianboulton (talk) 13:57, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can you take a look at the alt text for File:Chapel of St Stephen Martyr, Canterbury Cathedral.jpg as it does not read right, probably just a typo. Keith D (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There was a typo ("are" for "area"). Now fixed - very well spotted! Thanks indeed Brianboulton (talk) 21:13, 26 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments, and questions
  • Re homosexuality: Your own sources said that he got hot 'n bothered over the young girls at a chocolate factory. That hardly seems homosexual per se.
    • Lang was an enigma, with contradictory traits (see Lockhart's summary of his complex character). My job is to record what has been said by reliable sources, on all aspects of his character, not to make judgements. Brianboulton (talk) 18:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not at all done thinking about the Prayer Book controversy . I agree that perhaps it needs its own (brief) article, as you suggest. But even so, this is a key event in Lang's period as Cantuar. Its focus needs to be sharpened; its details collected together and highlighted. It shows his lack of leadership, as you noted far down in the article... It may show a lack of insight: one source said he "badly misread the establishment mood" of government. It shows the political currents (Liberal vs. Labour; see Lang's oft-cited quote about the coal mining issue) and the religious currents (staunch Protestant laity vs. Catholic-wannabe church leaders). ...as you noted, it passed through the religious decision process with overwhelming support... Far more was at stake than simply a prayer book, it was a significant move away from mainstream Protestantism... The defeat of the revision apparently led to discouragement among many clergy, who saw it as an establishmentarian smackdown. Etc. I'm actually not talking about a huge rewrite here. These issues just need to be explained well—though currently they are not.
    • I am a bit puzzled by your analysis. You say the Prayer Book controversy is "a key event in Lang's period as Cantuar", but in fact the House of Commons rejections came before Lang ascended to Canterbury. He thereupon made it a non-issue, which it remained until after his – and his successor's – departure. Yes, he was criticized for this lack of leadership by Bishop Bell, but others considered his inactivity a wise move which faclitated an eventual solution. In the controversy itself, up to 1928, Lang's role was that of a lieutenant to Archbishop Davidson; as Lockhart says, "the story belongs to Davidson rather than Lang". It would be possible to include a little more material, about Lang's influence is bringing about the overwhelming Church vote in favour, or about his misreading of the House of Commons situation, but it would not be right to elevate his role above that of loyal supporter of his senior Archbishop. If Lang's "oft-cited quote" is the one about a fair day's work and a fair day's wage, this was made in 1912, outside the time frame of the Prayer Book controversy and, I would have thought, with no relevance to it. I have no quarrel with your other assertions, but they are basically not about Lang. Anything added to the article in this respect must focus on his role. Brianboulton (talk) 18:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Two broad questions that I think were not answered adequately: First, why was his rise so meteoric? Second, and at the same time both more interesting and more important, why was he so ineffectual after he became Cantuar? Ling.Nut (talk) 01:55, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The first question cannot be answered objectively. Lang wasn't (like Temple or Davidson) the son or son-in-law of an Archbishop, nor was he nurtured in the Church of England; he was a Scots Presbyterian. He wasn't wealthy, had no family influence, and how he rose so quickly is a matter of conjecture. Was he clever, lucky or both? As far as I can within the principle of NPOV, I have marshalled the facts, but the question remains open. As to the second question, "ineffectual" is your word; the general consensus is softer, that he could have done more than he did, but I have not seen him described as ineffectual. Why he fell short of expectations is a matter about which writers have speculated, and which I believe I have summarised in the Assessment section. I am still studying sources for new material that can shed more light on this complicated life. Brianboulton (talk) 18:53, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs)
  • Commas are missing left and right.
  • I see several sentences that begin In YYYY or In Month YYYY without a comma after them. I even see "On 24 May 1891" without a succeeding comma. I believe this is grammatically incorrect.
    • There are different conventions for comma usage between American and British English. Both conventions are grammatically correct. In Brit Eng, commas don't have to follow dates, unless the date is followed by a subordinate clause. Thus: "On 20 July he went to school for the first time" needs no comma. "On 20 July, after eating breakfast, he went..." etc would require a comma.
  • also "During these years" comma.; "Of his life at that time" comma.
