Wikipedia:Featured article candidates -

Page too long and unwieldy? Try adding nominations viewer to your scripts page.

This star, with one point broken, indicates that an article is a candidate on this page.

Here, we determine which articles are to be featured articles (FAs). FAs exemplify Wikipedia's very best work and satisfy the FA criteria. All editors are welcome to review nominations; please see the review FAQ.

Before nominating an article, nominators may wish to receive feedback by listing it at Peer review and adding the review to the FAC peer review sidebar. Editors considering their first nomination, and any subsequent nomination before their first FA promotion, are strongly advised to seek the involvement of a mentor, to assist in the preparation and processing of the nomination. Nominators must be sufficiently familiar with the subject matter and sources to deal with objections during the featured article candidates (FAC) process. Nominators who are not significant contributors to the article should consult regular editors of the article before nominating it. Nominators are expected to respond positively to constructive criticism and to make efforts to address objections promptly. An article should not be on Featured article candidates and Peer review or Good article nominations at the same time.

The FAC coordinators—Ian Rose, Gog the Mild, David Fuchs and FrB.TG—determine the timing of the process for each nomination. For a nomination to be promoted to FA status, consensus must be reached that it meets the criteria. Consensus is built among reviewers and nominators; the coordinators determine whether there is consensus. A nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the coordinators:

actionable objections have not been resolved;
consensus for promotion has not been reached;
insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met; or
a nomination is unprepared.

It is assumed that all nominations have good qualities; this is why the main thrust of the process is to generate and resolve critical comments in relation to the criteria, and why such resolution is given considerably more weight than declarations of support.

Do not use graphics or complex templates on FAC nomination pages. Graphics such as Done and Not done slow down the page load time, and complex templates can lead to errors in the FAC archives. For technical reasons, templates that are acceptable are {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}}, used to hide offtopic discussions, and templates such as {{green}} that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples without altering fonts. Other templates such as {{done}}, {{not done}}, {{tq}}, {{tq2}}, and {{xt}}, may be removed.

An editor is normally allowed to be the sole nominator of one article at a time, but two nominations are allowed if the editor is a co-nominator on at least one of them. An editor may ask the approval of the coordinators to add a second sole nomination after the first has gained significant support. If a nomination is archived, the nominator(s) should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating. None of the nominators may nominate or co-nominate any article for two weeks unless given leave to do so by a coordinator; if such an article is nominated without asking for leave, a coordinator will decide whether to remove it. A coordinator may exempt from this restriction an archived nomination that attracted no (or minimal) feedback.

Nominations in urgent need of review are listed here. To contact the FAC coordinators, please leave a message on the FAC talk page, or use the {{@FAC}} notification template elsewhere.

A bot will update the article talk page after the article is promoted or the nomination archived; the delay in bot processing can range from minutes to several days, and the {{FAC}} template should remain on the talk page until the bot updates {{Article history}}.

Table of Contents – This page: Purge cache

Featured content:

Featured article candidates (FAC):

Featured article review (FAR):

Today's featured article (TFA):

Featured article tools:

Nomination procedure

Before nominating an article, ensure that it meets all of the FA criteria and that peer reviews are closed and archived.
Place {{subst:FAC}} at the top of the talk page of the nominated article and save the page.
From the FAC template, click on the red "initiate the nomination" link or the blue "leave comments" link. You will see pre-loaded information; leave that text. If you are unsure how to complete a nomination, please post to the FAC talk page for assistance.
Below the preloaded title, complete the nomination page, sign with ~~~~, and save the page.
Copy this text: {{Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/name of nominated article/archiveNumber}} (substituting Number), and edit this page (i.e., the page you are reading at the moment), pasting the template at the top of the list of candidates. Replace "name of ..." with the name of your nomination. This will transclude the nomination into this page. In the event that the title of the nomination page differs from this format, use the page's title instead.

Supporting and opposing

To respond to a nomination, click the "Edit" link to the right of the article nomination (not the "Edit this page" link for the whole FAC page). All editors are welcome to review nominations; see the review FAQ for an overview of the review process.
To support a nomination, write *'''Support''', followed by your reason(s), which should be based on a full reading of the text. If you have been a significant contributor to the article before its nomination, please indicate this. A reviewer who specializes in certain areas of the FA criteria should indicate whether the support is applicable to all of the criteria.
To oppose a nomination, write * '''Oppose''', followed by your reason(s). Each opposition must provide a specific rationale that can be addressed. If nothing can be done in principle to address the opposition, a coordinator may disregard it. References on style and grammar do not always agree; if a contributor cites support for a certain style in a standard reference work or other authoritative source, reviewers should consider accepting it. Reviewers who oppose are strongly encouraged to return after a few days to check whether their opposition has been addressed. To withdraw the opposition, strike it out (with <s> ... </s>) rather than removing it. Alternatively, reviewers may transfer lengthy, resolved commentary to the FAC archive talk page, leaving a link in a note on the FAC archive.
To provide constructive input on a nomination without specifically supporting or opposing, write *'''Comment''' followed by your advice.
For ease of editing, a reviewer who enters lengthy commentary may create a neutral fourth-level subsection, named either ==== Review by EditorX ==== or ==== Comments by EditorX ==== (do not use third-level or higher section headers). Please do not create subsections for short statements of support or opposition—for these a simple * '''Support''',*'''Oppose''', or *'''Comment''' followed by your statement of opinion, is sufficient. Please do not use a semicolon to bold a subheading; this creates accessibility problems. Specifically, a semi-colon creates an HTML description list with a description term list item. As a result, assistive technology is unable to identify the text in question as a heading and thus provide navigation to it, and screen readers will make extra list start/item/end announcements.
If a nominator feels that an Oppose has been addressed, they should say so, either after the reviewer's signature, or by interspersing their responses in the list provided by the reviewer. Per talk page guidelines, nominators should not cap, alter, strike, or add graphics to comments from other editors. If a nominator finds that an opposing reviewer is not returning to the nomination page to revisit improvements, this should be noted on the nomination page, with a diff to the reviewer's talk page showing the request to reconsider.

Nominator(s): Min968 (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Yongle Emperor, the third emperor of the Ming dynasty. I have tried to improve this article as well as the articles related to the Ming dynasty. Min968 (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review

[edit]

I see no problems with the sources. Several of the images need alt captions though. Векочел (talk) 02:23, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Portrait_assis_de_l'empereur_Ming_Chengzu.jpg needs a US tag. Ditto File:仁孝文皇后徐氏（明太宗（成祖））.jpg

Several of the maps use non-English labels - suggest translating them. Also see MOS:COLOUR

File:Yongle_Dadian_Encyclopedia_1403.jpg needs a US tag and is flagged as lacking source

Also, not an image comment, but sources would benefit from editing for consistency - for example, there are multiple different formats given for publication location, and some books don't include any. A Manual of Style review would also be helpful. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:48, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The art student Tao Sijin murdered her romantic partner Liu Mengying in 1932, sparking a widespread media controversy over homosexuality and its alleged link to violence across the Chinese press. Tao's defense jumped on this to try to present her as a sympathetic, tragic figure, shaping public ideas of lesbianism at a time where Chinese society was growing more hostile to it.. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Trial image is missing alt text

Couldn't confirm publication status of first image so changed to another with a known publication date (1932). The second was published 1929; added this to image description. Added alt-text. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 21:16, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by for now: The deathbed of Tao Yuanqing, August 1929. Tao Sijin is on the left and Xu Qinwen stands behind her.. She's presumably front left (the figure furthest left, in the back row, seems to be a man). Is Xu the one behind her to our left (in the glasses and bow tie), or to our right (in the straight tie)? Come to think of it, which "left" do we mean: see Proper right and proper left. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:47, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The murder and the ensuing court trial received large amounts of media attention and controversy across China, - Is "receiving controversy" grammatically correct?
Press was initially highly opposed to Tao -> Feels like this should be "The press was" or "Press coverage was"
Were these obsolete medical terms obsolete at the time, or are they now obsolete?
- Now obsolete - clarified.-G
Feels like a link to Mitigating factor wouldn't be amiss in the discussion of the defense.
- Hmm, but where? I don't want it to be an easter egg after all.-G
The prosecution filed a motion to dismiss the evaluation; they argued that her ability to be admitted to Hangzhou National College pointed to some soundness of mental health. They noted that her family had not previously mentioned poor mental health when she lived by herself, and accused the defense of raising the insanity defense solely as a means to reduce her sentence. - I'd use Tao explicitly in this series of sentences at least once. She hasn't been named in this paragraph
arguing that it misrepresented Tao's behavior as "ruthless". - What is "it" in this sentence?
I've made some minor changes; please review. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:58, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Crisco 1492: Thank you very much! Responded. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 23:57, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In 1910, Tao Sijin (陶思瑾) was born in Shaoxing, Zhejiang. Her family were writers and artists; her older brother Tao Yuanqing (陶元慶) was an influential painter and graphic designer. --> Tao Sijin (陶思瑾) was born in 1910 in Shaoxing, Zhejiang, into a family of writers and artists. Her older brother, Tao Yuanqing (陶元慶), was an influential painter and graphic designer.
- Partially implemented; I don't think we strictly need commas around Tao Yuanqing in this case.-G
Liu Mengying (劉夢瑩) was born to a wealthy and politically influential family in Hunan in 1912. --> Liu Mengying (劉夢瑩), born in 1912 in Hunan, came from a wealthy and politically influential family.
I recommend removing the red links.
- I'll keep them; they're useful.-G

Min968 (talk) 17:35, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – Pending

[edit]

Will do soon. A side note, I believe the red links provide some value to readers, most at least linking to the equivalent Chinese article, so I disagree with the removal suggestion above. Aza24 (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting (FACR 2c)

Stray comma before "A Problem of Glands"?
Please hyphenate the Further reading ISBN
(For both instances) I might consider including the full journal title name for Nan Nü (Nan Nü: Men, Women and Gender in China). It gives more context for the reader, and I'm seeing the full title used online in some places
"Chicago University Press" is not the correct publisher name in the further reading (should be "University of..."; see target page)
Interesting. The original Chinese article title (Li 2017) does not have the word "murder", but I am seeing it in their own English title. Also it should really be "Public Opinion" without the S, but they have used the S as well. I suppose we should stick to their translation.
Typically multi refs should be in numerical order. Please reorder the refs after "was arrested at the scene."
Thank you for including the original 1934 quote in its entirity, with English! Why do you use "……" for the chinese but "... " for the English? I would suggest [...] for both.
I believe 情杀 is really just "Crime of Passion" so I would suggest using that more familiar phrase for the English title.

Reliability (FACR 1c)

All recent and academic sources, I see no issues here. The one exception is a primary source, clearly introduced, and credited to it self.
- Although, do none of these sources comment on this primary source?
- Li mentions it, but I figured it would be more useful to just cite it directly, since I'm just summarizing what it reported.-G

Coverage (FACR 1c)

I am confused why The Emerging Lesbian: Female Same-Sex Desire in Modern China is in further reading? Does it discuss the topic at hand? If so, it should really be used in the article, as you are relying on very few sources in general. If it is a broader discussion on lesbian culture in China, it does not belong in the further reading here. If the latter is true, you might add it to the further reading of the articles in further reading.
- It briefly mentions the case (although not in enough detail to cite itself), and it is cited by almost every single other source on the matter. I feel like it's useful, but I can remove it if need be.-G
Is there nothing in Schizo: The Liberatory Potential of Madness (2019) or Keywords in Queer Sinophone Studies (2020) worth using? Posible that there is indeed nothing, but wanted to make sure you've seen these.
- I checked these; just brief mentions.-G

Verifiability (FACR 1c and 1f)

Where did you read the the Li 2017 source? Providing no link, doi etc. makes this difficult for anyone to verify. I may just consider attaching the research gate link ([1]). But a more direct site to the published journal issue on line is of course preferable.
- I sent Generalissima the Research Hub copy. I know personally I'm not keen on linking Research Hub, as automated tools flag it as potentially unreliable. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:17, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - Agree with Crisco here; I think the users can find the ResearchGate article by searching for it anyhow.-G
The Nie 2017 DOI is broken on my end
- Weird, it's what Brill itself says is the DOI. marked it as broken.-G

Spotchecks – Pending

[edit]

Signing on. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:35, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): 750 h+ 15:06, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about The Emancipation of Mimi, the tenth studio effort and comeback album of Mariah Carey, following the critical and commercial failures of her previous 21st-century releases. It contains some of her most well known songs, most prominently "We Belong Together", which spent 14 weeks at number one on the US music chart—the longest of any song in the 2000s. I've done major revisions on this article and I now believe it meets FA criteria. Enjoy! 750 h+ 15:06, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I have a few prose comments that I hope you can appreciate:

"...Twista told her that the beat had initially intended for him..." — Had initially been intended for him. "had initially intended" implies the beat itself intended (whatever intended in this universe might mean) for him, like it had agency. A funny mental image, but alas, as far as I'm aware, beats do not have agency.
"...recalling that she felt a 'great feeling about it..." — Saying that she felt a feeling is a bit tautological, no? Couldn't you just say that she "had a 'great feeling about it'"?
"Its bassline and chord progression align with piano and string notes." — Forgive me for not being totally musically inclined, but what does "align" mean here? They play the same notes? They change notes at the same intervals? Could you clarify, if not for me, for the reader?"
"...with The New York Times noting Carey's mimicry of Destiny's Child's double-time articulation to stay contemporary." — I don't quite understand what this means...? How does one articulate in double-time? Does her voice articulate in double time? Do the instruments? Also, does Destiny's Child articulate in double-time to stay contemporary, or does Carey do it on this track to stay contemporary with Destiny's Child?
"The Emancipation of Mimi was initially scheduled to be released on March 22, 2005." — ...but...? Why was it instead released eight days later?
"...with Jessica Bennett dubbing it 2005's definitive R&B soundtrack, its singles gripping culture, zeitgeist, and events like weddings and proms." — I can't quite parse this. The first part is understandable, but everything after the comma seems disjointed. Do the singles themselves have a "gripping culture"? Or are they instead gripping culture? Are "culture, zeitgeist, and events like weddings and proms" all linked to the verb "gripping"? If so, aren't "culture" and "zeitgeist" largely the same thing? I've always said (and heard) "cultural zeigeist".

Otherwise, this is a very well-written article. It has a quality I always adore in Wikipedia articles where the prose is neutral—like it should be—but it flows. It is very readable and engaging. That's what a Featured Article should have, in my opinion, and as I see no more outstanding bits, I think this is a very FA-ready article. These are all superficial, fixable-in-one-pass problems, so I look forward to your response. Thanksya for the interesting read! nub :) 20:03, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 01:09, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the self-titled debut EP of Yeah Yeah Yeahs. I am nominating it for FAC after two reviews from peers @Ceoil and @Z1720, and I think I've expanded it to the best of my ability and sorted everything how I could. I went through a peer review, then a GA review, so it should be ready for FA. Thank you! Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 01:09, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Yyy2003.png is of quite poor quality

It was the earliest available image of the band of this time period, but I replaced it with a higher quality picture from a little later in the decade.

What I have as of current is: "It illustrates the sound of Yeah Yeah Yeahs's first recordings and is the earliest available example of some quality in regards to their beginning sound." When you say to expand it more, what else should I add? Should it be more specific?

Yes - that's a fine purpose of use for the band's article, but not for this one. I'd also suggest including more of these details. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:29, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria I tried my best to expand the rationale for this article. How is this? Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 17:35, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Better. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:39, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support (ec with Nikki). Watched the page develop and did the GA review and guided a pre-FAC pre-run focused on source quality, text to source integrity and comprehensiveness, with no issues. So happy to support. Have done extensive copy edits but looking forward to further suggestions for improvement. As a disclaimer am a significant YYY fan. Ceoil (talk) 01:27, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Ceoil and @Nikkimaria! ❤️ Watagwaan? I really like the color red! 03:06, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): AxonsArachnida (talk) 08:02, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Huhu beetle, one of New Zealand's largest and most prominent beetles. They are well known among kiwis, firstly for flying into houses at night when the lights are left on and secondly for the larvae being a (often feared) food source. It is also one of the best researched beetles in New Zealand and has important implications for the timber industry. After lots of work, I believe it is ready to go through the gauntlet of the Featured Article review process. If successful, this would also make it the only beetle species Featured Article. AxonsArachnida (talk) 08:02, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I firstly want to say that I'm not knowledgeable on insects, so I'd prefer not to examine the more technical details. I did notice:

Some Māori words are missing {{lang|mi|}} in § Etymology
"The fully grown larva (called tataka)" - is 'tataka' another common English name for it, or is it mainly used in Māori?
Links can be added for 'Agathis australis' (kauri), 'Beilschmiedia tawa' (tawa), 'Māori people', and 'oak'.

- Alexeyevitch^(talk) 09:22, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alex. I've implemented these changes.

I am a bit busy so I may not end up doing a full/thorough review.

'Huhu, Titirangi, Auckland, New Zealand' this caption could be more descriptive e.g. 'A huhu beetle in Titirangi, Auckland'.

File:Huhu, Titirangi, Auckland 0604, New Zealand imported from iNaturalist photo 467356624.jpg is listed as CC BY at [2] but at [3] (which appears to be the origin) it is listed as CC BY NC. The licence may have been changed from CC BY to CC BY NC (CC licences are not revokable so its still able to be used) but unfortunately the page was not archived so I am unable to tell whether the licence was changed or not.

What you're looking at is the observations copyright status. iNaturalist users have separate copyrights for the images and the observation data itself. In this case, the image is CC-BY 4.0 but the observation data is CC-BY NC 4.0 as you noted.

Oh I see, that is confusing.

'Pale white eggs shaped like little rugby balls' the other captions just describe the life stage, this one should too, although the description did make me chuckle.

Whoops, that was meant to be the alt text!!

File:Wildfoods 2021 MRD 02.jpg may be an issue. NZ has no freedom of panorama for 2d works, whilst the text itself shouldn't be copyrightable the design of the sign could be. The artwork in the top left should be cropped out as well.

I didn't know that. From what I've read, it seems like you're right. Removed.

I've brought it up on Commons, if the decision there is that the sign does not qualify for copyright in New Zealand it can be re-added. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Prionoplus_reticularis_253198836.jpg Inaturalist lists at CC BY NC and is archived as being CC BY NC at the date of upload.

Same as the other iNat photo with image/observation having different copyrights.

Traumnovelle (talk) 09:46, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TraumnovelleCheers. I've gone over everything. AxonsArachnida (talk) 00:22, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

'Because the larva feeds on logs, it may be considered a forestry pest.' Why 'may be'? The source says it is one and I don't see any reason why this claim would be contested/doubted. Traumnovelle (talk) 09:20, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Short review, as I've already given comments during the PR that have all been addressed. I will likely support once these are addressed.

The second sentence is maybe more elegant as: "It is a large, distinctive species whose adults reach up to 5 cm in length."
Is gymnosperm needed in the lead? Should be linked if it stays, but might be too technical
, who have specific words for some of its life stages -> I'd omit, sounds a bit weird here
Consider including the lifetime of adults in the lead. After I read they could not feed I immediately wanted to know how long they live for.
Cognates in related languages (like Tagalog bukbok) refer to weevils known to infest wood and rice across tropical Southeast Asia -> Link cognates. Might need an explanation too. Simplify sentence structure by replacing 'known to' by 'that'?
Would this be a better explanation of basal? "meaning it split off earlier than the other species that were studied" (chatGPT suggestion). The section switches between Prioninae and Rhipidocerini. How do they relate? Can one of these complicated words be omitted? Overall, the prose of this paragraph is a bit weak.
- That explanation is somewhat clearer. I removed Prioninae and just stuck with the other.
Explain frass?
The treatment of the logs is cited to studies from around 2001. As it talks about new methods being proposed, what's the latest on this? Are they all still treated with methyl bromide?
- Added what's currently used (at least as of 2023, but there's nothing to indicate its changed since then).

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:56, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Femke Thanks for your comments (including in the Peer Review). I've gone over everything above. AxonsArachnida (talk) 09:12, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Femke And now I've gone over your remaining reply :) AxonsArachnida (talk) 08:39, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review in detail later, but for now I've just noticed inconsistency in the chemical names in the forestry pests section. I suggest doing both with their old names, methyl bromide and cyanogen, or, better, both as IUPAC, bromomethane and ethanedinitrile, but not one of each Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:47, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I made these tweaks to the lead, please check.
The first specimen of huhu beetle to be used for taxonomic purposes was collected by botanist Andrew Sinclair during a voyage where he visited the Bay of Islands and went on botanical expeditions alongside botanists William Colenso and Joseph Dalton Hooker.— suggest in which instead of where, also three botanist/botanical in the sentence.
- Changed where to in which. Removed one botanist usage.
The beetle isn't named once in two entire sections, starting with Description.
- Stated the name a couple more times near the beginning of sections
I made these tweaks to the Description, please check.
- All good changes. Thanks.
I copyedited Behaviour, but and with the male mandibles to stimulating the female appears to be faulty
I've removed multiple known to be from predators.
Forestry pest as above
- Changed ethanedinitrile to cyanogen. IUPAC names would be nice, but bromomethane/methyl bromide is always referred to as the latter in forestry literature and regulations for some reason, so I've had to stick with the old names for clarity.
~~More to come tomorrow~~ That's all for now Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:41, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks @Jimfbleak, I've addressed your comments. AxonsArachnida (talk) 08:55, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed this when it was at PR. I liked what I saw there and I see that all of the issues I found have been resolved, so happy to support. RoySmith (talk) 13:38, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Planning to do a pass over here shortly. Standby. ThaesOfereode (talk) 14:27, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

Overall, the lede needs some prose work. It's staccato and has little flow; it moves from thought to thought seemingly at random. The first paragraph should include the absolute most important information, the following paragraphs should be somewhat organized by topic. I'm pretty breezy with how you want to organize the topic, but it needs to have a topic of some sort.
- Okay. How does this sound for a lede structure: Paragraph 1 covering Description, distribution and usage as food source, as these seem most important. Paragraph 2 covering life cycle/hosts/gut microbiome/forestry pest (because these topics can probably connect to each other seamlessly). This leaves predators, behaviour, taxonomy and etymology. I don't know how to weave these in organically. It could just be a separate misc paragraph.
Issue with the altitude being mismatched with the body needs to be addressed.
The lede is awfully short for this. It should summarize the main points of the article, but it's missing tons of information. Remember, this is the part most people stop reading at.
- Is it? Looking through other FA invertebrates it seems to be a standard size. Regardless I'll add a few more things once the lede structure is sorted.
distinctive – What makes them distinctive?
- Clarified that its a visually distinctive species
During the night, the beetle may fly around in search of a mate. – Is that notable at all? It's a nocturnal animal that reproduces sexually; of course it would. Also, at night would be more natural, no?
- As opposed to searching for food or shelter.
New Zealand has to treat logs – Does the federal Kiwi government do this or is this mandated by them and done by third parties?
- Third parties. Added clarification to lede and forestry section.

