Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Laura Secord/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 list was promoted by Ian Rose 10:03, 4 March 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply]

Laura Secord

Laura Secord (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
  • Analysis
  • Citation bot
  • External links
Nominator(s): Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating this for featured article because I think it is a comprehensive article on the Chocoloate Lady this War of 1812 heroine, and an important part of early Canadian mythology.

Ideally, I'd like to see it as Today's Featured Article on 22 June 2013, which is the 200th anniversary of her famous walk through enemy-controlled territory to inform the British of an impending American attack. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:36, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Rschen7754

This is my first full review of a non-road FAC, so I won't be supporting or opposing until others review.

  • fought on the side of the American revolutionaries during the War. - phrased a bit awkwardly, someone who isn't familiar with American history might not understand
    • Rephrased, with a few more details. Curly Turkey (gobble) 12:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • last paragraph of lead - two sentences starting with "She" right next to each other
  • Section 2 is very short. Meanwhile, section 1 has a lot of subsections.
    • It is. I've found few details describing her, and couldn't think of a satisfying way to work the info into another section. Curly Turkey (gobble) 12:30, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • More later. --Rschen7754 09:26, 18 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Holding until the lead is figured out. --Rschen7754 06:19, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Personal history
  • He descended from Richard Ingersoll, - was descended?
  • where he settled on a small piece of land with a house on it on the Housatonic River. - the two "on"s so close to each other should be adjusted.
  • Thomas's contract was cancelled, either because road construction was not completed on time or because he had not brought in the requisite number of settlers. - seems uncertain.
    • Reworded. Leavy 2012 says it was because the roads weren't finished; Mackenzie 1977 (which I don't have access to) apparently claimed it was because of the number of settlers. Reworded to: "Thomas's contract was cancelled for not having fulfilled all the details of the conditions". Curly Turkey (gobble) 02:20, 28 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • "all the details of the conditions" seems a bit wordy. --Rschen7754 08:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • 1.2 - second and third paragraphs could be merged.
    • I'm not sure. It seems like a jarring transition in mid-paragraph. Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Was Secord promised the keys? It doesn't seem clear.
    • Maitland promised her the keys in 1827, but Colborne had become Lieutenant Governor by 1831 (when the monumetn opened) and didn't follow through on Maitland's promise. Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Would you mind clarifying this in the article? --Rschen7754 08:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've changed the last sentence to "Despite her pleas, Secord did not receive the keys to the monument." Curly Turkey (gobble) 10:43, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Memory and legend
  • I still think it should be merged somewhere, but won't oppose over it.
    • I'll think over a way to handle this. Curly Turkey (gobble) 08:24, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Merged. I've merged the "Personal description" and "Legend" sections into a "Memory and legend" section". Curly Turkey (gobble) 00:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • According to biographer Peggy Dymond Leavey, her many grandchildren enjoyed hearing their grandmother tell stories of her early life,[44] and her Anglican,[56] faith increased with age.[57] - seems like a stray comma after Anglican
  • More later. --Rschen7754 08:11, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • "In the early 1920s, historians suggested that Native scouts" - what are Native scouts? --Rschen7754 08:56, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reworded. That would be scouts sent by the Mohawks. Curly Turkey (gobble) 10:43, 29 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I'm not qualified to comment on the comprehensiveness, but otherwise the article meets the standard. --Rschen7754 18:57, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Dank

Comments. As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. Please check the edit summaries. - Dank (push to talk)

  • Hi Curly, thanks for bringing this to FAC. The lead needs to be longer; about twice as long would do it, as long as it does a good job summarizing the article. I'll be back with more a little later. - Dank (push to talk) 18:55, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Oh, dear. Oh, deary, deary, dear. Natty10000 doesn't seem to agree, as s/he has gutted the lead not just once (18 January), but twice (19 January) since I've submitted this article for FAC. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:58, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Okay, don't do anything with it yet, I'll go ask Natty what's up. - Dank (push to talk) 22:08, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think we can compromise here; I agree that it has a bit more detail than it needs, and I'll trim a bit. See what you think. - Dank (push to talk) 22:37, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • I certainly don't have any problem with a trimming, but cutting out the info about the chocolate company is a big mistake. It can hardly be understated how strongly Canadians associated her name with chocolates, even amongst those familiar with the historical Secord. The first thing most Canadians think of when you mention her name is chocolates. In fact, I first visited the article myself to find out when she founded "her" chocolate company. I think it's important to emphasize they she is both unrelated to the chocolate company, and that her name is strongly associated with the chocolate company amongst Canadians. Otherwise, Canadians (who will almost certainly be the vast majority of readers) will be confused as to her relation with the company (as I was).
            • I didn't cut the information out of the article, I just reduced the bit in the lead to "Laura Secord Chocolates are named for her." Change it however you want ... but if it feels too much like "product placement", then I'll stop here. - Dank (push to talk) 00:45, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
              • I do undertand the "product placement" concerns, but please keep in mind that a quite significant number (quite likely a majority) of Canadian readers who come to this article will be curious about her realtion to the chocolate company. "Laura Secord Chocolates are named after her" only raises more questions than it answers. The fact that the fame of the chocolate company far overshadows Secord's own has more than one reference in the article, and I'm sure I could come up with more with little effort.
              • How about something like this? —
                Before: "On the centennial of her walk, businessman Frank Patrick O'Connor named Laura Secord Chocolates in her honour; it became the most successful candy retailer in Canada, and though the historical Secord and her family had no relation to it, amongst Canadians her name is most often associated with the candy company."
                After: "Though the historical Secord and her family had no relation to it, most Canadians associate her name with the Laura Secord Chocolates company, which was named in her honour on the centennial of her walk."
              • I'm not really sure it's a good idea to leave out the "Canada's most successful candy retailer"; while I sympathise with the "product placement" concern, it does give context for non-Canadian readers—as in: why would Canadians associate her name with a candy company, and even if they do, why does it have to be in the lead?
          • If you're going to do more more trimming to the lead, there's one more detail I think is important not to lose: that her father fought on the American side in the Revolutionary war. Before I atrarted editing it, the article claimed Thomas Ingersoll was a United Empire Loyalist (uncited, of course). It's a belief held by (or assumed) a certain number of Canadians, and I think it's important to disabuse readers of that notion. Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:10, 19 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, I'm fine with those changes. - Dank (push to talk) 01:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would make "(where she stopped at the home of her half-brother Charles, who was ill in bed)" a note; I think it's a bit tangential and interrupts the flow of that sentence. - Dank (push to talk) 00:18, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • The two instances of " are said to " in the personal description section leave me a little skeptical ... who said? - Dank (push to talk) 00:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support on prose per standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 01:10, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Nikkimaria