    • With Brit Eng, commas are not necessary in these instances.
  • What is a prelate?
    • A senior priest - now linked.
  • practise law - practice not practise.
    • No, "practise" is a correct verb form, though not I think used in American Eng.
  • The thought persisted and one Sunday evening in the spring of 1889, after a visit to the theological college at Cuddesdon, Lang attended evening service at the Cuddesdon parish church. is runon without a comma after persisted.
    • There you have me; comma inserted
  • What is a curate?
    • The term is linked.
      • Why did you link the second instance?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:29, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Because I am only human, and we all make mistakes...(now rectified)
  • Is there a relevant link for pastoral? --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:25, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "These appointments reflected his growing reputation, and recognised his successful ministry in working-class parishes." has an ungrammatical comma that needs to be removed as does "divided, between his work in the Stepney region and his duties at St Paul's".
    • First example: it's not ungammatical, and the comma is fine. Second example: the comma is legitimate, but the sentence reads better without it, so removed.
      • As I understand it conjoining phrases with a comma and a conjunction in this manner connotes that the second phrase is an independent clause having its own subject, which is not the case here and why I believe the comma should be removed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:34, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have never heard of that rule of grammar, but it sounds pretty impressive. The comma can go.
  • Similar construction at "He voted against the 1914 Irish Home Rule Bill, and opposed liberalisation of the divorce laws."--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • And again "He also denounced the antisemitic policies of the German government, and took private steps to help European Jews."--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In this case: "He upheld the right of the Church to refuse the remarriage of divorced persons within its buildings,[91] but did not directly oppose A.P. Herbert's Matrimonial Causes Bill of 1937, which liberalised the divorce laws—Lang believed "it was no longer possible to impose the full Christian standard by law on a largely non-Christian population."", you need the comma for the purpose an anchor for the citation so just give the second clause a subject by changing it to "but he did not directly..."--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have applied the same solution to each of the above examples - inserting "he" after the conjunction. Brianboulton (talk) 10:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • badly housed??? maybe living in modest or rundown accomodations. Living on the streets. Something more professional is needed here.
    • I don't see why "badly housed" is unprofessional (or worth three query marks!). But I've extended it to: "housed in overcrowded and insanitary conditions."
      • Probably only worth one query mark:-!
  • The New York Times should be linked.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 15:58, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "he began to act as a "prince of the church"." is a very strong phrase that should be attributed in the text, IMO.
  • "Lang avoided continuation of the 1928 Prayer Book controversy by allowing it to lapse, after authorising a statement permitting use of the proposed Book locally if the parochial church council gave approval." seems to be using a comma unnecesarily to set off a prepositional phrase.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have revised this sentence as I wasn't happy with the wording. The comma issue here is null and void. Brianboulton (talk) 10:19, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • What is a cassock?
  • "On retirement Lang was created Baron Lang of Lambeth" seems to be an awkward garden path.
      • Can you explain what you mean, and why you think this simple factual statement is either awkward or misleading? Brianboulton (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think the office of Baron Lang of Lambeth was created for Lang.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:28, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • It's not an "office", it's a rank or title in the peerage. In common English usage peers are "created". Brianboulton (talk) 23:30, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • How about the title of Baron Lang of Lambeth was created for Lang.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:41, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
              • No, it's peers, not titles, that are created. You haven't explained your difficulty with this sentence, so I don't know what your problem is. However, I have reworded the sentence in the text, which should resove any remaining uncertainties. Brianboulton (talk) 10:11, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Link Time magazine and The Times in the text as well.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM)