Taxonomy

collected by botanist Andrew Sinclair during – You might point out that he (and his companions) were British.
zoologist Adam White – Ut supra
by entomologist Thomas Broun – Ut supra
Broun ~~then went on to~~ produce → Broun produced – cf. WP:POSA
ultimately Austronesian in origin – This link is kind of WP:EGGy. I would either link Austronesian languages instead of PAn, or rephrase.
in related languages – Very EGGy; I expected the link to take me to comparative linguistics or something. Say in related Malayo-Polynesian languages, vel sim.
semantically evolved – Recommend linking Semantic change
This stage is known in Māori as tataka – Is this distinct from the stated stages below?
Not mandatory, but you may consider using Te Aka or a similar source to provide literal translations. Knowing that the insect is called pepe te muimui (no dashes btw) is not all that interesting; knowing that it translates to something like 'swarm butterfly' is more interesting.
- I'm a bit hesitant. In the pepe te muimui example, muimui translates to swarm or to small. I don't see why I can just presume which it is meant to be.
Should Etymology be in the Taxonomy section or on its own?
- Shifted to its own section.
the phylogeny (a diagram representing evolutionary history) – Phylogeny *is* the evolutionary history, not its representation. A phylogenetic tree is the representation.
of Australian Rhipidocerini using genomic – Gloss "Rhipidocerini"
~~The phylogeny produced by~~ the study placed → The study placed – cf. POSA

Description

Is there a reason everything is "the" and singular? I feel like "Pupae are XYZ" is more natural than "The pupa is".
- To keep the singular usage consistent throughout the article.
The head and thorax have a thick layer of brown hairs that make it appear somewhat fuzzy. – Is it not actually fuzzy?
Spines are present on the femur and tibia, the third and fourth segments of the legs – We don't need to link femur and tibia to the same target; just link "legs" and leave it there.
There is a single record of a female developing an extra pair of ovaries. – This is kind of interesting, but I'm not sure what I'm supposed to take away from this. If there were a guy out there with eight eyes, that would be interesting, but it wouldn't necessarily warrant inclusion in a basic description of human anatomy.
The larvae have a well-developed head capsule – Why not link to Insect head?
with some minor morphological differences – ...such as?
It is white and is cigar-shaped. – Is "cigar-shaped" a term of art? I'm looking at the picture of the eggs and I would never in a million years describe it as "cigar-shaped".
The surface is unsculptured – Gloss "unsculptured".

Life cycle

Link Clutch (eggs)
The clutch size feels contradictory. Is 10–50 "average"? Where do the larger numbers occur?
excavates the initial gallery – No clue what this means
pupal chamber – Gloss
As adults, the species has a sex ratio of roughly 1:1 – You can just say the sex ratio is roughly equal and you might link it. It's more accessible.

Hosts

Distribution and habitat

Behaviour

strongly attracted to light – Link Phototaxis#Insects or other if you have a better idea; I'm not a bug guy
It will become active after dusk, apparently triggered by the decreasing light intensity. – As opposed to...?
The female tends to come out earlier than the male and stay in place. – I don't know that this means.
olfactory cue – Linked in lede but not here?
The adult of both sexes will exhibit a display behaviour if disturbed – Link Anti-predator adaptation?
mandibles opening to their full extent – Delink Mandibles here; you link a different, more appropriate page above
When anything touches the mandibles, it can deliver a bite and will latch onto the object. – Link Insect bite; is there anything like the Schmidt sting pain index which might indicate how painful this is (for a non-Kiwi like myself)?
The beetles escalate conflicts into combat by grappling with their forelegs, typically throwing one opponent onto its back. – Is this just intraspecies conflict or does it do this with other critters? Same with the following sentence.
with the male mandibles stimulating the female – Where on the female?
burrows into the logs form a series of "galleries" that vary in structure depending on the size and age of the log. – Isn't this already addressed above? Also why quotation marks for galleries here?
with the tunnels beginning to intersect with each other – With one larva's own tunnels or other tunnels?

Gut biome

was found to harbor – Not a Kiwi, but it should be "harbour" in NZ English, right?

As food

The huhu larva is edible to humans – Awkward and the link is very EGGy; you may just link Edibility and put Insects as food in a {{broader}} hatnote. Try something like The huhu larva is eaten by humans to solve awkwardness.
farmed as a food source – Link Insect farming#As feed and food
meets the WHO essential amino acid requirements – What? Like volume, number, breadth, or what? Similar issues in the following sentence.

Predators

The fungi generally infects – Either The fungi generally infect or The fungus general infects; I recommend the latter.
protozoan Gregarina – WP:SOB vio. Rephrase.

Forestry pest

That's all I got for now. ThaesOfereode (talk) 16:24, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Cyberlink420 (talk) 13:06, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the Transfer Pak, an accessory for the Nintendo 64 that allows it to connect to Game Boy games and exchange data with them, enabling new features. While considered innovative for the time, very few games supported it, and retrospective commentary has labeled it an afterthought at best.

Information on the device and its functionality was incomplete for a long time, so I made this article my pet project the last few years, and now believe it's in as complete a state as the currently available sources will allow. This is my first time going through the FAC process, so the article has been peer-reviewed and given a once-over by a FAC mentor. Any comments and feedback would be greatly appreciated. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 13:06, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image is appropriately licensed. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:17, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am open to the inclusion of an additional non-free image demonstrating the Transfer Pak being utilized in a game (something along the lines of [4] or [5]) if it's believed that it could be used to improve the article. An image of the 64 GB Cable might also make sense for inclusion, but because it was never released, it's only possible to get non-free images from online outlets or magazines that provided coverage at the time (such as this page from Monthly Nintendo Power). -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 02:00, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cut "GameCube – Game Boy Advance link cable" from see also since its included in prose

Done.

"the "Surf" ability" surf isn't an ability, its a move. Given that abilities and moves are two different things in pokemon, the correct term should be used

Done.

Weather or not outlets are linked is inconsistent

Done.

shouldn't the table sort chronologically instead of alphabetically?

That was a conscious choice. I considered going chronological at one point, but I felt the information flowed better and was more easily conveyed alphabetically due to several sequels having similar or overlapping Transfer Pak functionality (e.g. Pokémon, Nushi Tsuri, Mario Artist, Mario sports, Power Pros). I put together a mockup in my sandbox that shows the games in chronological order, which I genuinely believe looks worse.

That's what I found ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 06:19, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Olliefant: All points addressed. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 08:49, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Crispybeatle (talk) 22:04, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about "A Pillow of Winds" a pastoral, psychadelic, and acoustic love ballad made by the English band Pink Floyd, featured in their 1971 album Meddle. It's one of my favourite songs from the catalogue so that's why I decided to rework it and nominate for FAC. Crispybeatle (talk)

No need to link Gilmour twice in the lead
No need for capital on Mahjong
"Robert Christgau lamented the use of the word "before" in the third verse" - the body says the offending word was "behold" - which is correct?
"meanwhile Daniel Griffiths praised it for not using love clichés." => "while Daniel Griffiths praised it for not using love clichés."
"where it's possible" - no contractions please
"where the rest of the sessions would take place" => "where the rest of the sessions took place"
Gilmour should be named in full (and linked) on his first mention in the lead. Also, remove the Easter egg link to him in "Dave's Guitar Thing"
""A Pillow of Winds" would be later finished" => ""A Pillow of Winds" was later finished"
Does ref 1 source the entire section?
"pastoral[5] love[6] ballad[7] " - looks horrible with a ref after each word. Is there a way to do this differently?
"Along with "Fearless"" - more context please - was this on the same album?
"It's followed" - as above
"Nick Mason's prudent accompaniment" - "prudent" according to whom?
"the song features no real tune, and along with the arpeggios and the acoustic guitar's nylon strings, gives" => "the song features no real tune, and this, along with the arpeggios and the acoustic guitar's nylon strings, gives"
""A Pillow of Winds" Gilmour's lead vocal features a sleepy-sounding tone" - why is the song title there? it doesn't work grammatically
"where former member Syd Barrett writes" => "in which former member Syd Barrett writes" (a song is not a location)
No need to link Meddle twice in the release section
"described "A Pillow of Winds", along with "San Tropez", as an "ozone ballad"" - two songs can't be described as "a ballad" (singular)
There's a mix of tenses in that section
"Waters' lyrics has a mixed reception" - "lyrics" is plural
"criticizing the use" => "criticising the use"
On what basis was the use of that one word criticised......?
"Guesdon and Margotin theorize that Waters could've helped Gilmour" => "Guesdon and Margotin theorise that Waters could have helped Gilmour"
External links section has no content so there's no need for it to be there
That's what I got on a first pass -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:57, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Done and thank you, English is not my native language, so I might commit weird errors Crispybeatle (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:54, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When people talk about the gender bias in healthcare, endometriosis is often the first disease that is brought up. It causes tissue like that of the endometrium (the tissue that bleeds during periods) to grow outside of the uterus, for instance on bowels or in the lungs. Even thought endometriosis is common (10% of reproductive-age women), individuals wait an average of 5 to 12 years for a diagnosis, and can experience years of intense pain in the meantime. Treatment does not always work, or can stop working over time. Research funding is relatively low.

The article received a lovely review from IntentionallyDense, a great GA review from Strange Orange and an incredibly detailed pre-FAC review from UndercoverClassicist. I'm looking forward to further comments. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:54, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A well researched article: I have a few comments on the prose:

There are many examples of "outside of", which should just be "outside" as it is a preposition. I know the former is used in the US, but it this article there are examples of the latter too. The former are:

grows outside of the uterus
Lesions outside of the pelvic region
also provide an explanation for endometriosis outside of the pelvic region
allows endometriosis to continue growing outside of the womb.
endometrium-like tissue grows outside of the uterus
Lesions outside of the pelvic region,
but also provide an explanation for endometriosis outside of the pelvic region
This weakened response to progesterone allows endometriosis to continue growing outside of the womb.
All replaced

Here "The likelihood of symptoms returning after surgery is highly variable, with studies reporting recurrence rates anywhere between 6% and 67%." I find these with+participle expressions rather ugly. Can we say "and studies have reported"?

I've used a semicolon instead to link the two sentences without with. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:39, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here "In terms of surgery" - does this mean "regarding"?

It does, have replaced this with a new introductory sentence to be more concrete: "Surgery to remove endometriomas can help with fertility"

Here "The disease does not always worsen over time; in studies that track people over time" There is "over time...over time"

Removed the first 'over time'

Do we need some punctuation here, "It forms at or close to the location of the surgical cut"

I've instead replaced 'close to' with near. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:39, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

-Graham Beards (talk) 11:25, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here "In contrast, animals like rodents and non-human primates with an estrous cycle, in which the endometrium is reabsorbed rather than shed, do not develop the disease." While rodents do not develop the disease naturally, they are widely used as models of the disease. (See Zeng Y, Hang F, Peng C, Zhao L, Ou S, Luo L, Liu B (June 2024). "Research progress in rodent models of endometriosis". J Reprod Immunol. 163: 104219. doi:10.1016/j.jri.2024.104219. PMID 38422807.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: article number as page number (link)). Perhaps this should be said? Graham Beards (talk) 14:11, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've added the word naturally, and a sentence on animal models to the research directions section. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:54, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll gradually add to this when I have time.

The first paragraph under "Other factors" is quite complicated in terms of sentence structure.

I've simplified the last sentence, I hope you don't mind.
Thanks. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:44, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what to do with the first sentence; it's not bad, but I had to read it twice to understand what it was saying, and a grammar purist might not like opening with "Because".
I've changed it to "Most women with retrograde menstruation do not develop endometriosis, so other factors must also contribute to its development". Better?

Awesome, thanks.

The "as is done" in the second sentence feels ungrammatical and is at any rate confusing (what is done, "develop"?). I suggest putting the cancer reference at the end of the sentence, so the reader doesn't have to jump between subjects. "For endometriosis to develop, its cells must evade destruction by the immune system, attach to a surface, and promote the formation of new blood vessels, similar to some cancerous tumors." (I've thrown in "destruction" as well to make it clear why the immune system matters – laypeople may not know that the immune system attacks abnormal cells.) There might also be another way to phrase this, like "Endometriosis can only develop if ..."
Done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:44, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure how I feel about angiogenesis being mentioned in this sentence but not linked, only being linked later on.
I sometimes put the MOS aside if I can put the link in a more pertinent place. I think I resolved the MOS issue somewhat by linking from the caption, which is truly the first place in the section and I think we're okay with double linking from captions? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:44, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, I didn't notice that link. All good then.

I added it after your comment :). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:24, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I couldn't find any good link targets for the other two list items. Unfortunately we don't have a good article on immune evasion, best I could do is Cancer immunology or the redirect immunosurveillance. (I discovered how poorly this topic is covered on Wikipedia back in January...) For "attach to a surface", maybe Cell adhesion? Whether you add any of these links is up to you on account of how poor the choices are.
I don't know enough about the technical details to feel confident adding these links. It seems like immonusurveillance is mostly used in cancer research, but the term does pop up when I google 'endometriosis + immunosurveillance', so the redirect might be one of those with a possibility for a broader article instead of section link. Best to leave them out?

Sounds good, as I said I won't push for it.

"Endometriosis lesions require estrogen to grow" – the source says estradiol. The distinction isn't hugely relevant, since estradiol is the main form of estrogen, but for the sake of accuracy it may be better to write "estradiol, the most potent form of estrogen" or "most abundant" or similar.
Instead, I've added another source that talks about estrogens being required for growth. There's some worry that the estrogens in contraceptives might stimulate growth too. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:05, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks.

I realize "clearance" is the term used in the source, but that feels like jargon, and there's really only one way cells can be "cleared": by killing them. I think a clearer term like "destruction" would be better here.
Done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:44, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Please, please replace "plays a key role in" with something more specific...
Having looked at the paper I'm citing and a few others, I'm struggling to find something more specific. I've made a different change, as sources seem to talk slightly more about angiogenesis in the development and progression than in maintenance (e.g. [6][7] (only development/progression) [8] also maintenance), vs the cited source who just says maintenance. I'm happy to make it less specific and cut the second sentence as too technical and merge the para with the one above. What kind of information are you looking for? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:24, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"Plays a key role in" says nothing about the relationship between the two terms, other than that they are connected in some unspecified yet important way. I wish it were abolished entirely, but unfortunately it's common in science writing, where incentives are set for authors to puff up their discoveries as much as possible without making claims their evidence does not support. Here, it could mean that more angiogenesis increases the formation and maintenance of endometriosis, or it could mean that more angiogenesis impairs said formation and maintenance. (You might think this is silly, but there are diseases like macular degeneration where more angiogenesis is harmful to the tissue being supplied, and at any rate the reader shouldn't be required to jump through these logical hoops themselves.) Toadspike [Talk] 13:52, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, you're after the direction! That is supported by the sources (more angiogenesis = likely more endo). Overall, sources leaned towards more cautious wording, so changed the wording to 'is a likely driver'. I've also removed the next sentence which was too complicated and didn't add enough. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:19, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Use of serial commas isn't consistent. They're mostly absent, but this section has one. It's best to pick one and be consistent. I prefer using them for clarity, but if you choose not to that's also okay. (MOS:SERIAL)

I've now done them all.

"There are multiple possible causes of pain" – I suggest appending "associated with endometriosis". Though this is certainly true of all pain, that's not the point of this article.
I suggest replacing "gold standard" with something more specific, like "preferred option". I had a long rant here, but I accidentally deleted it and won't bother writing it out again. Suffice it to say this is another phrase I wish were abolished from medical writing entirely.
Well, it's the option with the highest accuracy, but not the preferred option in many cases anymore. Why is it problematic?
I'm wondering if "stroma" could be replaced with something like "connective tissue". Slightly more comprehensible, but longer. Up to you.
If I click stromal cell, it is described as if these cells are connective tissue precursor cells. But stroma (tissue) talks about it as connective tissue. I'm a bit confused. Happy to explain this better once that confusion is resolved. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:59, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The real definition is "tissue that is not functional", which is kinda messy and much broader than just connective tissue. This paper [9] uses the alternative "supporting tissue", which seems a lot better. What do you think? Toadspike [Talk] 21:57, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Explanation added. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:53, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"ureter of the urinary system" – dunno if you really need "of the urinary system". There aren't any others, and it doesn't provide that much additional clarity to someone who doesn't know what a ureter is.
Replaced with a longer more specific explanation. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:36, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pic caption "Clockwise from the top left is superficial peritoneal endometriosis, deep infiltrating endometriosis, a ruptured chocolate cyst and a mass of scar endometriosis encircled in red next to a caesarian section scar." That seems to have the pictures out of order - perhaps the final two are flipped?
Fixed in a way that makes a bit more sense on mobile. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:20, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Caption: "John A. Sampson" suggest wikilinking name here, in addtion to existing link in body text.
Done + explanation of why there is a photo of the guy
Warning for a cite: Consider changing "pages=108129 " to "article-number = 108129" to eliminate a cite tool warning.
Done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:20, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Noleander (talk) 13:26, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Femke! Good to see such a vital and underdiscussed topic brought to FAC. I'll review this over the coming days. More comments to follow. YuniToumei (talk) 21:13, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Deep endometriosis often appears as nodules: I suggest linking Nodule (medicine) at first appearance
Some individuals have no symptoms: It would be interesting to quantify this. What percentage of women experience no symptoms? Is there any good data on this in recent publications?
The omission was intentional, as we don't really know. Some sources say the prevalence of endometriosis among asymptotic women is about 2 to 10%, implying that asymptotic cases could make up almost none to 80% of cases. There is large uncertainty on prevalence of endometriosis among post-menopausal women too, who often do not have symptoms anymore. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I see, that's good then. Let's hope the science turns up some better numbers soon. YuniToumei (talk) 08:08, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
In those going through assisted reproductive treatment, endometriosis is found in about 30% to 50% of women: I'm concerned that there is a reasonable chance an unknowing reader could misinterpret this sentence to mean that assisted reproductive treatment could be causal to endometriosis. Do you think you could rephrase to resolve this ambiguity?
I've changed it to 'among women going through', to stress it's about the group not the treatment. Does that work? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is better, although it doubles the word "women" at the end of the phrase. I was about to suggest making the temporal relation explicit by saying something like "Among women going through assisted reproductive treatment, 30% to 50% were found to have pre-exisiting endometriosis". However, I have a concern about the sourcing. I looked at the citation in the cited review (25, Bulletti 2010), and in that paper the review cites, I cannot find the figure 30–50% in relation to assisted reproductive treatment. That figure instead appears as "30 to 50% of women with endometriosis are infertile", which in turn is cited to a 1951(!) paper which I cannot access. Do you think the review's statement is reliable nevertheless? YuniToumei (talk) 08:08, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've removed the statement (there was a similar statement elsewhere to a higher-quality source anyway). I will double check other statements from the source and probably remove it for all statistics and mildly contentious claims. This is the second error in statistics found in the source. They were helpful in correcting the other error, but two makes me question the rigour of fact-checking. Let me know if you'd like me to replace the source altogether. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 11:58, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've now removed other statistics from that source too. They were supported by the cited sources, but the cited sources were primary and possibly not the best to make a sweeping statement. Will keep the rest unless there are objections. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:55, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, looks good to me. YuniToumei (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
endometriosis is linked to cardiovascular disease, particularly in those who have had the uterus and ovaries removed as treatment: Clarify as treatment for what? Could be interpreted that it's treatment for the cardiovascular disease
Done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
increased risk of developing ovarian and thyroid cancers: I suggest linking Thyroid cancer
when extra tissue divides the vagina into two sides is this implying a Uterine septum? If so, I suggest adding a link.
endocrine disruptors—chemicals that interfere with hormones, such as estrogen: I'm guessing that a confusion here is much less likely, but it could theoretically be misconstrued such that estrogen is understood as one of these endocrine disruptors. Though if you don't think that is likely, feel free to leave it as it is.
I've removed the comma before 'such as estrogen'. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Evidence supporting the theory comes from retrospective epidemiological studies: I suggest linking Retrospective cohort study
involving white blood cells: I suggest linking White blood cell
a bimanual exam I suggest linking Bimanual exam, perhaps as Pelvic examination#Bimanual examination. The former is a redirect to the latter, although interestingly not to the specific section (yet).
Done and redirect fixed. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The term "chocolate cysts" is introduced in the Subtype section and reused in the MRI caption, but not reused or re-explained in the Keyhole surgery section. Since this procedure is where one would encounter those, it might be worth name-dropping them here again when you discuss the color of endrometiosis lesions?
It's a bit too much to explain it twice so close together. Would it be better if I move it down from the image to the text? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:30, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think so. To me, the term is a surgical one first and foremost, i.e. a description based on what one can see with one's naked eyes. MRIs don't typically record color, so I'm unsure why the cysts would appear chocolatey there. I'd probably just refer to them as ovarian cysts in the image caption. YuniToumei (talk) 08:08, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
if symptoms improve (‘empirical treatment’): I suggest linking Empirical therapy
The ENZIAN system: The Enzian system was amended to the newer #Enzian system in 2021 to include lesions with peritoneal, tubary, and ovarian localisation. What is the rationale behind referring only to the older system in this article?
Mostly sources; I can't yet make a a clean statemment about how good the #ENZIAN system is. I can note the update after the more general statements, but prefer not to for summary style. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine by me then. YuniToumei (talk) 08:08, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Whether hormonal contraception: I suggest linking Hormonal contraception
includes the hormonal coil (intrauterine device): Shouldn't this be "the hormonal coil (an intrauterine device)" since hormonal coils aren't the only type of IUDs?
implant under the skin: I suggest linking Subdermal implant
or those with uncontrolled hypertension: I suggest linking Hypertension
Done all the link suggestions, for the other comments see my replies. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Femke I've replied to some comments above. YuniToumei (talk) 08:08, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the edit hist, you seem to have gone for serial commas? I've added a few you seem to have missed. Feel free to undo any I might have mistakenly added.
You and Toadspike are angels. Thanks for fixing them!
Alternative hormonal treatment can be tried if the pill or IUD are not effective.: "if the pill or an IUD"?
Done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Symptoms typically start in adolescence or early 20s and tend to improve after menopause. This is due to the decrease in estrogen levels, which often aggravate the symptoms of endometriosis.: Do you think it's clear enough that "this" only refers to only the last clause of the first sentence? And do you think that it's clear that "which" refers to the sinking estrogen levels, and not to estrogen itself? I am aware that in the latter case the conjugation of "aggravate" makes it clear that it is linked to a plural word, but I'm wondering if someone reading quickly or being ESL might trip up over this.
I've simplified and merged the two sentences to make this clear. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
describing malignant tissue: I suggest linking Malignancy
Done. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
During operations, he observed that endometriotic lesions would bleed in sync with a woman's menstrual cycle: How did he observe that? Did he operate on the same patient across her cycle?
I don't think so. The source says: "His original observations occurred during surgeries on women who were menstruating when he found that the peritoneal lesions were bleeding similarly to the eutopic endometrium". So more likely a comparison between women. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I see. I was confused by how he would observe it "bleed in sync", but I guess given the original phrasing in the source, that's fine. YuniToumei (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
had masculinizing side effects: I suggest linking Masculinization
Done.
because taboos about sex before marriage: "because of taboos"?
Done
and cannot be used on its own.: "cannot" is ambiguous, it could imply e.g. a physical reason for which the biomarker cannot be applied by itself. Maybe you could rephrase this to make it clearer that the marker is not enough evidence when used alone.
I've added the word 'so' to clarify it's related to the facts it's not specific enough. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That was good, it seems to have slipped out again in a subsequent edit. Was that intentional? YuniToumei (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Edit conflicted with myself. Now fixed. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For the Research directions section, is there any research being done towards the pathogenesis of endometriosis that might be worth discussing here?
I've added a few research direction around how to study the pathophysiology (studying the molecular differences between lesions, animal models and their limitations and the growing use of organoids). Paper came out this month :). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, looks good! YuniToumei (talk) 10:00, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi all - after being away for a while I am back here with yet another Gillingham season article. This one follows the same format as the previous 42 which I got promoted (something Gillingham were nowhere near achieving in the season in question LOL). Feedback as ever will be most gratefully received and swiftly acted upon! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 15:55, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Background and pre-season