Sources and images - spotchecks not done. Disclaimer: have previously edited the article

  • FN59, 61, 73: page(s)?
    • 59: Unfortunately, I don't have access to the book, and I'm in Japan. I'll see if I can find an interested Canadian who can pop over to their local library and hunt it down. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Done. The helpful Moxy was very prompt in turning up a page reference for this one. Curly Turkey (gobble) 03:27, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • 61: I don't have access to this one, but it is available on JSTOR. I'll see if I can find some kind soul to track down the page numbers. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • Removed. Rjensen has access to the article, and gave me page refs, but has convinced me the information is really not that important. I've removed the two lines. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:43, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • 73: Removed. I don't have access to this book. The information was trivial, so I've deleted it. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • FN87: page formatting
  • Carstens: given that this is published by a print-on-demand company, what makes it a high-quality reliable source?
  • Berry: work?
    • Done. Typo in the parameter name. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Laura_Secord_warns_Fitzgibbons,_1813.jpg: is this being claimed as Crown copyright?
    • According to Library and Archives Canada: "No restrictions on use for reproductions or publication." and "Copyright: expired; Restrictions on use: nil" Nothing about the crown, or the conditions of the painting's creation. Without evidence to the contrary, I would assume that means the copyright was Lorne's. It was "[a]cquired by Dr. Arthur Doughty, Dominion Archivist, probably through a commission, before 1931", but creation is stated to be c. 1920. Curly Turkey (gobble) 01:28, 21 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Brock's_Monument.jpg: per the Canadian tag, need to mention which of its reasons applies. Also, author is listed as Durer, which is not correct
  • File:Mrs_James_Secord.jpg needs US PD tag. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:24, 20 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Paul MacDermott

  • Support I have reviewed this article using text-to-speech software, so please note there are aspects of it I haven't checked, such as images, but those seem to have been covered by other reviewers. Having listened to it several times over the last few days I find it reads well and provides a broad coverage of the topic. I like articles where I come away having learnt something interesting, and as someone from the UK I was unaware of Laura Secord and the role she played in history. One suggestion I have (though this is optional) is adding the pronunciation of her surname. My software pronounces it as "Seecord", but I've no idea if that is correct. Paul MacDermott (talk) (disclaimer) 12:32, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'd actually wanted to include a pronunciation, but have been unable to find a reliable source that provides one. Growing up in Canada, everyone around me pronounced Laura Secord Chocolates as /ˈsikɔɹd/; when I took my family to the Laura Secord Homestead last summer, the staff pronounced her name that way as well. The Japanese wiki site for her (jp:ローラ・セコール) has her name pronounced in a pseudo-French style (/sekoːɽɯ/), which made me doubt which was correct (I live in Japan, and looked it up for my wife). There are Japanese sources that give a pronunciation similar to the one I grew up with, though. There's a Yahoo! Answers page, which I'm fairly certain is a prank, that pronounces it /ˈlauɹə ˈsɛkɔɹd/. Curly Turkey (gobble) 21:41, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
      • I must admit I did have a quick look myself after my earlier posting, but could find nothing definitive, though from what you say my money's on /ˈsikɔɹd/; being the right one. I've only done a few reviews at FA level, but I don't think it would be an issue. Paul MacDermott (talk) 00:28, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
        • Done. Alright, I've added the pronunciation, though my OCD is eating me up inside—it's the only thing on the page that's uncited. Curly Turkey (gobble) 05:51, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
          • I stress again, my suggestion is an optional one. I don't think its inclusion is essential. Paul MacDermott (talk) 22:23, 28 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
            • Okay, I've taken it out again. Though, I don't actually have OCD (at least, not diagnosed). Curly Turkey (gobble) 23:23, 28 February 2013 (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/Laura_Secord/archive1&oldid=542024186"