03:30, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

  • You should use {{Inflation}} so that you don't have to update the currency conversion (£1 million in 2009 terms) every year. See Fountain_of_Time#Planning where I have used it.
    • What is the basis of calculation in this template, and how should its use be cited? Personally I find it a bit annoying, in that for example £1,500 converts as £50,101, an unnecessarily fussy level of detail. Brianboulton (talk) 10:11, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In Hastings's view, Lang was probably..." seems to use WP:WEASEL words.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 04:02, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • "Probably" is the word Hastings uses, to qualify his statement, so I must use it. too. (Why is it "weasel", anyway?) Brianboulton (talk) 08:46, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support-All issues resolved.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:47, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, and thanks for your input. Brianboulton (talk) 22:52, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Jappalang

Childhood and family

  • "Lang was born at ..."
    It would be better to start off with his full name here (without "William") and insert at least the year of birth as well. Consider the lede and the main text as two separate articles and this should become clear.
  • "... where he ... played football intermittently;"
    Did he play footer only at school (as seemingly suggested by the sentence)?
    No other references to his footy. I mentioned it to indicate that he was a pretty normal boy - it has no other significance. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    I see, might I suggest changing the last three words to "... occasionally played football;" or "... played the occasional game of football;"? Jappalang (talk) 15:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed to your second suggested alternative. Brianboulton (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... he was able to beginbegan his studies ..."

University of Glasgow

  • "... met some of the leading academics .... Long afterwards Lang commented on the inability of some of these eminent figures to handle "the Scottish boors who formed a large part of their classes"."
    This was a bit confusing to me till I read "Among his various tutors ..." in the later sentence. The "met ... leading academics" part led me to think that some of them might have been fellow students.
  • "In 1881 Lang made his first trip ... Edwin Booth in Othello. Later that year he travelled to Cambridge to stay with a friend who was studying there."
    What is the point of chronicling young Lang's adventures?
    It's the footy thing – trying to indicate that Lang had a range of interests and wasn't just the class swot. If you think that the references to Liddon, parliament and the theatre are distracting, I can remove them, as they aren't essential to the article. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    It is interesting, adds a bit of flavour to the account of Lang's youth. I am just wondering if it had wandered too much off the point (trivial). It is not really a big opposable issue. Jappalang (talk) 15:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Compromise: leave in his visits to to St Pauls & parliament, since they have slight bearing on his future career. Drop the theatre as relatively trivial. Does that satisfy? Brianboulton (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Eh, the issue is trivial (I left it unstruck since it is just a matter of personal opinion that is not opposable). Jappalang (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oxford

  • "... described by his biographer Lockhart ..."
    First mention of Lockhart should be by his full name.
    He is known as J.G. Lockhart; I have added these initials to the first mention.
    I found his full name as "John Gilbert Lockhart" on Worldcat,[2] and expanded it in the article. Jappalang (talk) 15:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... to that of Demosthenes."
    While Demosthenes should be familiar to those in the literary and political circles, the common reader might be ignorant of his significance at first glance (I did not know of his name and reputation till I read Ender's Game...). I think Demosthenes's credential should be made more obvious here (in part contributing to the opinion of Lang's oratory prowess). Perhaps, "... to that of Ancient Greek statesman, Demosthenes."
    • Good suggestion which I am happy to adopt. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Towards ordination

  • "Lang's career ambition, settled early in life, ..."
    "Settled" seems to imply the decision was not entirely his alone. Was this the case?
    • As far as I can see, he determined his own pathway. I have slightly reworded. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... to my[Lang's] liberal Conservatism".": This might be personal style, but I would prefer to clarify quotes rather than leave them untouched.