"31st since the club was elected back into the League" → "31st since the club was re-elected to the League"
both for transfer fees of £30,000.
- Could we use the conversion parameters here?

MSincccc (talk) 09:51, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: - both done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:15, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Third Division (August–December)

they lost 2–0 away to Chesterfield but started September with a
just three minutes after the kick-off
- We could drop the "the" before "kick-off".
Due to injury, it was the final match which Henderson
- How about "this was the"?
with less than five minutes of the match remaining
- We could drop "of the match" here.
The first two games of November also ended in draws away from home.
- Do we need the "also" here?
but in contrast they had not won a league game away from home
- We could either drop "but" or "in contrast".
Four days later, Gillingham won a Third Division match away from home for the first time during the season
- We could drop "during the season" here.
had scored five goals in a match at Priestfield since 1969
- We could drop "in a match".
The text uses both "minutes of the game" and "minutes of the match".

Third Division (January–May)

to begin a run of eight games without defeat
- How about "beginning a run of"?
making him the team's highest scorer in the period since he was signed
- We could drop "in the period".
Gillingham's third and fourth consecutive goalless draws came over the Easter period, with games at home to Colchester United and away to Millwall both finishing 0–0.
- Do we need to mention "0-0" when we say "goalless"?

MSincccc (talk) 04:32, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: - all done! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:17, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cup matches

they were drawn to play Dagenham
- How about "they were drawn against Dagenham"?
entered the 1980–81 Football League Cup in the first round, which took place before the first league match of the season
- Could we avoid repeating "first" in close proximity?

Bottom line

That's all from me. I will support the nomination.

Maybe we will be having this and/or this article as well at FAC in future? MSincccc (talk) 08:12, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: - many thanks for your support. I fixed those last two items -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, im reviewing this from a layman's perspective, so mostly prose points, using existing text and suggested replacement throughout.

Lead

It was the 49th season in which Gillingham competed in the Football League, and the 31st since the club was voted back into the league in 1950. and then in the next section: the 49th season playing in the Football League and the 31st since the club was elected back into the League in 1950 after being voted out in 1938. The lead and body are near-verbatim. Also inconsistent: the lead says "voted back"; the body says "elected back". Suggest you pick one.
By the end of 1980, they were in 21st place in the Third Division league table, a position which if maintained at the end of the season would result in relegation to the Fourth Division. By the end of 1980, they were 21st in the Third Division league table, a relegation position.

Third Division: August–December

Three days later, Gillingham played the first league match at their home ground, Priestfield Stadium, of the campaign. Three days later, Gillingham played their first league match of the campaign at their home ground, Priestfield Stadium.
Ashurst... criticised the referee, saying that Gillingham's first goal had been awarded despite a player being in what he considered to be a clearly offside position. Ashurst... criticised the referee, saying that Gillingham's first goal came from a position he considered clearly offside.
Some paragraphs run to 400+ words. Natural break points exist (start of November, the run of defeats in late November/December).

Third Division: January–May

a new record for the highest fee paid by the club to sign a player a club record.
Gillingham were reduced to ten men when White was sent off — Dean White hasn't been introduced in prose at this point. Full-name/wikilink him here rather than at the 7 March match.

Cup matches

in what was seen as a shock result (lead) / The result was seen as humiliating for Gillingham (body). "Seen as" without direct attribution reads as weasel. You cite Telegraph, Elligate, and Kent Messenger — name one in the body prose.
"They'd been told they weren't good enough, they'd dropped out of the [Football League] and they'd gone back there and proved a point. It was fantastic". — 28-word direct quote. Consider trimming.

Players

Lloyd made the fewest appearances, playing only twice. His two appearances, both as a substitute, were the only games he played for Gillingham, meaning that he left the club without ever being named in a starting line-up. Three sentences saying the same thing. Lloyd made only two appearances, both as a substitute, and left the club without ever starting a match.
Richardson is listed as GK in the table but scores and equalises in prose (vs Reading, vs Oxford). Check table.

Sourcing

Ref 66 has no URL. Is this not in the BNA?
The TalkSport citation for the two-points-per-win system is a thin source for a settled historical fact. Would Rollin's yearbooks do the job?

Happy to be corrected if im wrong on anything. Metalicat (talk) 09:38, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Metalicat: - many thanks for your review, please see responses above! -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:57, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Epicgenius (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a 1960s-era airport terminal at JFK Airport in New York City. Designed by Eero Saarinen, it is centered around a headhouse with a very distinctive thin-shell roof. The interiors are similarly impressive, with soaring spaces, along with multiple intermediate levels connected by an overpass. Millions of travelers have passed through the terminal over the years, and it received extensive praise and awards when built. Despite its architectural stature, the TWA Flight Center quickly became functionally inadequate. The building was abandoned from 2001 onward and struggled to find another use for a decade; its near-demolition triggered preservation disputes. The headhouse is now part of a hotel, and its impressive architecture can still be visited today.

This page was promoted to Good Article status six years ago after a GA review by Eddie891. After some additional copy edits and expansions, I think it's up to FA quality now, and I look forward to all comments and feedback. Epicgenius (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Removed.
Removed this as well. Theoretically slide 3 of this NY Times page can be used as a source. But there are two problems with that image: it seems to conflate the TWA Flight Center as part of Terminal 5, and it's technically out of date (though the latter is addressed in the caption).

– Epicgenius (talk) 13:55, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a couple of revisions for the time being but with exam preps, an open PR and multiple FAC reviews to conclude, it's unlikely that I would be able to give a full review at present. I might return later, if I have the time. Good luck with the nomination. MSincccc (talk) 14:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can the article clarify the distinction between these items:
1. The TWA Hotel
2. The headhouse building
3. The 1960's TWA terminal ( headhouse plus which other buildings?)
4. The TWA Flight Center (is this synonymous with the terminal?_

I feel like the readers might need a venn diagram to see how they inter-relate :-) If distinguishing these is not feasible in the Lead, consider adding several sentences somewhere, maybe a paragraph in the Architecture section?

That's a fair point. Basically:

(1) uses both (2) and a new building.
(4) is synonymous with (3), which used to encompass "flight wings" along with (2). Since the flight wings have been demolished, (4), (3), and (2) are all the same. (And yes, (4) and the term "Flight Center" are synonymous with the terminal. I've clarified this in the second sentence of the first paragraph, as well as in the second paragraph.) - EG

Continuing the above: What parts of the FLight Center are not the headhouse? I read:
- "The TWA Flight Center, designed by Eero Saarinen and his associates, is centered on a headhouse .."
- "The building's main section, the headhouse... "
- The TWA Hotel article says "TWA Hotel is a hotel ... It uses the head house of the TWA Flight Center... "

So if the headhouse is only part of the Flight Center, then what parts of the Flight Center are not the headhouse? Maybe it is stated further down in the article, but readers will want a summary of the major components/buildings very early.

I made it more clear that the flight wings were part of the terminal and have since been demolished. - EG

Continuing above: "Two tube-shaped, red-carpeted departure and arrival corridors extended outward from the terminal and connected to detached structures known as "flight wings", which contained the gates." Can this be clarified: Is the "terminal" here the headhouse? This sentence suggests that the wings & passages & gates are not part of the terminal. But I've always seen the word "terminal" used to include the attached passages & gates.
- I have reworded this. The flight wings were actually are part of the terminal. I've gone through the article and changed other instances of "terminal" to "headhouse" where only the headhouse is being mentioned. - EG

Clarify: "... [its] thin-shell concrete roofs could not be built in other parts of New York City; ..." Can it directly state " ... due to building codes". I realize that is sort of revealed later, but readers would benefit from a more direct statement.

Metric? "... 200,000 square feet (19,000 m2)..." Metric is far more common in the world and even in the USA these days. Is there any way the article could present metric first, then imperial in parens? I"m sure all the sources about the 1960s construction use imperial, but it is 2026 now, and English WP has an international readership.
- Per MOS:UNIT, "In non-scientific articles with strong ties to the United States, the primary units are US customary (pounds, miles, feet, inches, etc.)". Since this is a subject with strong ties to the US, and is not a scientific subject, I put the imperial first. The metric conversion is included in any case, but putting metric first in this article would seem to violate the MOS. - EG

Are there any sources that discuss this building in popular culture? I'm certain I've seen it as a setting/backdrop somehere: Film? Advertising? TV shows?
- Yes, this is mentioned in the "Awards and media" section. Strangely, I didn't find any sources that talked in depth about the terminal's appearances in popular culture, but I did find some scattered appearances here and there. However, per MOS:POPCULT I didn't mention these unless they were significant appearances (e.g. the terminal featured prominently in these media). - EG

Better wording? TWA's advertising manager said the building was promoted "as though it were a national monument". The word "said" may suggest to readers it is a statement of fact; but it may be a bit of puffery, so maybe something like TWA's advertising manager said their approach to advertising was to treat the building "as though it were a national monument"."
- Seems reasonable, I have done that. - EG

The "Show Ref Check" tool says that book sources use the location/city attribute inconsistently: 3 have the location; 13 do not. E.g. this one includes location Eero Saarinen: an Architecture of Multiplicity. New York: Not a showstopper for FA, just FYI.
- Removed all the locations - EG

The headhouse sits at the middle of a curve in one of JFK Airport's service roads,... Consider "access road" since "service road" implies a small, rarely used road, used only for repairs.
- And consider "enclosed by [or 'within'] a curved access road" rather than "at the middle" since the latter could mean it is positioned at the midpoint of a long, gradually curving road, whereas I think you're trying to emphasize that it is nestled within the loop of a tightly curved road.
  - Changed to "The headhouse sits on a curve in one of JFK Airport's service roads". It is technically on the midpoint of the curve, but I think that wording can cause confusion (as demonstrated by your comment above), as the headhouse is located on the convex (i.e. outer) side of the the curve. As for "service road", this is how access roads are referred to in the NYC region, but I have changed it to "access road". - EG

Photo of a large man with hat and beard? https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Central_View.jpg Not sure readers benefit from this: too many people obscuring the building. Black & white. Consider removing it to make room for other, more informative photos.
- Swapped it with another image. - EG

Can the article include a photo of one of Saarinen's buildings he designed before TWA? In other words, do any sources say something like "The TWA building was an evolution of his style, extending ideas he first introduced in his earlier Kresge Auditorium ..."? If so, readers would like to hear that.
- To be honest, Kresge wasn't really a major building of his. The sources do not make any connection like the one you're suggesting. In fact, he mainly designed based on the needs of his clients at the time, rather than necessarily making successive improvements to his designs; as an example, just before designing TWA and Dulles, he had worked on five corporate campuses, only to never design any others. Aside from that, there isn't really a good place to put the image; Kresge is mentioned once in the "Impact" section and in a footnote. - EG

Ditto for the Dulles International Airport Main Terminal ... if space & sources permit, a pic would be nice: Kresge -> TWA -> Dulles
- I'll think about it, as Dulles is arguably more related to this design than Kresge (being one of the few other airport terminals he designed). However, as with the above, I'm not sure where in the article it would go. - EG

Titles of sources use a mixture of title case & sentence case:
- "Thin shell classic TWA structure gets new life"
- "TWA to Unveil Spectacular N.Y. Flight Center Monday"

MOS says a consistent algorithm has to be used; and that the way a source capitalizes its own title should be ignored.

Fixed. - EG

- Just as a note, in the "Permission" section, it says "This image or media file contains material based on a work of a National Park Service employee". The file itself, indeed, does indicate that the NPS drew this file directly, meaning the underlying file is public domain. Works created by those in their official capacity as a US government worker are automatically PD.
  I'm not sure what Beyer Blinder Belle's involvement is, exactly. This is a scan of a file, and if they scanned the file, they cannot claim copyright over it because scans are entirely derivative and introduce no new content. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:59, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The interior was modeled next; since the space was to be symmetrical, Saarinen & Associates only created drawings for half the interior.... studied the models throughout the night, crawling across them. - Not clear if this passage is describing 2D drawings ("drawings", "crawling across them") or 3D structures ("modeled"). Do the sources specify?
- I've changed the wording. I didn't realize that the word "modeled" could be read as "physically modeled". - EG
... which Ringli said was part of Aline's efforts to ... I'd forgotten (or skipped) the place where Aline was identified, so I was lost here. Is there a way to remind the reader who she is in this sentence? Either "his wife" or "Saarinen's wife" or "Aline Saarinen" or something?
- Aline B. Saarinen is linked earlier; I spelled out her full name at first mention. Since this is in the section immediately preceding this one, I decided not to spell out her full name again, but happy to hear an alternative perspective on this. - EG
14 engineers and 150 artisans "artisans" is an unusual word to use for the US construction industry. To me the word conveys an artist or craftsperson that works on decorations and is skilled in things like sculpture, carving, stained glass, etc. I suppose there could be 150 such artisans, but that seems high. On the other hand, there may have been 500 construction workers and 150 artisans working on decorations. Can "artisans" be defined or wikilinked here?
- Changed to "150 skilled craftspeople". - EG
... one-eighth of the airline's passengers criticized the design of the temporary structure. The roof was poured as a single form starting on ... Some readers may think "The roof" was the roof of the temporary structure since they are adjacent in the text. If the roof was for the other (new) building consider adding a word to clarify.
- Changed to "The permanent structure's roof" - EG
It had been finished after most of the other major ... Grammar could perhaps be simpler ("had been" is annoying) e.g. It was completed/finished after ...
- Done (I used "finished" because the previous sentence uses "completed"). - EG
Image caption: Union News restaurants coffee shop by Raymond Loewy Can it clarify what Loewy's role was? Interior designer? Chef? Photogapher of this pic?
- I clarified Loewy's role in the project; he designed three of the upper-floor spaces. - EG
Two towers, flanking the headhouse's sunken lounge, curve around the original headhouse. These towers were constructed as part of the TWA Hotel, which has 512 guest room - Article should ideally tell the reader what Hotel facilities the headhouse contains: rooms? Reception? Restaurant(s)? I'm guessing no rooms, but that should be made explicit.
- It already was made explicit (in the first paragraph of the "Headhouse" section"). I also added that restaurants and the hotel's reception desk are there. - EG
Explain: According to Saarinen associate Kevin Roche, Saarinen had thought the TWA tract "was the best site", despite airline officials' dissatisfaction with the lot. This makes it sound like the airport provided TWA with multiple possible sites, and TWA told Saarinen to choose one. If so that should be stated, because normally airports are so tight on space (and they have a master plan) so they would tell the airline: "here is where you must build your terminal". So, if the airport did give TWA 2 or more sites to choose from, readers will want to know that because it is a bit surprising.
- They were assigned that site, same as in a regular master plan. TWA didn't like it, but Saarinen did. - EG
I ran the tool User:Alaexis/AI Source Verification which tries to validate all citations using AI. It was pretty slow, but by the time it got halfway thru, most cites were "not accessible"; a bunch were "validated", many were "partially validated". One failed validation, but it said that "only 10% of that source was accessible" so I'm not sure how it could draw a conclusion. Overall: it didn't find any solid source-to-text failures.
- I ran that tool too, and would not put too much stock in it. For example, one of the issues it raised was that "it does not mention 'closed-circuit television,' 'a central public address system,' 'a schedule board,' or 'baggage scales'", even though the source did mention these things. - EG
As such, the designation did not preserve the TWA Flight Center from modifications, a major point of contention when the building's redevelopment was proposed in the 2000s. That paragraph is well-written, but ends on a cliffhanger: readers will want to know if the changes to the building in the 2000s (for TWA hotel etc) violated the intent/spirit of the LPC designation; or did the 2000s changes respect the intent/spirit of the designation.
- The 2000s renovations didn't really change much, though this source says that the New York State Historic Preservation Office (a state agency) was consulted, so I would assume they conformed to the spirit of the designation. As for the 2010s changes, this source says that the developers consulted with nearly two dozen government agencies (already mentioned in the article).This source more explicitly states that the renovation team has consulted with the LPC regarding these changes "and will continue to work closely with these parties throughout construction". - EG
Compass: In its reports about the TWA Flight Center head house, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission uses modified cardinal directions for convenience. In this article, the precise cardinal directions are used. Readers may be confused by "modified cardinal direction" ... I'd never heard that term before, and I consider myself an amateur geographer. I finally figured it out by reading the source: For the sake of convenience, north is used in the description rather than northeast, and so on. Consider making the footnote clearer with something like In its reports about the TWA Flight Center head house, the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission used approximate compass directions for convenience. In this article, precise compass directions are used.
Some of the older photographs of interiors are muddy & dark, especially in shadows. That's a shame, because it is such a beautiful building. I'm pretty sure it is not my computer or eyeballs, since most other images in other articles appear fine. MOS:IMAGES specifically permits enhancement of brightness & saturation of older photos (to a small degree), provided it is not so extensive as to misrepresent the original. Consider brightening the following so readers can appreciate details in the shadows:
1. The terminal was ranked on the 2007 List of America's Favorite Architecture.
2. The architect Robert A. M. Stern called the headhouse a symbolic "Grand Central of the jet age".
3. Departures board in the headhouse [this one really needs it]
4. The headhouse under construction (exterior image, muddy shadows)

I'd be happy to help with enhancement, if you want.

If you could help out, that would be great. We have a ton of good images on Commons already, so if the pics need to be swapped out, we can do that as well. Epicgenius (talk) 15:33, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Epicgenius: I downloaded the four images listed above; made slight color adjustments; cropped two; and uploaded them to Wiki Commons (as new images). I retained the identical author/license/date information as the original. I included link to original image. I may not have copied over all the miscellaneous details from the original photo. If you think any of the emhanced images are unsatisfactory, feel free to revert ... my feelings won't be hurt :-) Noleander (talk) 22:46, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Accessibility: Images contain Alt text; no color-coding is used to convey information.

Prose: overall, the prose is professional quality, and meets FACR requirements.

MOS: The article and its cites conform to MOS expectations.

Images: are relevant and informative. I have not done a copyright check.

@Epicgenius: Small wording issue: Three 45-short-ton (40-long-ton; 41 t) cranes brought the concrete to the site. Some readers might picture movable cranes moving on treads. But I assume the cranes were fixed in-place on site, adjacent to the structure, and the cranes simply carried buckets of concrete by pivoting, correct? Consider Three 45-short-ton (40-long-ton; 41 t) cranes were used to pour concrete into the form. or similar.

Nominator(s): Stikkyy (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

USS Anzio was one of the fifty Casablanca-class escort carriers built for the U.S. Navy during World War II. She had a distinguished, but unheralded career during the Pacific War, supporting the island-hopping campaigns and hunting submarines. This article recently passed a MILHIST A-class review, and I believe that it is now ready to undergo the FAC process. This is my first FAC nomination, so robust scrutiny is both warranted and welcome. I disclose that I am registered in this year's WikiCup, although I have not been a very active participant. Stikkyy (talk) 00:05, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by JacobTheRox

[edit]

All 11 images are in the public domain because they were produced by in-service navy officials.
The last image hangs over into the next column for me, which then makes the table thin. Consider adding a {{clear}}.

I removed the last image, it didn't seem to be adding much.

All captions correctly formatted
Correct grammar in alt text "An aircraft carrier at sea with both aircraft elevators are depressed."
No other issues I can find
Image review is a Pass

Lvl2 "Notes"

Lvl2 "References"

Lvl2 "Sources"

Lvl3 "Online sources"

Lvl3 "Bibliography"

Semi-colon "Military documents"

This makes no sense to me – the use of a semi-colon as a section header is proscribed and if bibliography is for books, shouldn't it be its own lvl3 anyway? And why is it called "bibliography" while only including books, not "Book sources" to match the other headings?

The cost is only in the infobox; please add it to the actual prose itself. I would also add {{inflation}} with it so we know how much it is today.
That is all for now, I look forward to hearing your response.
P.S. My article Robert Jacomb-Hood is at FAC at the moment; please do consider dropping by!

Should all be resolved, I'll get around to your FAC ~soon. Stikkyy (talk) 18:10, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting article of an aircraft carrier during the WWII. As a non-expert on the era, I only have some minor comments.

where her aircraft were replenished perhaps aircrafts?

Aircraft is the plural form.

another group of an estimated 30–50 Japanese planes were "were" → was (you are talking about a single group)
in-between remove dash
was attached with "with" → "to"
hardpoints which could mount "which could" → that
wikilink: torpedo bomber first appearance is at the end of "Design and description" section, consider moving it
wikilink: squadron (at "Design and description") → squadron
wikilink: West Coast as it can ambiguous in its meaning (though it is clear if one reads the text), e.g., West Coast is a disambiguation page
Perhaps splitting "Okinawa and post war" into two sections? The section felt a bit too long (6 paragraphs).
- The same applies for "Typhoon Cobra and Iwo Jima"
Consider moving the two figures below the infobox per WP:SANDWICH: avoid sandwiching text between images, infoboxes, or similar templates horizontally opposite each other.

For clarification, are you referring to the two images under "Gilbert and Marshall Islands" or the action report images?

A.Cython (talk) 00:48, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded to your points. Stikkyy (talk) 17:10, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Swinging by after Stikkyy's hard work on the FAC I nommed. I'll make a few comments here and there over the next couple days. ~ Pbritti (talk) 05:05, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The caption for the photo Anzio in Shanghai's waters says it was the first American carrier to visit the city. This is not mentioned in the body and is unsourced in the caption.

Info moved to the body, backed by DANFS.

Nominator(s): ROY is WAR Talk! 06:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Binichella!

So, I will take this opportunity to re-nominate on FAC because of the Filipino girl group Bini performed in Coachella 2026. Making a history as the First Filipino group to perform at the music festival.

The previous FAC did not attracted editors here and it's understandable since it's Christmas month and New Year. So, I hope it can be pass this time and can nominate in TFA. All valid criticisms, questions are welcome. ROY is WAR Talk! 06:35, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roy, not sure if I will do a full review, but have run this through User:Alaexis/AI Source Verification, which picked up the following:

"The track was produced by Shintaro Yasuda and Skylar Mones" - it is unclear from the sources whether either were acting in their capacity as producer or merely composer.
"as well as the International Music Video title at the 2023 BreakTudo Awards in Brazil." - 2024 Awards

Some other points that catch my eye:

Language that can be read as promotional includes "revealed"
"Publications such as the Philippine Daily Inquirer's American bureau and SunStar Cebu have praised the video for its depictions of Filipino culture." ambiguous from your writing whether they were praising the video for depicting Filipino culture or the method of depiction.
the Bini members decided to sing the track a capella. → the Bini members sang the track a capella.

Good luck with the nomination! Whonting (talk) 07:29, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Whonting! Thanks for your review!

"The track was produced by Shintaro Yasuda and Skylar Mones" - it is unclear from the sources whether either were acting in their capacity as producer or merely composer
- they are both producer and songwriter.
"as well as the International Music Video title at the 2023 BreakTudo Awards in Brazil." - 2024 Awards Done
Language that can be read as promotional includes "revealed" Done
"Publications such as the Philippine Daily Inquirer's American bureau and SunStar Cebu have praised the video for its depictions of Filipino culture." ambiguous from your writing whether they were praising the video for depicting Filipino culture or the method of depiction Done
the Bini members decided to sing the track a capella. → the Bini members sang the track a capella. Done.

ROY is WAR Talk! 10:08, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Roy for getting on these quickly. Can you move a source inline explicitly saying they are producers on the song? Whonting (talk) 10:19, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whonting: on ref 8: They collaborated closely with renowned producers Skylar Mones and Shintaro Yasuda, known for their work with international stars as well as K-pop icons. Also, in their apple music credits which is reliable too. ROY is WAR Talk! 10:42, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Whonting!

Just an update, if you are done here? If yes, please add if you are support or oppose. Thanks! ROY is WAR Talk! 11:16, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roy, since the conversation at RSN has died down, I feel more empowered to do a full review here. A few points:
- I note that Bini's genre categorizations are appearing to be song marketing and aren't necessarily accurate; are the sources we are using for genres regurgitated press releases or are they (somewhat) impartial commentary?
- "Lyrically, the song is about a woman embracing her attractive qualities" I'm sure this is a template in Wikiproject music because I keep seeing variations appearing, but it is rather awkward. Prefer "The songs lyrics describe" or equivalent.
- The whole sentence is generally clunky. The "asserting herself to her suitors" at least could be reframed around her being confident.
- "although a few reviews have acknowledged that its sound has divided Bini's fans" Although isn't appropriate here. Further, "its sound" is vague; what about its sound?
- "25 Best Bini Songs (So Far), Ranked" needs to be dated (and, haven't they released like 40 songs? It doesn't seem DUE to put such a fact in the lead).
- "walking and dancing in colorful sets" → "walking and dancing through colorful sets"
- "second-highest-trending music video" I am not sure what it means for a music video to be "highest-trending". Can you step this out for me?
- "summer anthem" needs to adhere to MOS:QUOTEPOV
- "helped Bini become the Filipino group with the most monthly listeners on Spotify" MOS:DATED
- "replacing her in the top spot" necessarily implied
- The background section starts well, and then devolves into a list of facts that aren't particularly connected. Can you work on the flow here?
- "Bini announced the release of the single "Cherry on Top" on June 10, 2024" they announced the single would be released or they released the single with an announcement?
- "Elijah Pareño of Rolling Stone Philippines described "Cherry on Top" as "one of the most unexpected turns" that Bini has taken musically" we don't need to frame this around Pareño's reaction and whether he would expect such a release, simply describing that it broke from their earlier music with the inclusion of drum and base is sufficient.
- Composition and lyrics needs more flow between sentences. Imagine you were reading this section in a magazine, you wouldn't think it acceptable writing.
- "Lyrically, the song is from the perspective of a woman who establishes" same as in lead.
- An explanation of the idiom wikt:cherry on top seems due.
- Is the reference to Beyonce the extent of the female empowerment themes?
- "The promotion also included a photo shoot clip with the caption, "All eyes on us! Our upcoming single 'Cherry on Top' is serving soon!"" why is this due?
- "The promotion" what promotion? You mention it was "also released on Instagram", what was the first?
- "It was included to be part of a then-upcoming album." very clunky
- "the group unveiled official "Cherry on Top" shirt merchandise on October 27." unveiled here is promotional language. The detail in this section is very granular, and generally of interest only to fans.
- Some of the prose can be tightened up via WP:THEGAME, e.g. "One of Mikha's lines ~~in the song~~", "A few remixes ~~of the song~~" and "Christmas remix ~~of "Cherry on Top"~~ was released".
- "The collaboration emerged after the group met her" more promotional language, and I'm not sure what I'm meant to take from finding out the events that they met the singer at.
- "which she co-wrote with the group's vocal coach" who is "she" here?
- "featuring a brief interpolation of "Jingle Bells"" I get the impression here that this brief interpolation was the extent of what made it a Christmas remix, is this the case?
- "Gabriel Saulog hailed the track" this is not a review, it is labelled "News". No opinions expressed should be included.
- "He wrote that the song's musical direction" good here to remind what was changed -- the English lyricism and the drum and base elements I assume.
- "alienating their fan base upon release" can you point to what in the source is being used to support this?
- "praised the song's "frantic" pace and strong melodies" See the sixth bullet point in WP:RECEPTION. This persists throughout.
- "is oversaturated" opinion, needs attribution
- "Less than 24 hours since its release" → "Within the first 24 hours of its release," (better imo)
- I'm not sure why we qualify everything as "official" in Music video, this is implied I would think.
- "Some of the dance scenes take place on top of a giant cake" introduce that they are dancing in the MV first
- Why are we naming hair credits etc for the music video.
- "~~vintage,~~ neo-Victorian architectural style"
- "Its sets have been described as a "wonderland of pastels and bright hues"" Can you introduce this information without the attribution / POV element?
- For neutrality's sake, you should always be introducing content first rather than how it was received. "Publications such as the Philippine Daily Inquirer's American bureau and SunStar Cebu have praised how the video portrays of Filipino culture.[45][46] These cultural references include pagmamano,[b] balikbayan boxes,[c] and Filipino snacks such as banana cue[d] and halo-halo.[e]"
- "Filipino snacks such as banana cue" (footnote) "~~A Filipino snack consisting of~~ deep-fried, caramelized bananas skewered on sticks, made using saba bananas."
- The description of the morning scene is a little strange, done through the lens of items that feature? Items are not a morning routine.
- "the video became the top trending music video on YouTube" in the Philippines.
- Wikipedia:Awards and accolades is an effort at applying WP:INDISCRIMINATE to awards and listicles. In light of it, can you reflect on how many of the nominations and listicles mentioned are DUE?
- "global recognition" perhaps attention? By saying recognition, we are saying it is valuable (a value judgement) and that it does not receive sufficient attention on such basis (another opinion).
- "evidence of Bini's growing international success" What is an NPOV way of expressing this?
- "As a part of Globe Telecom's G Fest" quite clearly undue.

Whonting (talk) 03:28, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This isn't a topic I'm at all familiar with, but here goes:

The background section needs a paragraph or two more clear explaining this band's career up to the release of the song.
The information on who wrote the song in the 'Composition and lyrics' section is confusing.
Can more be said about the song's lyrics? This would work best as a separate paragraph, but needs a bit more material.
"It was included to be part of a then-upcoming album" - bit over-complex
" He wrote that the song's musical direction diverged from Bini's typical style" - if this is the case, the article doesn't cover it.
- Comment not addressed. I note that the band's most popular songs on Spotify are largely sung in Filipino, but all lyrics for this song are in English (sung with a distinct US accents). Is this part of the new direction? Was this song an attempt to break into the American market? Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can anything be said about the song's commercial performance and profile outside of the Philippines?
"Its sets have been described" - this is confusing: was the video shot in part of a city or on a set?
"The video also depicts a typical morning scene in the Philippines" - from having just watched the video, an obvious issue is that many of the people in the clip appear to be white North Americans. Do any sources cover this? (it was presumably done to broaden the appeal of the video to western markets).
The 'In popular culture' section seems to really be about covers.
Also from having listened to the song, it's very over-produced and the band sings with strong North American English accents. Do any sources discuss this?
Only one of the current six notes is referenced; they all need to be. Nick-D (talk) 00:36, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Nick-D! Thanks for your review!

It's all Done except for this:

I added the forbes here. Although, WP:FORBESCON is unreliable, however, Jeff Benjamin have published many reliable source such as Billboard, Rolling Stone etc. So, it wouldn't hurt the references, i guess?

from having just watched the video, an obvious issue is that many of the people in the clip appear to be white North Americans. Do any sources cover this? (it was presumably done to broaden the appeal of the video to western markets).
- Unfortunately, I search on this and I can't find on this specific. But, maybe in the future someone cover on this. :)
The background section needs a paragraph or two more clear explaining this band's career up to the release of the song
- I added a bit on the most important 'cause some of the news in June 2024 are just trivial, so it's not really worth it to add.
  - The material here remains inadequate. Remember that FAs need to largely stand alone. I know nothing about this band, and the section isn't helping me to understand it. Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can anything be said about the song's commercial performance and profile outside of the Philippines?
- Unfortunately, none. Tho, the listicles on the international media outlets and "In popular culture" helped too.

Let me know if there's anything to do. ROY is WAR Talk! 11:40, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments:

"widespread critical acclaim, although a few reviews have acknowledged that its sound has divided Bini's fans" - the grammar is off here
- Drive-by comment from Nineteen Ninety-Four guy: Each claim is unreferenced and unsubstantiated in its appropriate section in the body, as well. "Widespread critical acclaim" is such a strong claim that has to be backed by reliable, high quality sources explicitly stating this; citing listicles (which are hardly arbiters of critical consensus) and a measley five positive reviews to support this claim doesn't give the article a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature (as per criterion 1c). Nineteen Ninety-Four guy (talk) 04:59, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"On June 16, Bini surpassed Taylor Swift" - it should be specified more clearly that this is only in a narrow way given this is quite a broad statement. Nick-D (talk) 04:06, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I added that part, not the nominator. All of the review sources have "Generally reliable" consensus, so I figured it was safe to say, but I still removed it. :) Very easy fix. (And two of the listicles used are purely dedicated to Bini's music, so I hope my revision is okay now.) ~2026-20515-51 (talk) 17:05, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): ThaesOfereode (talk) 21:36, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Unlike its better-known and more poetic English cousin, Old Frisian is the language of lawyers under fire. Spoken by Frisians under siege from both sides of the Lauwers, virtually all Old Frisian attestations come from legal documents. I believe I've beaten this article into being one of the better publicly-accessible resources for the topic. The page touches on both history and linguistics, given the general messiness of classification, periodization, and phylogeny surrounding the language, so anyone interested in the Late Middle Ages or its transition to the early modern period will hopefully find something of interest here. ThaesOfereode (talk) 21:36, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Some images are missing alt text

File:Brokmerbrief.jpg needs a US tag. Ditto File:Freeska_Landriucht.jpg

File:Eerste_Hunsingoër_Handschrift_-_blz._44.jpg: source link is dead, missing a US tag

PharyngealImplosive7

[edit]

Marking my spot, will get to this if I have any free time – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 20:02, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@PharyngealImplosive7: Courtesy ping. ThaesOfereode (talk) 12:47, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

First batch of comments

@ThaesOfereode: This is first of all very well written in general. For now, I will just review all sections up to morphology without much depth, since I don't have too much time.

No worries; I appreciate the time you spent on this. ThaesOfereode (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Soft recommendation to make to the Weser in the lead to the Weser River (this isn't too important though)
through periphrastic constructions, meaning that other words could be added to create different grammatical meanings -> through periphrastic constructions, where other words are added to create different grammatical meanings (this is still kind of awkward though)
The linguistic phylogeny – that is, the relation of these varieties to each other through linguistic descent – is described thus -> The linguistic phylogeny – that is, the relation of these varieties to each other through linguistic descent – is shown below??
The German linguist Theodor Siebs is commonly associated with popularizing this affinity and is credited with coining the term "Anglo-Frisian languages" in his 1889 dissertation entitled Zur Geschichte der Englisch-friesischen Sprache ('On the History of the Anglo-Frisian Languages'), though the English philologist Henry Sweet is considered the "father of the Anglo-Frisian hypothesis", articulating the concept as early as 1876. -> perhaps split this into two sentences
there is toponymic data to support a significant Frisian settlement, including Friston and Frisby -> define toponymic data in the article
Seems fine to me, wording-wise. – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 01:36, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
this is not considered to be a cause for the linguistic similarities -> perhaps elaborate on why this is not a cause for linguistic similarities
and later ruled by Charlemagne -> is this important enough for inclusion (perhaps only mention that it was ruled by Charles Martel)
- I had been planning to integrate The Statues of Magnus when I created the article, as it's an Old Frisian document describing the uniqueness of their legal rights within the HRE, but it's probably a bit much here. ThaesOfereode (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
because it was of higher prestige or more widely understood -> because it was of higher prestige and more widely understood
The language had two diphthongs: iā and iū, the latter of which was interchangeable with iō -> do the sources describe diphthongs' actual phonetics?
though semivowels -> maybe list the semivowels of Old Frisian so that readers know what they are as per WP:MTAU
allophones -> define these, per WP:MTAU, maybe look at the approach I used in Nizaa language (in the vowels section)
The consonant exceptions may have been realized as the voiceless allophones [l̥], [r̥], or [ʍ] -> sounds awkward, maybe say like /xl/, /xr/, and /xw/ were realized as those voiceless liquids/semivowels
was devoiced and spirantized in word-final position -> define spirantinzed per WP:MTAU, perhaps give an IPA description in brackets as well
Dental fricatives were written as ⟨th⟩ -> The dental fricatives /θ/ and /ð/ were both written as ⟨th⟩
though the phoneme /t/ was sometimes written as ⟨th⟩; no pronunciation change is thought to have occurred, however -> punctuation seems wrong (especially the use of the semicolon)
This last process is known as the Rüstring a-mutation -> perhaps link to Germanic a-mutation

Anyways, the article is very well-written again, and these are just a few small issues – PharyngealImplosive7 (talk) 20:30, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for taking a look at this PI7. I appreciate the time. ThaesOfereode (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, fun, another language FAC! I'll give this a look-through.

I'm unsure if we should have this in past tense - articles like Old English or Egyptian language use present tense. After all, the language no longer being used doesn't mean it no longer exists.-G
Old Frisian was spoken by contemporary Frisians who comprised a loose confederacy I don't think we need "contemporary" here - for one, of course it was spoken by people who lived at the same time that the language was spoken, but 'contemporary' can also be used to mean 'modern'.
- Good call. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- 'who comprised' could probably be shortened to 'among' or similar
- Also, nitpicky, but is Upstalsboom the right link here? That's the governing confederacy, but the land of said confederacy (which is probably more useful for describing where they lived) was the Seven Sealands
  - I hemmed and hawwed about this one. Frisian historiography is... difficult. The Seven Sealands were more akin to a national idealization from their mythic origins; "all Seven Sealands" is often used to invoke the idea of "all Frisians". Yes, it behaved as sort of a semi-jurisdictional entity, but the reality is much blurrier (see how Sealands really don't match the 1300 map at Frisian freedom). The Frisians of this period *loved* to make legal callbacks to stuff that probably didn't happen (famously that Charlemagne gave them special rights within the HRE) and they often retrofitted those pseudohistorical ideas with the era's realities. I'd say there's similarity with the 32 counties of Ireland, both as a legal entity of somewhat self-governing entities and as a propagandistic ideal vis-à-vis Nationalist rhetoric giving a sense of "wholeness" (cf. 26 + 6 = 1). The Upstalsboom League was the *de facto* semi-state which would have been the polity another state would be fighting against. Think the Confederate States of America, which was a loosely associated state held together by a constitution and a common enemy. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ledes tend to have very simple language, so you should probably gloss "periphrastic constructions"
"closely related to" -> "North Sea Germanic" seems like an easter egg link to me. I would just live out the link there.
Why is "spoken during the period" part of the link text?
Scholars have argued that the term "Old Frisian" is somewhat misleading How widespread is this view? In the body, you attribute it to De Haan. You might want to say "some linguists such as Germen de Haan" instead.
It is the common ancestor of all modern Frisian languages except for the Insular North Frisian languages, with which Old Frisian shares a common ancestor called Pre–Old Frisian or Proto-Frisian This might be worth moving to the end of the lede, when you talk about Middle Frisian, so you can mention what languages are descended from it.
Not an FA criteria concern, but shouldn't we red-link Proto-Frisian or Pre-Proto-Frisian?