Leeds

  • "He rejected a tempting offer of the chaplaincy of All Souls, as he wanted to be "up and doing" in a tough parish."
    Was All Souls some sort of "soft and cushy" parish?
    All Souls (as stated in last line of previous section) is an Oxford college, so the tempting offer was for the chaplaincy of a college, to which he had been elected a Fellow. It would indeed have been a cushy number, but he rejected it. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Hmmm, okay, I was looking to more details of what would be a "tough" parish in those days, but the current wording is nothing opposable. Jappalang (talk) 03:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Can you indicate that your concern here is resolved, or otherwise clarify any outstanding issue with this point?
    Same as the "tour" above, not opposable. Jappalang (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As well as his parish duties,—Lang acted temporarily as Principal of the Clergy School,—he was chaplain to Leeds Infirmary and took charge of a men's club of around a hundred members."
    • The things he did in addition to his normal parish duties included the temporary principalship of the school, the infirmary chaplaincy and the men's club - all were extracurricular to his everyday parish work. I have slightly reworded, to make this clearer. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Seeing your clarification, my actual issue (which I thought to solve as above) arises from the placement of "Lang acted temporarily as Principal of the Clergy School" between "In addition to/As well as his parish duties," and "(he) was chaplain to Leeds Infirmary ...". In this case, perhaps the original sentence with a fullstop substituting the comma after "Clergy School" would solve the issue? Jappalang (talk) 15:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sorry, but I don't understand what the "issue" is. The sentence now reads: "In addition to his normal parish duties, Lang acted temporarily as Principal of the Clergy School, was chaplain to Leeds Infirmary, and took charge of a men's club of around a hundred members." I am simply listing three things he did in addition to his normal parish duties. As this is surely clear, why does the sentence need changing? Brianboulton (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • It was grammatical, pertaining to pronouns. From the first sentence, I saw "As well as his ..., Lang acted ..., he was ... .", which seemed weird to me. On re-reading your amendment, it is resolved: "In addition to his ..., Lang acted ..., was ..., and took charge ... ." Sorry for my confused state above. Jappalang (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Portsea

  • "Lang may have realised that he was destined for high office; he is reported to have practised the episcopal signature "Cosmo Cantuar" during a relaxed discussion with his curates."
    What is an "episcopal signature"? How does practising "Cosmo Cantaur" show he knew he was destined for high office?
    I've dropped the "episcopal", and inserted a parenthetical explanatory note. This is an oft-told story of Lang, prematurely practising the signature he would use as Archbishop of Canterbury. It shows that the possibility of high office had entered his mind. Note that I have stood away slightly from the story - "may have realised", "is reported to have"; it's best to be noncommital. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Pardon my ignorance, but I still have questions over "signature". My understanding of the term is a stylised handwriting of one's name. By "practised the signature ... during a relaxed discussion with his curates", does it mean he signed himself off on paper with "Cantaur" to his name in front of his curates? Jappalang (talk) 15:09, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes, evidently that is what he did. Brianboulton (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As a Royal Chaplain ..."
    When did he become a Royal Chaplain or are all Honorary Chaplains to the Queen Royal Chaplains as well?
    Sorry, I overlooked this. The term "Royal Chaplain" was my unofficial shorthand for Honorary Chaplain to the Queen. I have revised the sentence and ropped the term Brianboulton (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Stepney

  • "Lang took as his personal assistant ... Dick Sheppard, who became a close friend and confidante. HeSheppard was eventually ordained,"

St Paul's Cathedral

  • "Temple observed that, in contrast to the Bishop of London's sermons, with Lang the pleasure was intellectual rather than emotional, but "I can remember all his points, just because their connexion is inevitable.... And for me, there is no doubt that this is the more edifying by far.""
    Suggestion: "Temple observed that, in contrast to the Bishop of London's sermons, listening to Lang brought on an intellectual rather than emotional pleasure: "I can remember all his points, just because their connexion is inevitable.... And for me, there is no doubt that this is the more edifying by far.""
    • Yes, runs a bit more smoothly. Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... for the recovery of King Edward VII's recovery ..."

Appointment

  • "On the issue of age, the Church Times believed it was the deliberate choice ofthat Asquith todeliberately recommended the youngest bishop available, after the PMhe had endured ..."