Classification:

are traditionally divided When did this periodization schema emerge?
I feel some of the scholars you introduce should be introduced as linguists or academics. Sometimes it's obvious that's what they are in the sentence, but for all a lay reader knows Alistair Campbell might just be a random guy.
I feel we might be name-dropping individual linguists a bit too much in general. We don't need to know each authority's individual take, we need to summarize broad scholarly views and trends.
- In principle, I agree with you. For this section at least, I feel like my name-dropping is confined to specific arguments or contrasts rather than broad views, but I've cut a few edge cases. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Dialects section pretty solid.
- Thank you! ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Though are more recent attestations is a bit cumbersome; "are attested more recently" might be a bit easier to parse.
- Sometime between the 11th and 13th centuries, improvements in dyking technology in Denmark and the Duchy of Schleswig led to the reclamation of the areas they now occupy This seems irrelevant to the understanding of the language, if there were already Frisians in the area beforehand.
There continues to be an overreliance on individual linguist's takes in the "Relationship with English" section; remember summary style!

History:

What is the Sincfal? A river?
previously uninhabited, surely (otherwise one may think they are no longer inhabited)
You use native names for all the varieties except Heligoland Frisian?
Besides the offshore islands, who were in these coastal regions previously? What languages did they displace?
- I'm not sure we have that granularity. The Frisians (who may have actually been the Jutes; it's complicated) basically moved into unoccupied territory. There were some geological events that pushed the Frisii out of the region and the Frisians/Jutes filled that gap. I covered this in a previous version of this article, but I felt it was too intricately detailed for this topic, so it's now at History of the Frisians. Who they pushed out from the edges is unclear. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It might be worth noting in the first paragraph that these peoples were speaking Proto-Frisian and not Old Frisian. Just to remind a reader.
One wants for a map of the region that shows the locations of landmarks such as the Lauwers.
Additionally, a map showing where each dialect was spoken would be exceptionally helpful
- I think this may be a granularity problem again (remember there is some debate as to whether there really is an East–West divide rather than Classical–Post-Classical one), but I will look around, as above. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Corpus section is very solid. It may be worth mentioning the Hunsingo Statutes in text as opposed to just the label.
Again, may be worth mentioning the present status of Frisian briefly in the end of the 'Decline and evolution' section.

Vocabulary

I don't think we need the "Native vocabulary" subheading - both because following a heading with a subheading doesnt look the best, but also because it can be assumed that something not under "loanwords" is going to be about native vocabulary.
many terms were created through compounding or affixation Aren't such terms still directly traced from Proto-Germanic?
Might be useful to remind the reader when Christianization happened again.

Phonology

Wikilink phonology
Gloss stem
Rest of the section very solid

Morphology

Syntax

We already talk about case a lot under morphology. It feels strange to split across two sections
- I did consider this. Their discussion in Morphology is about their construction (e.g., how case endings function with the stem); their discussion in Syntax is about their use (e.g., their semantic function, their governance). ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
First paragraph of 'verbs' is extremely large; consider splitting

ThaesOfereode That's all from my read-through. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 22:02, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalissima: Thank you for such a great, thorough review. Responded to most everything above, with a few more involved changes needing a little more time to integrate. ThaesOfereode (talk) 01:21, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Relayed (talk • contribs) 13:15, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, everyone! How are you feeling? I'm here to re-nominate the WP article to SB19's 2025 single "Dam" for FAC, just in time for their upcoming Lollapalooza performance. It is by far SB19's best-performing single to date, surpassing "Gento". This nom is part of my efforts of improving coverage of Filipino music in Wikipedia. Apart from prose changes and addition of new information, this article hasn't gone much changes since it was promoted as Good Article last July. I do believe it has the potential to be an FA; it's comprehensive, well-researched, and follows proper style guidelines, hopefully should meet the rest of the FA criteria altogether.

This article has not attracted comments on my previous two FAC attempts, hopefully I can gain enough support for this nom. Now that my schedule isn't as hectic, I would be happy to address all your concerns regarding this nom. All types of feedback, constructive criticism, and suggestions are welcome and much appreciated. I sincerely thank the reviewers in advance who will put their time and effort here. Relayed (talk • contribs) 13:15, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Relayed, I'll have a look over. Whonting (talk) 13:23, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the lyrics, the narrator discusses his struggles and desire to become a better version of himself while upholding self-integrity and determination. Why while? These are surely not incompatible with becoming a better version of himself?
Can you introduce Alanshiii?

Unfortunately, there's not much info about Alanshiii himself, so I couldn't really introduce him deeply in the article. Sources just introduce him as the director of the video. What I know is, if I'm not mistaken, Alanshiii is a stage name for "Alan Montales Ante Jr." (based on his socials) and is probably associated with the production company 1032 Lab. Before "Dam", he directed the video for "Kalakal", if you want me to mention that instead. – R

Some POV language throughout, e.g. production quality, The EP explored genres, revealing that now they have. Can you work on some more impartial language?
most-viewed music videos on YouTube I presume?

Done: Yes, that would be correct. I have revised the prose to make it clearer. – R

The prose in Composition and lyrics is rather choppy, you can do a better job of allowing the sentences to flow. Which is a bit strange, I quite like your prose in the lead.
I don't understand how "Dam" is wordplay from pakiramdam

"Dam" was derived from pakiramdam; sources have stated that "'Dam' is a play on the word pakiramdam." SB19 is known for using words for its titles that wouldn't really mean by its literal dictionary per se, like "Mapa" (Though it's English literal equivalent is a "map", its deeper meaning is apparently a mashup of mama and papa) or "Gento". Let me know if there are any changes you would suggest to move forward. – R

I still don't quite understand. Ed is derived from Edward, that doesn't make it "wordplay". Wordplay has an element of wit. What is witty about shortening pakiramdam to dam? - Whonting

Musically, "Dam" is characterized as primarily a powerful anthemic hip-hop track wordy and vague, who is characterizing it as such? Whether it is powerful is an opinion, and likewise for anthemic ("rousing or uplifting")
alluding to the band's experiences throughout their career vague and should be attributed... I will revisit this section once rewritten. The same issues persist.
I have now looked through the reception section. None of the "track reviews" are from music critics, and they cannot be taken as music criticism. Their opinions are undue and should not be included. I believe the same for Rome Saenz, though I am open to being wrong if you can provide an instance of him writing a critical review of music for Billboard Phillipines.

Thanks for pointing that out. Unfortunately, full-on critiques/criticisms that rip each part of the song or any art in general are almost non-existent in the Philippine media, hence why that's the case. Although there are some notable exceptions, like the film Maid in Malacañang, it's still almost non-existent beyond that. Some journalists are aware of this ([10] [11]), apparently the reason behind that "is to give local talent some much-needed support and encouragement. We all think the industry needs all the help it can get," attributing it to the PH music industry not being as established as the West. So, most articles often send praises rather than criticisms.

Although Rolling Stone Philippines was recently established in the country, music criticism is not widespread there either, nor have they made a critique of "Dam". They would often review international releases rather than local ones. From what I can see, you can count on your fingers how many they did on a Filipino act, and most of them are non-mainstream artists. Other than that, the closest critics we have perhaps are social media users on X.

For the "Critical reception" section in the article, I mapped it out based on another FA Freedom (concert). Let me know if there's something you want me to do regarding this to move forward. – R

This is a really interesting response, thankyou for sharing it. I have also read the pieces you linked, which were troubling, -- I didn't know how bad the situation in the Phillipines was.

At this article at this time there are two problems with the sourcing: non-music critics who are being represented as music critics (a WP:TSI problem, an example being the GMA Integrated News writer who is not a critic and does not claim to be), and music critics who are (it seems) unwilling to offer criticism, making their praise meaningless. We don't have to agree on the second justifying removal to agree that the first certainly does.

On the second, critics who seem unwilling to criticise, I don't see how they can be high-quality reliable sources for the purpose of FA. Whether they should be included on Wikipedia as a general matter, if we can't find evidence they are willing to critically review songs by Filipino artists, at FA they certainly should go.

That's where I'm at now, I'm very interested to hear if you agree or disagree. I opened up a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Tambayan Philippines/Task force Philippine Music on this topic, I'm sorry for singling you out but I think you know it's not a problem particularly to your editing or this article. Whonting (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine, and thank you, Whonting, for bringing this to our attention. I'll get to that topic soon. About the GMA Integrated News "review", I did go ahead and remove it as suggested. Relayed (talk • contribs) 18:41, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the sources for "commercial success", they are too effusive for such a judgement to be put in wikivoice. Simply list the facts.

Relayed, I'll pause here so you can address these points. The changes to critical reception should be reflected in the lead. Whonting (talk) 13:48, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Whonting! Thank you for taking your time to look at the article! I'll let you know once I've fully addressed your concerns. Relayed (talk • contribs) 14:33, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Relayed, looking forward to it. Jo-Jo Eumerus, pinging you as an FYI to the above comments on sourcing since you were the source reviewer for Gento (song) where these were not flagged as issues. Whonting (talk) 04:36, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Whonting! I'm sorry for taking so long. Although I'm not yet done addressing everything, I did leave some comments above, especially answers to some of your queries to clear things up. I'll let you know once again if I'm done addressing the rest. Regards, Relayed (talk • contribs) 14:54, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Relayed, I have left a response above. Whonting (talk) 15:41, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is where my relatively limited knowledge of pop culture sources showed, evidently. One thing to consider about reviews is that since they give opinion, the criteria for their inclusion is to a large degree whether they are prominent enough. Anyhow, looking up Pauline Miranda [12] sounds like she doesn't write much on music. Hidzir Junaini [13] and Rome Saenz [14] meanwhile do. Alwin Ignacio [15] and [16] Kristofer Purnell one could go either way. Kristine Kang I can't find much on - which is probably a strike against her inclusion. That's for citing their opinions; whether they are reliable sources for facts would be a different question, although I generally assume that prominent reviewers would be called out if they got facts wrong frequently. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:55, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus, no, thankyou for doing it in the first place. I agree with you on prominence, though my point is less concerned with prominence (these are all established outlets after all), but whether we can take these to be sincere opinions of reviewers.

One distinction we can draw with these sources is "song is released, check it out" stories (e.g. at NME [17]) vs "this is a review" stories (e.g. still at NME for the same song [18]). Note that the second is an example of critical reception and the first is not, writing in different mediums and to a degree for different audiences (fans vs prospective listeners). Whonting (talk) 10:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Whonting: I get what you mean, but unfortunately, as I explained above, the PH media hasn't been investing in music review stories, which is quite a bummer because I would rather read something that goes deeper into the songs than just mere shallow statements of what it is. I just tried my best to get through with what I could work with, which I did by looking for somewhat subjective/opinionated statements in their news stories, then piecing them all together. That's kinda how I ended up with something like what I've written in the article. Relayed (talk • contribs) 18:36, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Relayed, the discussion at RSN has died down (sorry if I didn't directly make you aware of it, though I was looking for external perspectives), and even if I am disasstisfied with the outcome I feel more confident about proceeding. Expect further comments over the next day. Whonting (talk) 03:43, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I notice a few points above are still outstanding, let me know if you need any clarification on what I was saying.
On reviews, I see Purnell is being cited as a review when the piece is one of the "new music out now" news pieces rather than a review. I'm inclined to say the same for Junaini, can I hear from you on this? Morales puffing up the subject before an interview, writing for the Grammy's, is not a review and cannot be considered criticial reception. Miranda's piece is lifestyle journalism written for fans in the tone of a "we're one of you too!" - I don't think we should be characterizing this as a review. I don't think Kang's piece is a review either, falling into the latter category of "new music, check this out." I think the NME distinction I drew above is instructive for this. Relayed, can you have a go at working on these points -- to me, certainly, the most pressing and important elements the article needs addressed -- before I continue? Whonting (talk) 00:34, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Relayed: Here shall be an image review from me! Arconning (talk) 06:17, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dam by SB19 cover art.jpg - Fair use
File:SB19 on stage at the Pagtatag! World Tour, 2023 (cropped).jpg - CC BY 2.0
File:SB19 - Dam (music video screenshot).jpg - Fair use
File:SB19 performing Dam at the Bench Body of Work (cropped).png - CC BY 2.0
Most of the images have alt-text besides the music video image, that needs to be fixed.
All of the images are relevant to the article, under proper licensing, and have proper captioning.

Hi, Arconning! Thank you for doing an image review! I'll let you know if I've made the edits. Relayed (talk • contribs) 09:54, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, once again, Arconning! I have added an alt-text for the music video photo ("Refer to caption", since I believe caption itself is descriptive enough) as per MOS:ALTINCAPTION. Let me know if you have anything else. Relayed (talk • contribs) 15:05, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pass. Arconning (talk) 17:03, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for being here, Arconning! Relayed (talk • contribs) 18:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): GrenadinesDes (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the very-long tracked and destructive EF4 tornado that touched down in Louisiana and crossed into Mississippi and tracked over 150 miles overall, killing 10 and injuring 146 others. Since early September, I've been actively renovating and massively improve the article to a way better state then it was when it was made back in July 2024. This is my second attempt on getting this article to FA status so feedback would be much appreciated! GrenadinesDes (talk) 22:42, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"inflicted significant to major destruction" - Reads a bit weird, some areas may not have been affected as badly as others. This can probably be reworded for clearer understanding.

Meteorological setup

[edit]

"trough" - This needs a link to the article: Trough (meteorology).

"Developing of severe thunderstorms were occurring" - "Development" is probably a better fit here.

"become more elevated" - "more" is redundant as elevated means it is increasing regardless.

"though there were still some uncertainty" - "were" > "was".

"be over the destabilizing warm sector over the lower Mississippi valley" - Double use of "over". This requires rewording.

"Squall line" - Should be linked to squall line.

Lead:

Meteorological Setup:

added a link to first mention of trough
replaced developing --> development
removed "more"
replaced were --> was
replaced the second "over" with "spanning"
linked squall line

GrenadinesDes (talk) 00:00, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@GrenadinesDes, would you be able to add your updates under the corresponding section? Thanks! 11WB (talk) 01:26, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

sure GrenadinesDes (talk) 01:31, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These are fine. ✔ 11WB (talk) 17:50, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"few miles west of Tallulah." - Missing an "a" at the start.

"downing a couple high-tension power poles" - Missing an "of" in between "couple" and "high-tension".

"and flipping a tractor trailer and injuring the driver." - Change second "and" to a comma.

"Soon, the tornado crossed the Mississippi River into Mississippi." > "The tornado later crossed the..."

"weakened down to" - "down" is redundant.

"substandard" - I initially read this as an opinion of the homes in question. I now understand this to mean it doesn't meet the legal requirements for protection against extreme weather, such as tornadoes and hurricanes. This should be specified within the article.

"two mobile homes were dislodge from their units" - "dislodge" should be "dislodged".

"A 31-year-old mother here was killed after shielding her three children underneath a mattress, who survived the tornado." - Did the mother and 3 children survive, or just the children/mother?

"were dislodge and rolled off their units." - "dislodged".

"hardwood trees was snapped and debarked." - "were".

"couple of mobile homes were destroyed," - Missing an "a" at the start.

"forward speed" - What does this mean?

"poorly built"/"constructed" - I feel this may edge into WP:NPOV slightly. I am unfamiliar with specific WP:WPTC wording guidelines, so this may be acceptable.

I feel that referenced tornadoes should actually be linked per WP:PLA and WP:NWFCTM.

"with being noted that surveyors" - This is missing a word. Possibly "it"?

"the damage in Choctaw County with yet to be determined on whether or not it was one continuous tornado." - "with yet" and the preceding words reads a bit off. This sentence needs rewording.

adds in the "a"
I think you mean "of" should be in between "couple" and "high-tension"
reworded the sentence to the suggested one.
redundancy removed
I used the word "substandard", I was trying to keep myself from using "poorly-built" too much, substandard is just mean the construction quality wasn't that great compared to the average home, though I will replace the word though.
made dislodge past tense
the mother died but the children lived, I've added a little clarification to not cause confusion
replaced was ---> were
adds in the "a"
forward speed is how fast an object, or tornado here, moves across the ground, like a racing car moving at 55 mph.
when it comes to structures being destroyed in tornadoes, if the structures gets rated EF3 or below, its an indication that the structure was poorly-built or has massive issues that led to its failure.
I assume you're referring to tornadoes that get brought up throughout the article, they get linked
yep "it" was missing
reworded

GrenadinesDes (talk) 01:01, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These are fine and you are correct about the second one. ✔ 11WB (talk) 17:52, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This can probably be in its own section.

"The estimated timber damage inflicted from the tornado were up to $19 million," - "was".

"with the study nothing that," - "nothing" should be "noting".

The second paragraph has text from the paper used with the CC BY 4.0 licence. For the purposes of an FAC, I think there is an expectance that this would be summarised in our own words. This is also true for the third paragraph.

All good here. ✔ 11WB (talk) 17:52, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Impacts and aftermath

[edit]

The first paragraph is very much a statistic dump. These can be spread out into the following paragraphs, which each focus on a specific area the tornado hit.

Third paragraph. Make sure ref numbers are in the correct numerical order.

"the residents in Eagle Bend might've not heard the sirens anyways since the closest one to the town was 4 miles (6.4 km) away" - This is very poorly written. We don't use contractions per MOS:CONTRACT. "Anyways" is not encyclopaedic.

Broke up the first paragraph to new paragraphs
Was a little confused by what this meant initially but I think I manage to fix it.
Reworded and redid the statement, I believe "regardless" is more encyclopedic. GrenadinesDes (talk) 02:15, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Refs are now in numerical order. This is all fine. ✔ 11WB (talk) 17:54, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Long enough to be its own section.

"placed in" - Not the best way of saying this.

"beginning from Tuesday, April 27 to Friday, April 30" - "from" is redundant.

There is a slight WP:REFBOMB in the third paragraph. Are four sources necessary here?

"that were capable in search and rescue operations." - "in" > "of".

This section is quite long. I understand featured articles require more detail, however this section is contributing to the quite large word count of about 8,500. This can be trimmed without losing too much I think.

Turned into its own section
replaced words
removed redundancy
Spread out the sources
replaced word
trimmed it down a little, but I'm kinda reluctant to do it since I really did a lot work on it. GrenadinesDes (talk) 04:04, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The word length is less than 10,000–so this shouldn't be an issue. Everything else is fine here. ✔ 11WB (talk) 17:53, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"After the tornado, majority of the spilled materials at the Complex Chemical plant" - Missing an "a" before majority.

"which were rebuilt to include a truck loading area." - "was".

"residents planning to rebuild their destroyed homes have to abide by the new construction guidelines" - Written in present tense, per MOS:TENSE this needs to be changed to past tense. So "have" to "had".

"every given year." - Meaning?

"almost 69.1 million tons of debris were removed across five counties," - "was".

Some of the sentences are quite long and should be split up for easier reading.

"90% of the damaged homes in Yazoo City was repaired and rebuilt," - "were".

The "Depiction in media" paragraph needs to be split up into shorter sentences.

Added the "a"
replaced every were --> was
changed to past tense
Every year, theres a chance a high chance of a 100 year flood considering the topography of the region.
Split up paragraphs
I don't really see the problem with depiction of media, it seems fine. GrenadinesDes (talk) 04:24, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The topography should be explained for the unfamiliar reader. Otherwise this is fine. ✔ 11WB (talk) 17:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tried my best with adding more details to the explanation @11WB GrenadinesDes (talk) 23:18, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"with buildings having their windows blown out and a siding from a building was torn off." - This reads weirdly. I think removing "was" should fix this.

"Afterwards, the tornado damaged or torn off roofs from homes and businesses," - Why "or"?

"before quickly traversing into Yazoo County, quickly intensifying to high-end EF1 strength," - Double use of "quickly".

"The tornado widen south of Yazoo City" - Should that be "widened"?

These are all relatively minor and can be taken care of with simple copy editing. I have a minor concern about a lack of links to other articles, basically the opposite of WP:SEAOFBLUE (see MOS:CONTEXTLINK). If there is an article for a meteorological term, it should be linked to for the benefit of the unfamiliar reader. I will do a source check soon. 11WB (talk) 00:20, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Removed "was"
removed "damaged or" and replaced torn --> tore
Removed second quickly
Made it past tense

GrenadinesDes (talk) 04:43, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick response time @GrenadinesDes! I will begin the source review soon. I may be able to start it today dependent on time, and no later than next week! 11WB (talk) 09:09, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This section is fine. ✔ 11WB (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 3: Some of the information is verified. However, there is no mention of Weir or Yazoo City and the $ figure is not present. ✖
Ref 12: This seems to confirm everything but the mph. ✖
Ref 28: This is included two other references, so I am unsure what exactly this is verifying from the text. ✖
Ref 32: Information in the sources seems to be quite general. Unsure what this is verifying.
Ref 40: This is fine. ✔
Ref 51: Seems to be accurate. ✔
Ref 55: This is fine. (Inline ref needs "|url-access=registration".) ✔
Ref 60: This is fine. ✔
Ref 70: Able to verify this through archive URL. ✔
Ref 72: Source says "about 20", so the number was approximate, not definite. ✖

Ref 3: added sources that mentions Weir and YC, and the figure was a WP:CALC estimation.

Ref 12: The source does include the forward speed, its in the text data on U3:24/12:21 PM

Ref 28: Replaced one of the source with a better one.

Ref 32: Its verifying what the tornado did in Oktibbeha County

Ref 55: added the url registration GrenadinesDes (talk) 16:14, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Has the ref 72 wording been fixed? 11WB (talk) 11:20, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, though I emphasized it by putting "approximately" before "20 students", I don't know if that's enough though. GrenadinesDes (talk) 13:17, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That works. ✔ 11WB (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 16: This is a manufacturing website. I am unsure why they would be reliable for weather events.
Ref 30: Foster's Daily Democrat says they are politically biased. WP:BIASED says: "When dealing with a potentially biased source, editors should consider whether the source meets the normal requirements for reliable sources, such as editorial control, a reputation for fact-checking, and the level of independence from the topic the source is covering."
Ref 42, 76: This is a government domain, but it is a blog. This falls under WP:SPS. I'm not seeing any editorial policies. Why are they reliable?
Ref 43-44, 49: Unsure of the reliability of these Journal sites. I am not seeing any editorial policies.
Ref 46: This does not fill me with much confidence. The web page looks to be very generic. Why is this reliable?
Ref 47: This is a company according to their about page. Why is this used?

Ref 16: Well in the article, it talks about the damage done to the chemical plant impacted.

Ref 30: I don't really see anything biased in the article and its in line with other informations

Ref 42 and 76: Trina George has an extensive educational background and was the state director for USDA Miss.

https://magnoliatribune.com/2024/08/04/meet-usda-rural-development-mississippi-state-director-dr-trina-n-george/

Ref 43-44 & 49: secondary source backs up the first 2 sources https://www.wlbt.com/story/12387436/hundreds-filed-tornado-damage-insurance-claims/ https://www.reuters.com/article/world/uk/mississippi-counts-cost-of-storms-that-killed-10-idUSTRE63P697/. A local, secondary source partially backing up the 3rd source https://www.ksla.com/story/12371362/storms-leave-path-of-destruction-from-la-to-al/.

Ref 46: Generic ≠ unreliable, and its a local news website

Ref 47: I don't really see how that makes it unreliable

@11WB GrenadinesDes (talk) 17:24, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are we able to get some more information about ref 46? 11WB (talk) 17:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just now realized the article was made by the power company for Yazoo City, I can't find other sources but thats likely due to the fact the power company is a very local one rather than a more widespread one. GrenadinesDes (talk) 19:12, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@11WB GrenadinesDes (talk) 19:19, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. That may explain the generic look of the site. I'll take a proper look at this again tomorrow or later in the week, as I'm about to go (mostly) offline. 11WB (talk) 19:23, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@11WB Is this passable now? GrenadinesDes (talk) 11:16, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have some minor concerns. I'll get to this at some point later today or tomorrow. 11WB (talk) 11:21, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 16: This is probably fine then. ✔
Ref 30: This is fine. ✔
Ref 42, 76: If they are subject matter experts, then citing them is acceptable. ✔
Ref 43-44, 49: It would be a good idea to use those sources too. ✔
Ref 46: I've had a look and this is only verifiable through the company's own WP:PRIMARY source. This, I believe, is WP:UNDUE and should be removed.
Ref 47: This is actually a WAPT article, can the original URL be found?

Courtesy pinging @GrenadinesDes. 11WB (talk) 12:19, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Ref 46

For Ref 47: I'm struggling to find the original URL for the article, it most likely got deleted. I don't know if it's on the Internet Archive since that website is blocked on my school laptop but I'll check later on my phone. GrenadinesDes (talk) 13:29, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the original URL exist, seems like it didn't archived @11WB GrenadinesDes (talk) 16:23, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, the news aggregate URL is fine. ✔ 11WB (talk) 16:45, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first image in the Meteorological setup section is causing text placement issues with the infobox. Per MOS:IMAGELOC this image should be placed on the right, so that the text is on the left, rather than in the centre, where it currently is.

@11WB GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:46, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is much better. ✔ 11WB (talk) 21:11, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tentative support: I'm happy to give early support to this article becoming featured. I would like to know what more experienced weather editors think of it though. I'll keep tabs on this candidacy. The article is definitely improved, so there shouldn't be any issues. Best of luck to you, @GrenadinesDes. 11WB (talk) 16:48, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Will do a prose review (non-experienced). 750 h+ 08:28, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

lead

restrengthening to low-end EF4 intensity few miles southwest of ==> "restrengthening to low-end EF4 intensity a few miles southwest of"
Initially, there were uncertainties on whether this ==> "Initially, there were uncertainties about whether this"
concluded with one, unified track. ==> "concluded that there was one, unified track."
track became the fourth longest in Mississippi history ==> "track became the fourth-longest in Mississippi history"
with maximum width of 3,080 yd ==> "with a maximum width of 3,080 yd"
devastated areas few days later ==> "devastated areas a few days later"
organizations, local businesses and non-profit groups oxford comma consistency
Louisiana and a Baptist church in Yazoo City that were completely ==> "Louisiana and a Baptist church in Yazoo City that was completely"

meteorological summary

On April 20, Storm Prediction Center highlighted a Day 5 ==> "On April 20, the Storm Prediction Center highlighted a Day 5"
destabilizing airmass combined with strong wind field ==> "destabilizing airmass combined with a strong wind field"
spreading across the region suggesting severe weather add a comma after "region"
Development of severe thunderstorms were occurring during ==> "Development of severe thunderstorms was occurring during"
leading to concentrated area of severe weather across the moderate ==> "leading to a concentrated area of severe weather across the moderate"
convective clusters and line of embedded supercells this should be either "convective clusters and a line of embedded supercells" or "convective clusters and lines of embedded supercells"
in place for large portions Mississippi and Alabama and small parts ==> "in place for large portions of Mississippi and Alabama and small parts"
with the storms expected to moving into Alabama ==> "with the storms expected to move into Alabama"
Large scale ascent was forecasted to ==> "Large-scale ascent was forecasted to"
and a moist and unstable boundary layer was expected ==> "and a moist and unstable boundary layer were expected"
the afternoon as discrete supercells development ==> "the afternoon as discrete supercell development"
with wind gust up to ==> "with wind gusts up to"

More incoming. 750 h+ 13:37, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

Done
Done
Done
Done
Done
Done
Done Added the extra commas
Done

Meteorological Summary:

Done
Done
Done Added the comma
Done
Done
Done Went with the latter statement
Done
Done Removed moving with move
Done
Done
Done
Done

GrenadinesDes (talk) 14:16, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+ also complementary ping GrenadinesDes (talk) 11:47, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

tornado summary

carving cycloidal marks on the ground ==> "carving cycloidal marks in the ground"
intensified to mid-range EF3 strength crossing Willow Bayou Road ==> "intensified to mid-range EF3 strength, crossing Willow Bayou Road"
Couple of framed homes sustained ==> "A couple of framed homes sustained"
where approximately 14 employees were working at the time the tornado struck, all the employees survived, though three received minor injuries. ==> "where approximately 14 employees were working at the time the tornado struck. All the employees survived, though three received minor injuries."
Every warehouse, the electrical infrastructure of the plant, and the office areas on site were destroyed, the piping system sustained severe damage and communications went offline. ==> "Every warehouse, the electrical infrastructure of the plant, and the office areas on site were destroyed. The piping system sustained severe damage and communications went offline."
The tornado briefly entering back into Louisiana ==> "The tornado briefly entered back into Louisiana"
before re-entering back into Mississippi ==> "before re-entering Mississippi"
uprooting a large amount of trees in the ==> "uprooting a large number of trees in the"
Road sustained significant roof damage and a utility add a comma after "damage"
snapping multiple trees along Yazoo River ==> "snapping multiple trees along the Yazoo River"
with estimated windspeeds up to 120 "windspeeds" is usually two separate words
a couple of outbuilding were demolished ==> "a couple of outbuildings were demolished"
a framed home had most of their roof ripped away ==> "a framed home had most of its roof ripped away"
sustained moderate roof damage and a single-wide mobile comma after "damage" (consistency)
Along Bus Station Road, The Hillcrest Baptist Church was "The" should be lowercase
Several hardwood trees nearby the church ==> "Several hardwood trees near the church"
Mississippi Department Of Transportation maintenance building "Of" should be lowercase
leveling a poorly built home at estimated windspeeds of 155 mph "windspeeds" ==> "wind speeds"
The tornado slightly weakened to mid-range EF3 intensity, crossing Old Benton Road, leveling a poorly built home at estimated windspeeds of 155 mph (249 km/h), another home along the road was mostly leveled, with a few interior walls left standing. Separate the sentence (starting at "another home along the road was mostly leveled")
a double-wide mobile was destroyed ==> "a double-wide mobile home was destroyed"
At 12:24 p.m., National Weather Service issued ==> "At 12:24 p.m., the National Weather Service issued"
For the rest of Yazoo County; more semi-colon should be a comma
A well-built brick home was mostly leveled, leaving a few walls left standing. ==> "A well-built brick home was mostly leveled, with a few walls left standing."
weakening back to an low-end EF2 intensity "an" ==> "a"
and parts of Holmes, Choctaw, Montgomery and Carroll County oxford comma
Carroll County with the tornado's forward speed estimated at 55 mph (89 km/h) Comma after "County"
several trees, demolishing outbuilding ==> "several trees, demolishing an outbuilding"
went through rural forested area at ==> "went through a rural forested area at"
after crossing Natchez Trace Parkway ==> "after crossing the Natchez Trace Parkway"
walls collapse, multiple of homes had significant roof damage "multiple of homes" ==> "multiple homes"
Dozens of mobile homes and conventional foundation homes were completely demolished and multiple vehicles were thrown into the tree line, two poorly-built homes were leveled, a couple of one-story homes were mostly leveled, with a few interior walls left standing, a poorly-constructed home was shifted off its foundation, and several hardwood and softwood trees were significantly snapped or debarked. this sentence is quite a mouthful, could be split into two or even three.
The tornado make an eastward turn ==> "The tornado made an eastward turn"
The tornado dissipated few miles north ==> "The tornado dissipated a few miles north"

case studies

The estimated timber damage inflicted from the ==> "The estimated timber damage inflicted by the"
Portion of every tornadoes recorded have TKE ==> "A portion of every tornado recorded has TKE}}
The study noted that a tornado's were measured by energy a tornado's what?
with the longer lasting tornadoes ==> "with the longer-lasting tornadoes"

Will continue.

Tornado summary:

Done
Done
Done
Done Removed run-on
Done Removed run-on
Done
Done
Done
Done added the comma
Done added "the"
Done Split up windspeeds
Done
Done
Done added comma
Done lowercased "The"
Done
Done lowercased "Of"
Done Split up windspeeds
Done Removed run-on
Done added the "home"
Done added "the"
Done replaced semi-colon
Done Replaced sentence
Done Replaced "an"
Done added the commas
Done Added "an"
Done added "a"
Done added "the"
Done split up into 2 paragraphs
Done
Done

Case studies:

Done
Done
Done added "strength"
Done added the dash

GrenadinesDes (talk) 15:58, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

impacts and aftermath

The tornado caused $36 million in total damage, $35 million in property and $1 million in agricultural damage in Louisiana and injured 16 people.[16] needs an oxford comma. also is the "injured 16 people" part not a bit random.
more than 160 homes received moderate to major damage, with 107 homes destroyed ==> "more than 160 homes sustained moderate to major damage, and 107 were destroyed"
affected 556 homes, 242 manufactured homes, 33 businesses and 18 agricultural areas oxford comma
with a couple of them from Yazoo City were airlifted to the hospital
with a couple of them from Yazoo City were airlifted to the hospital, with 14 of the patients being in critical condition. ==> "with a couple of them from Yazoo City, who were airlifted to the hospital; 14 of the patients were in critical condition."
Nationwide spokeswomen reported that 35 claims were placed by Monday and she add a comma following "Monday"
not planning on adding temporary claims center in add "a" after "adding"
Electric Power Association reported 18,000 ==> "The Electric Power Association reported 18,000"
Eagle Bend might have not heard ==> "Eagle Bend might not have heard"
Despite that, the residents of Eagle Bend might have not heard the sirens regardless since the closest one to the town was 4 miles (6.4 km) away since Warren county lacked the money available to construct a tornado siren near the Eagle Bend area. this sentence could be split into two
from Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published ==> "from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published"

response

have been higher, if not for the comma not needed
Tuesday, April 27 to Friday, April 30 during the ==> "Tuesday, April 27, to Friday, April 30, during the"
Choctaw, Holmes, Warren and Yazoo Counties oxford comma
The declaration also noted that FEMA were continuing ==> "The declaration also noted that FEMA was continuing"
additional forms of assistance to be likely after ==> "additional forms of assistance would likely be provided"
surveying completed ==> "surveying was completed"
according to American Medical ==> "according to an American Medical"
Central Mississippi chapter opened ==> "The Central Mississippi chapter opened"
Service collaborated to organized a stress ==> "Service collaborated to organize a stress"
all the disaster declared counties ==> "all the disaster-declared counties"
deployed in Holmes County, 278 volunteers were registered ==> "deployed in Holmes County, and 278 volunteers were registered"
assisting in accounting all residents in ==> "assisting in accounting for all residents in"
including Arkansas and Kentucky arrived to aid in the recovery effort need a comma after "Kentucky"
The foundation made emergency ==> "The foundation provided emergency"
span of a couple days ==> "span of a couple of days"
Houston Astros player, Roy Oswalt, traveled commas aren't needed here
started working relief effort ==> "started a relief effort"
from his parents and neighbors homes. ==> "from his parents' and neighbors' homes."
roofing shingles, windows and pipes oxford comma
guests that showed up ==> "guests who showed up"

recovery

a new electrical system, a large steel enclosure to protect the distillation and oil blending units ==> "a new electrical system, and a large steel enclosure to protect the distillation and oil blending units"
housing, a disaster recovery ==> "housing, and a disaster recovery"
to assist with unemployment and small business "business" should be "businesses"
almost 69.1 million tons of debris was removed ==> "almost 69.1 million tons of debris were removed"
Emergency management director for Choctaw ==> "The emergency management director for Choctaw"
with many other moving into FEMA cottage homes ==> "with many others moving into FEMA cottage homes"
based in the St. Louis spent "the" shouldn't be here
was rebuilt debt free due to ==> "was rebuilt debt-free due to"
agencies extinguishing the fires in 14 hours why is this "fires" when there's only one mentioned
storm chaser and meteorologist, Reed Timmer, and his chase commas shouldn't be here.
chase partners Joel Taylor and Chris Chittick, were ==> "chase partners, Joel Taylor and Chris Chittick, were"

later tornadoes

with estimated windspeeds of 115 mph "windspeeds" ==> "wind speeds"
power poles were snapped ==> "snapped power poles"
No casualties were reported and the tornado caused ==> "No casualties were reported, and the tornado caused"
intensifying to high-end EF1 strength, demolishing multiple farm outbuildings ==> "intensifying to high-end EF1 strength, and demolishing multiple farm outbuildings"
damaged and moderate roof damage oxford comma
moderate roof damage were noted before ==> "moderate roof damage was noted before"
No casualties were reported and the tornado caused $500,000 in damage ==> "No casualties were reported, and the tornado caused $500,000 in damage"

Impacts and Aftermath

Done added the oxford comma, and the mention of 16 injuries is the only sort of human impact the tornado did in Louisiana.
Done reworded sentence
Done entered the comma
Done redone statement
Done added the comma after Monday
Done added "a"
Done added "the"
Done reworded and split up the sentence.
Done added "the"

response

Done comma removed
Done added comma
Done added comma
Done replaced "were"
Done reworded sentence
Done added "was"
Done
Done Added "the"
Done
Done added the dash

GrenadinesDes (talk) 18:27, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Continuation:

Done added "and"
Done added "for"
Done added comma after Kentucky
Done replaced word
Done added "of"
Done removed commas
Done replaced "working"
Done
Done
Done

recovery

Done
Done
Done
Done
Done
Done
Done
Done
Done changed to "fire"
Done
Done

later tornadoes

Done
Done synthaxes
Done added the commas for statements similar to that
Done added ", and"
Done added comma
Done replaced were to was

GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:28, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+ GrenadinesDes (talk) 20:29, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just a note. Per WP:FAC instructions, we are advised not to use "graphics or complex templates on FAC nomination pages", as they increase page load time. 11WB (talk) 02:54, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

oh I didn't know mb GrenadinesDes (talk) 08:00, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think just with the sheer number of grammatical issues I've pointed out (I think i've point the majority out above), I'll give this article, like 11WB, a tentative support too. 750 h+ 07:33, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Volcanoguy 17:43, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a small volcano and the youngest cinder cone in the Desolation Lava Field of British Columbia, Canada. It's kinda short but that's to be expected for an article about a minor landform. For example, see the article about Eve Cone which is about 6 kilometres (3.7 mi) northwest of Williams Cone. Volcanoguy 17:43, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hog Farm, GeoWriter, and Generalissima: This FAC may be of interest to you. Volcanoguy 20:34, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support by JJE

Disclaimer: Was linked to here from my own FAC so this review should be assessed accordingly.Pretty short article, but not too short for FA I reckon. Specific points:

"The cause of volcanic activity in the Northern Cordilleran Volcanic Province is thought to be due to rifting of the North American Cordillera" is the "due to" needed? The rifting is the cause, there isn't an intermediate step named here.
I've removed "The cause of" and replaced "volcanic activity with "volcanism". Volcanoguy 20:30, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"involved the accumulation of" better "build up"?
Done. Volcanoguy 21:58, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"most of it was rafted away by massive lava from Williams Cone" what does "massive lava" mean here?
Removed "massive". Volcanoguy 18:54, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing objectionable about article structure, sourcing and formatting. ALT text and images fine too.

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:50, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support with the small-text qualifier above. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:21, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Dumelow (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a Victorian-era British Army officer. Glyn spent most of his career with the 24th Regiment and made a bit of a name for himself during the 9th Cape Frontier War. While commanding his regiment in the Anglo-Zulu War he was badly affected by the losses suffered at the Battle of Isandlwana and experienced a mental breakdown; he escaped being made a scapegoat for the defeat, partly because of his wife's intervention. He went on to command a brigade during the second, successful, invasion that won the war for the British but this was his last active service; he survived just long enough to wave his regiment off for service in the Second Boer War. The article has recently passed a MILHIST A-class assessment - Dumelow (talk) 17:33, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very interesting article, especially as it provides a snapshot of the military forces and personnel that built and sustained the British Empire (and without glamorising them). I have only the following comments:

"and was afterwards posted on garrison duty across the British Empire" - was Glyn moved around as part of this? There's currently no details on how or when he went from India to Malta

There's a history of the regiment from 1892 that I had originally discounted because of its age and being written by its own officers but I think it should be OK for detail on its postings which I can't source elsewhere. Added some info, including an interesting snippet of service during the Fenian Rising.

"across the border in nearby Spain" - 'nearby' doesn't seem necessary

Removed

"Chelmsford was concerned about the forces of two Zulu chiefs, Matshana kaMondisa of the Sithole clan and Matshana kaSitshakuza of the Mchunu clan, who he thought were gathering a force" - repetition of 'force' in the same sentence

Good spot, removed "the forces of", which I didn't think was necessary

"outbreak of disease" - can you say what disease(s)?

Added - Dumelow (talk) 11:51, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"By the end of April, Glyn was at Dundee" - specify that this is the town in South Africa rather than the much better known one in Scotland.

Good point, added ", Natal"

Do we know when/if Glyn recovered from his depression following Isandlwana? The first para of the 'second invasion' section suggests he was still not fully effective as a military commander.

I don't think so but I can't find too much commentary on his behaviour during the second invasion, I assume he sort of slotted back into a subordinate role under Chelmsford without a great deal to do. Greaves (2012) has "Glyn never recovered from losing his regiment at Isandlwana" and Greaves & Knight (2006) on his retirement has "a sad and stooped little man, Glyn's remaining years were overshadowed by the memory of his lost family on the rocky slopes of Isandlwana". I've summarised in the article as "In retirement Glyn lived in Mortimer Common in Berkshire, his final years were gloomy, haunted by the memory of Isandlwana." but happy to hear suggestion - Dumelow (talk) 12:06, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Glyn was promoted to major-general on 30 September 1882" - no duties associated with this are noted: was it essentially an honorific?

I've not been able to find anything he did in this period. I don't know if he perhaps remained on half pay and it was granted as a means of boosting his pension - Dumelow (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do any sources discuss Glyn as a person during the last decades of his life in the UK? It must have been a significant change returning to the country after living for most of his life overseas. Nick-D (talk) 01:09, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not much, except or the comments noted above about the memories of Isandlwana - Dumelow (talk) 12:10, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review Nick-D, I've made some replies above and will come back on the rest once I've checked the relevant sources - Dumelow (talk) 12:41, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick-D, I think I have come back on everything above now - Dumelow (talk) 15:37, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Those changes look good, and I'm happy to support this nomination. Nick-D (talk) 07:42, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

*Putting a placeholder here. I'll review over the coming days. AA (talk) 20:52, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Lead

To avoid ambiguity in the lead, could "general rank" perhaps be linked to his substantiative rank?

Now linked to general officer

Early career

Is there any information on how or where he was educated?

Alas the sources have very little on his early life

I couldn't find anything even briefly mentioning his education on BNA either. AA (talk) 08:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Two uses of "with his regiment" in consecutive sentences. Could this be reworded to avoid repetition?

Replaced the first one with "with the 82nd Regiment"

The mention of the burial of his sons on Malta is quite sudden, and prior to this there is no mention of their deaths. Might it be possible to introduce this to the reader in a sentence or two before, briefly describing how they died?

There's not much out there but I have scraped together a little more info from birth records and the British Newspaper Archive and added that, which may help? Their deaths are not mentioned in the garrison medical officer's annual reports for the period and there is no specific link to any disease outbreaks of the time (Richard Oliver Couper died before the November 1867 cholera outbreak in the garrison).

This is really helpful and a great addition. Glyn never had much good fortune, by the sounds of it. AA (talk) 08:42, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cape Colony

"and led expeditions that lasted up to ten days at a time" → "and led expeditions lasting up to ten days at a time"

Agreed and changed

9th Cape Frontier War

Nothing to add here. Can't see any standout issues with structure or grammar. The section adequately and concisely details Glyn's role in the war.