World War I

  • Suggestion: "Within months hehis looks changed from a dark-haired, young-looking manyouth to that of a bald, and elderly-lookingold man."
    • Your suggestion doesn't strike me as quite right. I've simplified my version, see what you think. Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... continued his war workcontributions to the war,"

Postwar years

  • "described by Hastings as "one of the rare historical documents that does not get forgotten with the years."
    Does the quote end with this sentence (missing closing quotation marks)?

International and dosmetic politics

  • "... declaring that the Munich Agreement of September 1938 was due to/by the "Hand of God.""?
    • I've looked again, and I wasn't using the "Hand of God" quote correctly. So I've changed the text. Lang called for a day of thanksgiving for the "sudden lifting of the cloud". That is more accurate.

Abdication crisis

  • "... with the American divorcée Wallis Simpson ..."
    This and the following sentences ("... the king intended to marry Mrs. Simpson either before or shortly after his impending coronation.") seem to indicate that Mrs Simpson was divorced at the time of Edward VIII's accession. That is wrong. She was divorced from Spencer but married to Simpson (and still married in 1936). Mrs Simpson/Spencer's status could probably be better explained here.
    • OK, I've clarified as best I can without using up too many words. See what you think. Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On 11 December, all attempts to persuade him otherwise having failed, he did so ..."
    Suggestion: "All attempts to dissuade him failed, and on 11 December, he gave up his throne ..."

Assessment

  • "after sitting for Sir William Orpen in 1924, Lang remarked to Bishop Hensley Henson of Durham that the portrait showed him as "proud, prelatical and pompous." Henson's reply was "To which of these epithets does Your Grace take exception?""
    I love this sentence, but is this a factual anecdote? If not, it would be better to establish the context of this quote.
    • Widely quoted, and believed factual, but the story is never pinned down to a specific time and place, nor is it clear who witnessed the exchange. So, I have inserted a couple of caveats. No article on Lang would be complete, I believe, without this line. Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Some commentators have suggested that Lang was a repressed homosexual."
    It should be expounded (briefly if it is a cursory view) on why these commentators hold such suggestions. Leaving it as a single sentence without reason seems to be a bit on the gossip side of things.
    If Starkey and Gove were ordinary newspaper journalists, the "gossip" implication might stick. But they are serious writers who have each made their suggestions in unsensationalist contexts. Neither is specific as to why they hold their views, which I have presented cautiously and in the context of other information about Lang's possible sexual tendencies. Lang was a public figure and things were and will be said about him, by responsible commentators. I think that the "comprehensive" criterion requires me to report such remarks, without in any way endorsing them. Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    They might be serious writers, but it is curious how such an allegation can come about without basis. It seems Ling.Nut (above) shares a similar concern as well. Basically, information is put forth that shows Lang could have carnal thoughts towards women, but nothing backs up the homosexual opinion. Are there no books or newspaper articles that stated such a revelation or assertion with the reasons why? If not, and if the statement is to stay, then I think the authors of those views should be held accountable, i.e. we should explicitly attribute the statement to them, such as "Years after Lang's death, his sexual orientation was questioned. Journalist Michael Gove and Channel 4 television station suggested that Lang was a repressed homosexual." Jappalang (talk) 03:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    An excellent idea. I have incorporated it, but have reordered the paragraph so that the "suggestion" no longer hangs fire at the end, where it tended to look like an accusation. The sense of the paragraph now is: "He led a celibate life; people have suggested he was a closet homosexual, and he certainly had emotional friendships with male colleagues; however he enjoyed women's company and found them attractive." I think that is fair; it leaves nothing out, without placing emphasis on any one aspect. See what you think (also Ling Nut comment below). Brianboulton (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography

  • "... including a novel of the 1745 risingJocobite Risings in 1745."

General

  • There are two "the King". I believe it (king) is lowercase when not used as a title.
    • I have lower-cased the first. The second is in a quotation and has to stay as it is. 16:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Images

  • All images are verifiably in the public domain or appropriately licensed.