Anglo-Zulu War

Done

"...gave Glyn command of his No. 3 Column." Could "his" be dropped here? No worries if not, might be the proper military lingo!

No, not needed. Removed

First invasion

"On 24 January the Natal Native Contingent at the post mutinied." The NNC abbreviation can be used here.

Done

"Effete" is a very niche word, I wonder if linking it to the Wiktionary definition might be beneficial? (wiktionary:effete).

Agreed and done, I didn't know of its older use meaning "exhausted, spent, worn-out", which I suspect was what was intended here rather than the modern use

Must admit, I had only heard of the word once or twice in my 36 years, so I had to Google its meaning! Think you are correct with the older use being intended here. AA (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Second invasion

A list like this "The British force, more than 5,000 strong and supported by 12 artillery pieces and 2 gatling guns," is an exception (MOS:NUMNOTES: "Comparable values near one another should be all spelled out or all in figures, even if some of the numbers would (or could) normally be written differently: patients' ages were five, thirty-two, and one hundred one or ages were 5, 32, and 101, but not ages were five, 32, and 101 or ages were five, thirty-two, and 101.")

Fair enough, no contention from me! AA (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Glyn had returned to Natal by 26 August..." not sure "had" is needed here.

Removed

Later career and death

"In retirement Glyn lived in Mortimer Common in Berkshire, his final years were gloomy, haunted by the memory of Isandlwana". This might be better served with a semicolon after "Berkshire".

Done

Do we know when he moved just over the county border to Hampshire?

Good spot. I think its the same place, his residence is given as "Stratfield Saye, Mortimer" in directories of the time. I've amended this just to "Stratfield Saye".

The house is ~600 metres over the county border in Hampshire, so that's probably why sources interchange Berkshire/Hampshire! AA (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

Some brilliant footnotes here, that would be useful for several of my Hampshire cricketers who purchased commissions!

Yes, Glyn really came in just at the end of the era, he must have been one of the last men in the army to purchase a lieutenant-colonelcy. A traditional officer who seems to have had few ambitions beyond his regiment.

Was thinking it was a high rank to purchase, most of the Hampshire cricketers that had purchased commissions only pruchased up to lieutenant. AA (talk) 08:48, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Could the equivalents be updated to 2026 values?

The conversion is done by template:inflation it will automatically update as the indices are updated

References

Ref 19 needs a Wayback Machine archive link.

Done

Bibliography

Bruce and Paton et al. need |via=Internet Archive adding to them, plus |url-access=registration.

Done

Image review by JacobTheRox

[edit]

Feel free to disagree with my comments as always
File:Diadoch.png
- Public domain by author's release.
- The caption should have some kind of punctuation regarding the {{circa}}, probably either A map of the territories of the Diadochi, c. 303 BC or A map of the territories of the Diadochi (c. 303 BC)
Is there no other image you could include? The fact there's only a map leaves an interesting article otherwise a bit... bland. I can't see any on commons; are there no diagrams of city layouts or contemporaneous maps or depictions of leaders that are in the public domain?
- Unfortunately (because we don't know where the city is) I can't put any pictures of ruins or layouts. We don't have any definite images of Antigonus I either. I suppose it could have an image of Seleucus, or Seleucia Pieria where its inhabitants were deported to. What do you think? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:35, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
How about a multiple image of Lysimachus and Seleucus I Nicator either at the start of "Fall" or the paragraph before? Putting some faces to people is always nice in a history article. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 14:51, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Done with pleasure. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant. Image review is a Pass then; I eagerly await the source review. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 16:42, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Currently Antigoneia is a redirect to Antigonia. Why isn't it the name of this article per WP:NATURAL. I suppose they may be too similar, and it's not relevant for the FAC, but I thought you'd be the person to ask.
- I think too similar, yes.
Second to this, why is "(Syria)" a disambiguator rather than the nicer looking "Antigoneia, Syria"?
Remove duplicated link to Macedonian Empire
The article is only around 1000 words, of which over a quarter is the lead and introduction to the empire / regional history. That doesn't seem very in-depth for a FA – is that a limit imposed by the available source material? I am aware that the sources you've used are more general historical coverage so the detail may just not exist.
- Unfortunately, an undiscovered city with six years of peak existence built by someone whom his successors preferred to quickly and forcibly forget just doesn't have that much going for it. If it was found, you'd have archaeological, topographical, cultural, economical, etc. analysis (see Ai-Khanoum) but it's not, so we don't.
I think that's all I have. The article is a nice read but just a little short and only has one image. I look forward to reading other reviewers' comments. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 20:14, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. My article Robert Jacomb-Hood is at FAC at the moment; feel free to drop by!

Further drive by comments: JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 18:26, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wording: "Seleucus ensured Antigoneia's erasure by transferring its population to his own foundations at Seleucia Pieria and Antioch..." The word "foundations" caught me off guard. To my USA ears, foundation as a noun means a building support or a charity. I suppose here it means "a city that Seleucus founded"? Consider re-wording so more readers get the gist.

I see that the word is also used here: "... through settlement foundation. It was natural that occupying Antigoneia would not fully suit his purposes—founding a new city and destroying the previous foundation would be far more prestigious. Seleucus may have considered his defeated enemy's choice of location to his own at Antioch, which had a superior water supply, was situated in more fertile lands, and was closer to the sea. Legends of Antioch's foundation record that ..." The 1st and 3rd usages here are sorta verb-ish, and make sense. The middle usage is a concrete or rock structure that a building rests upon (to my ears :-) Noleander (talk) 23:30, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Noleander! The term "foundation" is, as you note, somewhat antiquated, with the study of the foundations of Alexander the Great dating almost as far back to the time of the American Founding Fathers. The meaning is the same for both cities and America—it is the first establishment that is being referred to. Unfortunately, the term is now so intimately associated with the topic area (besides having a meaning, relating to the very initial decision and acts to establish a city, which is not quite replicated by any other word) that I think removing it in the first instance would be a mistake, but I have rephrased the second. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Description

Description

Are there any alternatives for this section heading or is this the best one?
"preferring to only state" → "preferring only to state"
who, Billows deduced, must have come from Antigoneia
- Do we need the commas here?
"Seleucus may have considered his defeated enemy's choice of location to his own at Antioch" → "Seleucus may have considered his defeated enemy's choice of location inferior to his own at Antioch"
"an eagle carried the sacrificial meat to Antioch's" → "an eagle carried the sacrificial meat to Antioch"

MSincccc (talk) 07:49, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I had some reservations about reviewing this -- not for any quality concerns, but simply because it is very short. We certainly do have very short (and very good) FAs, many of which are in the classics-adjacent sphere, but this is not my specialism and it's difficult to be certain of comprehensiveness. It doesn't seem to have an entry in the Oxford Classical Dictionary (at least, not the 1999 edition that I can check until TWL sorts out OUP access), and it has only a very cursory item in Brill's New Pauly; if there was something significant to say about it, I'd expect it to be there. ~~So my starting position is that we're probably covered for comprehensiveness.~~ (having looked into the sources in more detail, my view on this has changed: there are a couple of important omissions). UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:04, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why the name is transliterated into modern Greek rather than ancient -- it isn't in Greece, and it was abandoned long before modern Greek came about.
I think the first sentence (per MOS:FIRST) could be better at bringing readers in. Most won't know what "Hellenistic" means, who Antigonus was, or where the Orontes is. Nor do we ever say, as far as I can see, exactly where it is. We should be able to say, for example, that it was near the eastern Mediterranean coast in modern Syria, Turkey or Lebanon, because that's where the River Orontes is. I would suggest adding an image of the Orontes's drainage basin to the lead -- if you're feeling particularly arty, a nice map of Antigonus's kingdom with the Orontes labelled would do the job excellently.
The measurements in the lead are a bit ugly with the double brackets. Dashes might be neater.
Its location is unknown: suggest exact location or similar (we know roughly where it was).
I would give a literal translation of "Diadochi".
We give Seleucos his title in the lead, but not the body.
Personal taste, perhaps, but it seems odd to be resolutely Greek with the transliteration of Antigoneia (not -ea), and completely Latin with e.g. Seleucus, Celaenae, Seleucia.
east-west and north-south roads: MOS:DASH.
dual use of Antioch and Seleucia: I would clarify where these are, to make even clearer that Seleucia and Seleucia Pieria are not the same place.

More to follow. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:20, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The historian Diodorus Siculus reports that Antigoneia had a perimeter of seventy stades (7.5 miles (12.1 km)).: see my commments about double brackets ago. Who was Diodorus, and roughly when did he write? A stadion was about 200m, so even if we assume that Diodorus means exactly 70 and not 71 or 69 (unlikely), we can't pretend to an accuracy of 100m: trim the kilometer conversion to 12 km.
Billows estimates its Greco-Macedonian population at 20,000, not including indigenous Asians or slaves: I haven't been able to get hold of the book, but does he make any kind of ballparking guess at what sort of proportion of the population this might have represented? It's a pretty useless statistic without one, but of course if the sources don't extimate, there's not a lot we can do. Can we, however, give some idea of the basis for it? Does a source say that Antigonos moved a certain number of people here? The normal methods would be censuses and estimates from archaeological remains, but I don't think we have either of those.
On another note: De Giorgi 2016, p. 50, says that the exiled population (according to "legend" -- but the real source is John Malalas) was 5,300 Greeks and Macedonians, which is rather a lot less. He's being a bit loose with the source here: Malalas says that the Athenians living in Antigoneia were forced to live in Antioch, along with "some Macedonians" (origin not specified), totalling 5,300 together -- this rather strongly implies that not all of the former residents were moved.
a potential location on the left bank of the Orontes: suggest "west bank", as even those reviewers who know where the Orontes is are unlikely to know which way it flows (I didn't).
A French military officer named Paul Jacquot: I'd suggest we introduce him as we have everyone else: not "a historian named Diodorus Siculus", but e.g. "Paul Jacquot, a French military officer writing in 1931...". Did he visit the site? There's some context on him in De Georgi and Eger 2021 that would be worth mentioning (for example, that the source here is a tourist guide rather than an academic publication).
Another point on the location: Libanius (11.85 (cited at De Georgi 2016, p. 51) says that Antiogoneia was 40 stades from Antioch. We could (for example) have a map of the Orontes basin, with Antioch marked with a radius of 40 stades around it.
To keep beating this drum: Diodorus (40.47.5) puts it in Upper Syria; I must admit I'm not totally sure which bit of Syria is upper as opposed to lower (up the river?) but we can state it, and link to Syria (region).
Legends of Antioch's foundation record that in 300 BC Seleucus performed a sacrifice at Antigoneia for a sign from Zeus: the source for this is Libanius, 11.85f: it would be good to name it. I must admit I'm not sure what the basis for calling it a legend is -- Libanius presents it as fact and it doesn't seem particularly unlikely, even if we might question whether the bit about the eagle seizing the sacrificial offering is entirely legit.
the ancient historians Strabo, Libanius, and John Malalas: this is rather misleading. Strabo is known as a geographer; his great work is an anthropological geography of the world that he knew. Libanius was a rhetorician, and the work in question (cited several times above) is the Oration In Praise Of Antioch (see JSTOR 985424). John Malalas was a historian, or at least a chronicler, but he lived 800 years after the destruction of Antigoneia and about 500 after Strabo: we're smoothing over crucial differences of time, place and purpose between these sources. We need to give it space to breathe and explain exactly what we're dealing with in this material.
On the apparent mutual endorsement of Jacquot, Downey and Cohen, De George (2016, p. 51) seem to disagree that they all put it in the same place. He has Glanville Downey located Antigoneia on a plateau overlooking the Orontes only 8 km northeast of Antioch (Güzelburç) and oriented toward the Amuq Valley’s rich farmland. Similarly, Getzel Cohen’s [sic] argued that Antigoneia might lie north of Antioch, accepting the distance of forty stades (approximately 7.4 km) and situating the city in the vicinity of the lake.68. Cohen actually says (2006, pp. 76f) Most likely it was located northeast of Antioch in the triangle of land where the Kara Su joins the Orontes.; he doesn't cite or mention Jacquot, though he does point readers towards Downey in a footnote. They're definitely all saying that it's in pretty much the same place, but I don't think we can say that Cohen in particular was endorsing Jacquot: he's independently saying more or less the same thing.
Andrea U. De Giorgi argues that the absence of archaeological evidence means this plateau can no longer be identified: another one that needs some space to breathe. Absence of evidence is not, after all, usually evidence of absence, especially in archaeology and particularly when we're dealing with a city that's been consciously destroyed. He seems to be talking about the Amuq Valley Regional Projects (see report here), probably the field survey done under Robert Braidwood in the 1930s. We need to say that this area has been (reasonably) intensively explored by a team looking for evidence of settlements (though admittedly they weren't really looking for Hellenistic settlements), and that they failed to find a suitable candidate for Antigoneia in the area, and that's the basis of De Giorgi's absence-of-evidence claim.
On the destruction: there's important context in Cohen 2006, p. 78 (n. 4) as to what that destruction may (and may not) have entailed: we talk about these at the end, to explain Dio Cassius's comment about its survival, but they really need to be stated when we talk about the actual "destruction".
The point at Cohen 2006, p. 23, that Antigoneia was the first major Hellenistic foundation in Syria is noteworthy.
Events that took place at Antigoneia included: the senior advisor Aristodemus of Miletus's staged acclamation of Antigonus as king, following the Battle of Salamis in early 306, and Antigonus's subsequent coronation in the royal palace; the burial of his younger son Philip in late 306, shortly before he led forth a strong army to invade Egypt; and a grand festival planned for 302, intended to include theatre and sporting competitions, which was abruptly cancelled when the diadochus Lysimachus invaded Phrygia: this is a giant sentence. On a more nit-picky note, we do make it sound like Philip make a remarkable recovery after his burial and went on to lead an army. Do we need "strong" there?
After compensating the crestfallen entrants with a total of 200 gold talents: this word almost certainly needs cutting. Was 200 talents a lot?
Seleucus may have considered his defeated enemy's choice of location to his own at Antioch: there's a word missing here.
which had a superior water supply, was situated in more fertile lands, and was closer to the sea: this is cited to Downey, who thinks he knows definitively where Antigoneia was. We can't have that cake and eat it: if we're accepting De Giorgi's view that the Güzelburç plateau is now out, we don't know for sure that any of these were true. We can still do something by being clear who's saying this and on what basis.
According to Cohen, the ancient historians Strabo, Libanius, and John Malalas "indicate that Seleucus destroyed or depopulated Antigoneia in order to populate Antioch.: it's weird to say this as "according to" -- you can read it in Libanius (Antigonia itself he obliterated, since it was a memorial of an evil man, and he removed hither the population, among whom were Athenians.), Strabo sort-of says it (Now Nicator founded the first of the settlements, transferring thither the settlers from Antigonia, which had been built near it a short time before by Antigonus), and John Malalas likewise says it straightforwardly: Then he went away and razed the city of Antigonia down to the ground; he took away the materials by river, and set up a statue of Tyche of Antigonia, with the horn of Amaltheia in front of it. ... After destroying Antigonia, Seleucus forced the Athenians who lived there to move to Antioch the great.
Related to the above, where a modern source is citing an ancient one, I would cite it too, especially if there's a nice online edition for readers to use. As we can see, in some cases our historians haven't been entirely careful with their primary material.
Many of Antigoneia's population were likely relocated to Seleucia Pieria, which Seleucus intended to be his western capital, although the Antiochene writers Libanius and Malalas omit this information: we're jumping two-footed into a difficult problem here. This is Downey's theory, and he admits on p. 59 that most of his contemporaries disagreed with him. The only source to mention Seleuceia is Didorus, and the other option -- which Downey says is/was the general view, citing Karl Otfried Müller -- is that Diodorus just got the wrong city. It's basically a giant conjecture, and we need to present it as such (or find someone else who agrees with Downey). Cohen 2006, p. 77, at least says it's plausible, since Seleukeia was a very important place, but that "a number of scholars" think Diodorus just got it wrong.
preferring to only state that many were settled at Antioch: I can't see this, at least as we frame it, in Cohen: he certainly doesn't follow Downey in alleging an Antiochene coverup -- he only states that the sources differ, not that this was a matter of their authors' preferences.
The article by Marinoni cited in Cohen 2006 (see p. 77) seems to be important in the question above.
The Tyche of Antigoneia (De Giorgi 2016, pp. 51f) needs some coverage and attention.
Although Diodorus Siculus reports that Antigoneia was destroyed by Seleucus: not just Diodorus -- see above.
Notes 3 and 24: better to put sources in date order within the same footnote (as in note 9 and 19), unless one's labelled as being used for one part.
Per WP:ISBN, use the ISBN number printed on the book: that's a 10-digit one for Billows and Downey.
We should mention the debate about the mint: Cohen 2006, p. 77.
We do have the late comment by George Syncellus that Antigoneia was on the site of Antioch -- Cohen 2006, p. 77 -- one of the secondary sources mentioned it and called it rather unlikely, but I'm struggling to find which one.
Given our agnosticism about the location, it seems odd to include {{Ancient settlements in Turkey}} at the bottom. Has anyone actually said confidently that it was in modern Turkey -- most of the likely area is, but it's also pretty close to the Syrian border.

That's probably my lot for now. Some small nitpicks but a couple of more thorny issues: let me know if you want me to take another look at anything. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:04, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to do a source review, but UC seems to have covered a lot of sourcing issues/concerns in these comments. When these comments are resolved, please ping me and I will do a focused-source review. Aza24 (talk) 21:48, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): SnowyRiver28 (talk) 00:22, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the 2015 murder of a school teacher in a small town in regional New South Wales, Australia. This is my first GA, DYK and FAC, so any extra feedback or tips would be much appreciated:) SnowyRiver28 (talk) 00:22, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging GA and Peer Review editors: @Sophisticatedevening @HurricaneZeta SnowyRiver28 (talk) 00:27, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All online sources should have archives, some of them do not.
Instead of using the url "illawarramercury.com.au." use the name of the website/company.
A lot of the things in the website parameters can be wikilinked.
None of the images have alt text.

Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 00:43, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments! I've fixed the URL title for that reference and added alt text to all images. I've run the ArchiveBot several times but it's left some references without archives; do I manually find and add them? And what do you mean by website parameters? Is this the wiki pages for the references? SnowyRiver28 (talk) 01:42, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you can go to https://web.archive.org/ and use the wayback machine to manually get the url and dates for each one IAbot didn't get; it might help (if you use Chrome) to install the Wayback Machine extension to speed up the process. What I meant by website parameters was going back into references and finding the |website=The Sydney Morning Herald and turning it into |website=[[The Sydney Morning Herald]], doing so for all of them that don't already have it. Sophisticatedevening^(talk) 01:51, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've added archives for all sources that can be archived and wikilinked each publisher. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 10:19, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Thanks, both fixed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 08:30, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why is the author for [1] and [21] listed as "Press, Australian Associated"?

Retitled all instances to 'Australian Associated Press'. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why does [6] have "Australian Broadcasting Corporation"? The other ABC News citations format the website as "ABC News"

Fixed. SnowyRiver28 (talk)

What makes Illawarra Mercury a high-quality reliable source?

I've swapped this for a better source. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Any ISSNs available for the sources with no ISSNs?

I've added ISSNs for the sources I was able to find them for. Not sure about the others but I'm assuming not every source has an ISSN? SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The "Legacy" section seems to be rather short, with half of the paragraphs being one-line sentences; they should be consolidated into one paragraph imo.
"Scott's murder continues to have an impact, and has been noted to have caused a 'national awakening' to gendered violence." Who said that her murder caused a "national awakening" to gendered violence? Looking at the source, it seems that ABC News wrote that in a section title, but this comment seems to have come from an activist interviewed by ABC News. Also, how was there a "national awakening" to gendered violence? The current phrasing seems to be weasel words (for a lack of a phrase, sorry).
"The Leeton community continues to carry the grief of Scott's murder" this seems to go against MOS:RECENT.

I agree with this and your above point. I've removed them both for the moment but I'll try and think of a better phrasing for the continued grief statement. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"One day before what would have been Scott's 28th birthday, on 13 October 2016, Stanford was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment for aggravated sexual assault and life imprisonment for murder.[8][23][24][25]" this seems to be WP:OVERCITE.

I've removed two of the citations that affirmed the same thing so there's just two citations there now. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 09:49, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 07:00, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to disagree with my comments and sorry if I've repeated any from above.
The paragraphs in the lead are 3 sentences each and in my opinion are quite short for FA; I think more detail could be added or it converted to two longer paragraphs.

I've expanded the lead with more info, it's now four paragraphs. Let me know if you think this enough or more is needed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fix cite order to [1][5] not [5][1]
The source does not bring light to the fact that Stanford's upbringing was normal in light of his father's having left them, so I would say the current wording could be seen as OR. I would suggest you remove "Despite his father abandoning the family"

Agreed and removed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Stanford's flouting of rules was a clear "red flag" – is there more detail as to what he had done earlier, and if so, why the company don't think it was a concern? Did they ever know?

Added detail on the rules he was given and broke. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fix cite order to [8][10] not [10][8]
Fix cite order to [8][12] not [12][8]
Add comma after "later that evening,"

All citations above and below fixed and comma added. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fix disambiguation link to ute – I'm also unsure what this means, which would help if I could hover over a bluelink

Sorry, I should've caught that it was a disambig link when I added it as per a previous suggestion here. Fixed SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As the quote from the tape is multiple short sentences it would be clearer to put "in a videotaped police interview" beforehand.