Some of the above are just suggestions (my prose sucks), so... Since my knowledge about the Archibishop of Canterbury is basically restricted to jokes about Henry II's attitude, I am commenting on what appears to be lacking from the viewpoint of a reader fresh to the subject. Looking forward to support once the above are addressed. Jappalang (talk) 08:10, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for your review. I have dealt with about half your points, but other duties are calling. I'll be back later to deal with the rest. Brianboulton (talk) 11:15, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • ...which I have now done, and thank you again. Brianboulton (talk) 16:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Struck most of it, but there are still a few that requires additional attention (the singular sentence about his sexual orientation is still of concern). Jappalang (talk) 03:05, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • See my update responses to this and other issues. Brianboulton (talk) 10:01, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support:(outdented) As what I perceived were issues have been resolved, there is nothing to stop me from throwing my support behind Brian's latest masterpiece. Jappalang (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Nobody got rid of this turbulent priest... he just left on his own (the third one to do so, it seems). Should that factoid be included in the article? It might be trivial (no telling how many more Archbishops of Canterbury would retire rather than die in office), so its exclusion would not affect my support. Jappalang (talk) 00:05, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • As it happens, every one of Lang's successors bar Temple has retired, so retirement (usually at or around 70) is now the norm. Brianboulton (talk) 13:21, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
  • The homosexual bit is much, much better. It no longer leaves so many open questions, which previously gave it almost the air of a swipe at his character.
  • I saw at least one quote (dig it up tomorrow) which said the Prayer Bok thing made Lang more conservative (in the general sense). I think this should go in he article and the lead. Ling.Nut (talk) 13:26, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I've watched the changes Brian has made to this article from the beginning (I did add some extra material and refs jsut before he started his revamp, bu the present article is basically "his", though I did do a bit of typo spotting for him along the way), and I beleive it now meets the criteria.
    Comments, on the sexuality issue, I don't think this is overstated (though I do wonder if the only basis that the suggestions have been made on is anglo-catholic plus celibate = "must be gay"). On the prayerbook revision, the article as it stands gives similar weight to the issue as does the ODNB article (the only one of the major sources which is readily available to me). David Underdown (talk) 15:40, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks, and it should be noted that your typo-spotting and intermittent suggestions during the revamp were valuable, and much appeciated. Brianboulton (talk) 16:33, 28 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Ling.Nut (talk) 19:14, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support my issue is addressed and nicely Comment I have replaced the last sentence in the lead, which is unreferenced with the last sentence in the Assessment section which seems to be more NPOV and is referenced. Please let me know if you agree, otherwise I support this article's nomination for FAC. Thanks, NancyHeise talk 16:49, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I understand your point, but we can't have the exact same sentences ending both the lead and the Assessment section. I have now included a shorter version of the concluding assessment as the final lead sentences. I believe that I have addressed your concern that the lead previously did not wholly reflect the consensus view on Lang's career; I think it now does. Also, it is not necessary to cite lead infomation, provided the material is referenced in the main text. I am sorry if you feel you cannot support the article, but I really do not want to amend the text further on this point. Brianboulton (talk) 23:33, 30 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Well-written, comprehensive. Jayjg (talk) 23:55, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments -
  • Does the EB 11th edition entry for WCL not give the author at the end?
    • No, neither for the biog or for the "Confirmation of bishops" article also cited from EB 11th. Brianboulton (talk) 00:30, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Weird, normally they did. No worries. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:10, 2 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with she link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support - I reviewed the article earlier and had no quibbles. I did notice the bit about the EB, but that's not enough to hold back my support. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:52, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Image review I've checked the copyright status of the images and they're all good. Stifle (talk) 21:13, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support I added some comments at peer review; I was mightily impressed with the article then, and the fine tuning arising from the above comments has improved it still further. Tim riley (talk) 12:44, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Confused about numbering convention here (WP:MOSNUM); I see 44 years old, but eighteen and fourteen? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:20, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Addressed, I made all numbers over nine numerals. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Cosmo_Gordon_Lang/archive1&oldid=1088205199"