Fixed SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it known where in the quite graphic sequence of his crime at what point she was actually dead? If not that might be worth mentioning and if so please add it in the right place

Yes, it's in the court judgement. I've added it to the appropriate place. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The plural of medium is media, not mediums.

Fixed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fix cite order to [8][21][22] not [21][8][22]
"One day before what would have been Scott's 28th birthday" – does the alignment with her birthday add encyclopaedic value; if it is merely for the emotional touch it should not be included.

Agreed and removed. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article is missing a reactions section; surely this was brought to national attention and relevant people commented, both when she went missing and during/after the trial.
The article is well written and most my comments are just prose suggestions but I feel like it lacks the depth of an FA. I read Disappearance of Natalee Holloway and Soham murders, the former of which is FA, and they seem much more detailed and encyclopaedic. I think there is definitely FA potential but I'm not ready to support at this point. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 15:56, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. My own article is on FAC here if you are interested in dropping by!

Copyvio from Watagwaan

[edit]

Hello, I hope all is well! This is just a quick look on Copyvio to save some time down the line.

Copyvio score is 26.5%, which is pretty good! The majority stems from the Sydney Morning Herald source (This one: ^[1]) although I'm pretty positive this is just of similar words used in both articles. There's only so many words you can use.

Will probably look into the article more later! For now, take care! I hope this goes on to become featured. Watagwaan (talk) 03:56, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello there! Thought I'd take a look at this since I have an open FAC of my own.

Is there any information about Scott's life prior to her murder? Birth year, education, etc.

Scott's disappearance sparked a large search effort, involving local police, SES volunteers, local sporting clubs and members of the wider Riverina community.[5][3] – The citations are out of order.

Overall, the article seems well-written, comprehensive and well-researched. Volcanoguy 15:38, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for having a look. I’ve fixed the citation order and I’ll endeavour to find some more info on Scott and add it to the background when I get the chance. SnowyRiver28 (talk) 12:02, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Usernameunique (talk) 01:54, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The 1909 statuette The Dance of Anitra witnesses the intersection of four themes. It shows the work of the English sculptor Edith Maryon shortly before she left for Dornach to join Rudolf Steiner's anthroposophical movement. It shows the Canadian dancer Maud Allan at the height of her flash-in-the-pan, and fleeting, success: eighteen months of sold-out shows at London's Palace Theatre, and cultural status as fashion icon and sex symbol—not to mention, affairs with a duke and the Prime Minister's wife. It shows the desert tribeswoman Anitra as she seduces the titular rake in Peer Gynt. It shows a performance to some of the most famous music composed by Edvard Grieg. And, of course, it's just a striking piece.

I created this article last November after it emerged at auction from more than a century of obscurity. It recently passed a good-article review (thanks, CounterpointStitch and MSincccc), and is ready to be reviewed here. --Usernameunique (talk) 01:54, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Background

then studied art upon her return
- Do we need "upon her return"?
Maryon exhibited little if at all after 1912.
- How about "Maryon exhibited little after 1912"?
  - The "if at all" is to point out that she may have had no exhibitions at all after that time; there are none that I'm aware of. --18:50, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
for the first time, in Germany.
- You could drop the comma after "time"?
In 1914, she travelled to Dornach
- You could drop the frontal comma after "1914" since it's British English.

MSincccc (talk) 08:43, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Description

Themes

was made around the same time and was perhaps larger
- Could the repetition of was be avoided?
  - Dropped the second. --18:52, 5 April 2026 (UTC)
this intimate rendering indicates there was a close relationship or at the very least an understanding
- How about "at least" in place of "at the very least"?

MSincccc (talk) 13:45, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Themes

represents a fifth-category work by Maryon
- What does "fifth-category" work mean in this context?
  - These are outlined in the background section on Maryon: These works, according to her biographer Rex Raab [de], tended to fall into five categories: first, the world of external physical being; second, references to the elemental world; third, motifs from the spiritual world; fourth, spiritual–allegorical works; and fifth, a combination of emotional and spiritual aspects. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Another such example is Maryon's 1911 work
According to Dreweatts, while writing about The Dance of Anitra, "While there is little
- Could we avoid the first "while" since it occurs in the quote?
These had their genesis in a relief created by Maryon
- How about These originated in a relief created by Maryon, perhaps in early 1919, depicting
- Also, you could link to relief.

MSincccc (talk) 16:33, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much, MSincccc. Responses above. --Usernameunique (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The other, titled The Passing of Winter—Miss Maude Allan as Spring, was made around the same time and perhaps larger; it was pictured in Academy Architecture in 1909,[77][78] and exhibited at the Forty-first Autumn Exhibition at the Walker Art Gallery from 23 September 1911 to 6 January 1912, priced at £200 (equivalent to £28,000 in 2024[a]).

Provenance

termed the work "graceful"
- How about A review in The Era described the work as "graceful" ?
A column published in the Acton Gazette and Middlesex County Times
- We could drop "published".
although it did not sell during the exhibition.
- How about dropping "during the exhibition"?
The International Studio printed a photograph of the statuette
- How is it different from "publishing" a photograph?

MSincccc (talk) 13:58, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

by the English artist Edith Maryon.
- Maryon's Wikipedia article describes her as a "sculptor". Could we make it so here as well?
Like The Dance of Anitra, these translated the grace and lightness of dance to the sculptural form.
- How about "into the sculptural form"?
Lead seems to be lesser than 400 words, even though I bet it's well more than 300. No issues with it though.

MSincccc (talk) 11:52, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

After another read of the body

with the former exhibition held during the summer and the latter during the autumn
- How about "with the former exhibition held in the summer and the latter in the autumn"?
resolved to centre the anthroposophical movement, and build the Goetheanum as
- Do we need the comma after "and"?
among other works and contributions while there
- Do we need both "works" and "contributions" or am I mistaken in thinking both are the same?
  - "Works" was supposed to refer to art and "contributions" to intellectual input, but I suppose the latter can cover both. Removed the former.
and Panama, and back.
- How about "and Panama, before returning"?
The performance facilitated an introduction to Alfred Butt, the manager of London's Palace Theatre, which in turn facilitated a two-week residency there.
- We could avoid repeating "facilitated".
as she performs the seductive dance which emphasises
- "which" → "that" (defining clause)

MSincccc (talk) 10:30, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line

Overall, the aesthetics of the article are nice: good images; good section sizes.

Clarify: "...the sculpture represents a fifth-category work by Maryon..." can the article define "fifth-category work"?

This is in the background section on Maryon: These works, according to her biographer Rex Raab [de], tended to fall into five categories: first, the world of external physical being; second, references to the elemental world; third, motifs from the spiritual world; fourth, spiritual–allegorical works; and fifth, a combination of emotional and spiritual aspects. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:05, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wording: "As termed by Dreweatts, it represents Maryon's ..." "Termed" doesn't seem ideal there.

Image copyrights? I'm not a copyright expert, but I notice that images such as this one have a single license from the photographer. Don't images of sculptures also require a free-to-use explanation for the artwork itself? I have seen photos of modern sculptures in Wikipedia, but they are always outdoor sculptures, and those Commons pages always have two free-to-use statements: (a) the photographer's license; and (b) the panorama law of the country, which typically states that images of outdoor buildings & sculptures are free-to-use. But those panorama laws would not apply to a small indoor sculpture like this one. This sculpture may be out of copyright because of its age, but that still needs to be stated in the Commons data.
- This same issue applies to most of the sculpture images in the article.

Alt text: WP:ALT requires the alt text to be worded in a way that visually-impaired users can use screen-reading apps, and the alt text describes the visual content. The Alt text here is not helpful:
- Current alt text: "Colour photograph of The Dance of Anitra"
- Better alt text: "A photograph of a bronze statue, about half meter tall, of a young woman dancing, wearing a knee-length dress."

Ditto for alt text of all images.

I've expanded these. Note that per this 2019 RfC (see also this 2024 discussion), alt text is not a FAC requirement. I do agree that it's good practice to include it, although opinions vary on what constitutes useful alt text. WP:ALT, for its part, states that Alternative text should be short, such as "A basketball player" or "Tony Blair shakes hands with George W. Bush", while others prefer more detailed descriptions. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:28, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The "Background" body text in the article seems unusually large, relative to the body text of the sculpture itself. Normally, the Backtround info is about 5% to 20% of an article. But here it seem to be about 50% to 70% of the article. That might be justified if there were no "main" articles for the background material, but there are main articles in WP already:

The WP:FACR criterion #4 says the article must "stay focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate". The way the article stands now, the excess background material looks like it was added to pad the article to make it larger. It is okay for the article to be small ... lots of small articles achieve FA status. I see in the GA review that the same "size of background" issue was raised, and some background material was trimmed at that time .... Consider trimming more.

I'm certainly not opposed to short articles (see Sutton Hoo Helmet (sculpture)), but here we're dealing with an object at the intersection of four different narratives. The background sections comply with summary style in that they focus on the relevant portions—especially now that (in response to the points made during the GA review) I've cut the article by about a third. --Usernameunique (talk) 22:26, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cite bundling: some sentences have 4 or 5 superscript cites: e.g. The Dance of Anitra is made of bronze.[76][77][78][79][80]. That is kinda ugly. Consider bundling the cites in to a single superscript. Personally, I use Template:Multiref, but there are lots of ways to bundle.

I've cut down a number of these so that I think there are only two with four cites, and none with five. Perspectives vary on this, but I tend to prefer a different footnote cites for each source. --Usernameunique (talk) 18:48, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography: The anonymous (no author) sources are intermingled with the sources-with-authors. I suppose that is permitted, but consider separating them into two separate groups. Seems odd to have last names mixed up with the article names. Not required for FA, but something to consider.

I tend to use two main citation styles. For articles with lots of sources without page ranges (e.g., newspaper articles), I use both short cites and full cites in the "References" section (Robert Kaske#References is an example of this). For articles where most of the sources have page ranges (namely books), I use just short cites. Here, it's on the edge—there are about a dozen newspaper articles (which tend to be the anonymous ones you note), and these could be moved up to the References section. On balance, though, I think it looks better this way. --Usernameunique (talk) 19:31, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that moving the no-author sources up into the References section is not good. But consider segregating them, as in this article: Bridge#Unknown_author. No big deal, just a suggestion. Noleander (talk) 20:06, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Choreography? Do sources describe the choreography of the dance?

Should the quote be paraphrased? the auction house Dreweatts wrote, captures her "charisma, mysticism, movement and sensual stage performance" in the midst of "the seductive dance which emphasises the grace and beauty of Anitra". That's a big quote. WP is an encyclopedia, so the body text should be in the encyclopedia's voice unless there is a good reason a quote is required. See Wikipedia:Quotations. Quotes should be used when the speaker is saying something (a) controversial or contentious; or (b) particularly poetic or unique; or (c) when the exact words used by the speaker are critical.

There aren't many sources giving interpretive descriptions of the sculpture, and it's nice to include what we can. Given that it's interpretive, however, I agree that we should be clear whose voice the words are in. It now reads: Allan is captured mid-dance. According to the auction house Dreweatts, "The depiction of Maud Allan in this bronze captures the dancer's charisma, mysticism, movement and sensual stage presence as she performs the seductive dance which emphasises the grace and beauty of Anitra". --Usernameunique (talk) 02:26, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to disagree with me and sorry if I've repeated from others' comments
There are quite a few redlinks – please make sure they are worthy of inclusion. These are:
- The Representative of Humanity
- Salome and the Head
- Rex Raab in the citations. I think if you have an ILL for him in the body there's no point having the redlink in the footnotes. The other way you can do it is delete the first name Rex and just put {{Interlanguage link|Rex Raab|lt=Raab, Rex|de}} in the last name section. Just be careful this doesn't break sfns though.
  - Opinions vary on this issue, although the relevant guideline generally favors including red links when the subject is notable and verifiable. The "nutshell" summary of the page states (with emphasis retained) that Red links are for topics that should have articles but do not. They are not only acceptable but also needed in articles. They serve as a clear indication of which articles are in need of creation, and encourage it. Remove red links only if you are certain that Wikipedia should not have an article on that subject. I don't think there's any question that any of the red-linked subjects are both notable and verifiable: The people all have pages on different-language wikis, and the other two are discussed in many sources (there are literal books about The Representative of Humanity, and a bunch of reviews of Salome and the Head). --Usernameunique (talk) 23:31, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would use {{refbegin}} and {{refend}} in the Bibliography as it would appear a lot neater.

My personal feeling is that some of the background on Peer Gynt is at the point of trivia. The following quote is essentially irrelevant to the sculpture and could be a single sentence:

He is now along the south-west coast of Morocco, and enjoying dinner with four travel companions taken aboard his steam yacht in Gibraltar. Gynt regales his companions with his life's story: In his telling, he was betrothed to a woman "of royal blood", but objected to her father's request that he take a title in order to marry her. He left, made his fortune trading slaves to the Carolinas, and heathen images to China, and then—questioning the morality of these enterprises—used "The last cargo of flesh" to open his own plantation, and operated a dual trade in China, where he sold idols to non-Christians, and goods to Christian missionaries that they then used to barter away the idols.

I've cut out part of the explanation for how he made his money. The play uses this section to catch the reader up to speed—Act III ended with Peer Gynt leaving his homeland, meaning that everything that happens between then and his appearance in Morocco happens offstage. This section is thus important to learning who the Peer Gynt is who appears before Anitra. In this section, we learn relevant facts including that (a) he is in Morocco, (b) he is still a liar (he didn't object to taking a title; he was run out of town), (c) he is still a cad with little regard for others except in the sense of how they can benefit him. This is the person for whom Anita—at his command—dances. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:26, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused as to whether Anitra's Dance was included in the original Peer Gynt at all, or how it was affected by the alterations made before performance.

Peer Gynt was originally published as a book. It does't describe the dance in any detail other than that it was performed—rather, we are treated to the woman paeaning Gynt as they dance, and to Gynt's monologue on Anitra's looks. Ibsen seems to have been well aware while writing that actually performing the (long and complicated) play would require some alterations. I imagine that most of these included the dance—the accompanying music is some of Grieg's most famous, after all—but there have been different approaches, and it would be difficult to call any of these performances (as opposed to the written work) the "official" version. --Usernameunique (talk) 21:34, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is, in my opinion, a little bit of WP:OVERCITE. For example, "The Dance of Anitra is made of bronze" is not a controversial statement and does not need four citations just because there are four (or more sources) that corroborate it. There are, I imagine, other instances where you are using many citations for a single, non-controversial claim and you could consider cutting down on this.

The multiple references are really just (a) to give the full range of sources available, and (b) because some sources have multiple versions (e.g., the print/online auction catalogue, and the German/English versions of Selg). I've used the {{sfnm}} template to bundle the latter category, which helps a bit, and means there are no more places with four or more cites in a row. --Usernameunique (talk) 02:53, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the efn is interesting enough to be in the main body.

Use {{inflation/fn}} when using inflation figures because the price in 2024 is not corroborated by the source. I suggest inserting this before the closing bracket.

That's all for now. Based on a successful source review above I will likely support once these issues have been discussed.

P.S. my article Robert Jacomb-Hood is on FAC as well right now. Please consider dropping by!

Nominator(s): Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:32, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The women's figure skating event at the 2022 Winter Olympics highlighted everything wrong with women's figure skating: over-the-top drama, abusive coaching, tantrums, epic meltdowns, and a failed drug test. With Johnny Weir providing Russian-to-English translation in real time. The competition results are all sourced and documented, the tables are properly formatted, the background and aftermath are both covered, the sources are properly formatted and archived where possible, and relevant photographs are used. This article was promoted to GA in February 2026. I look forward to any and all constructive feedback and am willing to answer any questions. Thank you so much! Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:32, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging User:Rhain who did the GA review of this article for me. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:34, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review by JacobTheRox

[edit]

I like everything left-justified.

The reason it is down further in the article is because the Controversy section is considerably shorter. I'll try relocating the image to see how it looks there. I also shortened the image caption, which at the same time fixes the comma v. colon issue.

I have added an image of the arena to the Background section. It forces the small skating infobox down a little, but I think it looks okay.

* P.S. my article Robert Jacomb-Hood is on FAC as well right now. Please consider dropping by!

Other drive by comment

The quote starting "We boundlessly..." then has a citation, ellipsis, then second part of the quote with a second citation. This seems a bit more jumbled than putting both citations at the end.

There were inconsistencies in the translation of that quote from the original Russian, so the first source confirms the first half of the quote and the second source confirms the second half of the quote.

User:JacobTheRox: Thank you for taking the time to check out my article! I believe I have addressed all of your comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 18:31, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I agree,

Pass on the image review and I will make a final judgement once a source review has been completed. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 19:51, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have had another read through of the article and I am happy to support. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 15:12, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much; I appreciate that! Bgsu98 (Talk) 15:29, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Keys could be used for the colored columns

I don't see any colored columns?

A lot of unnecessary duplication, for example "World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA)" appears three times on the page, the acronym doesn't need to be repeated that many times

I have always tried to follow MOS:REPEATLINK: "Link a term at most once per major section, at first occurrence."

Can you explain the difference in use between "AP News" and "Associated Press"?

AP News is the website; Associated Press is the agency which is occasionally cited on other news sites.

"[Beijing, China]" -> "[Beijing], China"

Both yield the same result, but I think the first is stylistically more visually appealing. "China" is not actually linked.

I don't care one way or another, but the GA recommended I link it! 😂

That's what I found ping me when done. Olliefant (she/her) 06:06, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Olliefant: I have tried to address all of your comments. Thank you for taking the time to examine my article. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:26, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Olliefant (she/her) 21:10, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overall the article is well-written on a sport that may have some drama and scandals. I only have a few comments.

The Aftermath is kind of long (no need to trim), but perhaps introducing subsections to ease reading flow? Typically as rule of thumb, four paragraphs is a good threshold to consider separating into smaller themes.

Let me know what you think.

"We boundlessly and fully support Kamila Valieva and call on everyone to support her.[59] ... And we say to Kamila: Kamila, do not hide your face, you are Russian, walk proudly everywhere and, most importantly, perform and defeat everyone".[57] If I understand correct this is a quote which is based on two different sources. Unless there is a policy, I think it is better to move citation 59 at the end of the quote rather being in the middle of it. It appears as if it is part of the quote.

Fixed. This was suggested before, and I do see the confusion and have no problem moving the citation. It is based on two different sources with differing translations.

and then seventeen → "and then to seventeen"

Russia's state sponsored → "Russia's state-sponsored" (add dash)

If you do not use an acronym the do not define it, e.g, USADA.

Fixed. I also used acronyms in places where the full names had been used twice.

stated bluntly remove "bluntly" as this may appear subjective

Anna Shcherbakova stated that she felt empty inside, Alexandra Trusova could be heard shouting that she "hated the sport" and swore she would never skate again, as she could not understand how she had only finished in second place after performing a record-setting five quadruple jumps, and Valieva broke down sobbing this is very long break within a sentence (there are good reasons for em dashes to be discouraged MOS:SPARETHEDASH). Consider removing it (I fail to see the value) or place it in a note (via the efn template).

I am a little uncomfortable with the overuse of quotes WP:QUOTEFARM
- Coach Eteri Tutberidze could be heard berating Valieva after she left the ice: "Why did you let it go? Explain it to me, why? Why did you stop fighting? You let it go after that Axel. Why?" Where is the encyclopedic value here?
- "I am not happy with the result," said Trusova. "There is no happiness."[39] Shcherbakova was alone when she learned she had won the gold medal. "You win the Olympics and you can't even celebrate," Weir commented. Same question, better to summarize these quotes. A.Cython (talk) 23:50, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have made an effort to prune down some of the quotes.

User:A.Cython: Thank you for taking the time to examine my article! I have tried to address all of your suggestions. Please let me know what you think of my improvements. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:51, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for making the changes. It reads better, though I still feel that the whole controversy about Valieva overshadowed the whole event, but this might be true. Perhaps this controversy deserves a dedicated article.

Support Good luck with the nomination. A.Cython (talk) 01:05, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sadly, the controversy did overshadow the event. Ultimately, she only finished fourth, so the medal ceremony was held. If she had placed third or higher, it would have been delayed like the team event ceremony, and can you image the IOC/ISU trying to stage a late medal ceremony in Paris where the Russians continued to be barred from competition? The whole event highlighted everything wrong with women's figure skating. Compare it to the 2026 Olympics, where the women's event highlighted everything good about the sport. Bgsu98 (Talk) 01:12, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the clarification, as you may have guessed by my comments, I am not familiar with the sport. I think we all appreciate your efforts in covering the particular sport. A.Cython (talk) 01:18, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like everything is reliable and well-formatted. Gonna need someone to check https://www.championat.com/olympicwinter/news-4612333-v-mok-otreagirovali-na-propusk-kamiloj-valievoj-press-konferencii-posle-korotkoj-programmy.html though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:37, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jo-Jo Eumerus: What is it you want checked? Bgsu98 (Talk) 11:45, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Its reliability and whether it supports the claims cited to it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:18, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jo-Jo Eumerus: Here is the text of the article: International Olympic Committee Press Secretary Mark Adams commented on Russian figure skater Kamila Valieva's decision to skip the press conference following her win in the short program at the Beijing Olympics. The Court of Arbitration for Sport previously rejected the appeals of the IOC , WADA, and ISU regarding the 15-year-old athlete's doping case and cleared her for the 2022 Games. "We welcome all athletes to attend press conferences, but we can't force anyone. I don't think Valieva will appear at future press conferences," Championat correspondent Elena Kuznetsova reported Adams as saying. Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it a reliable source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:21, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Ruby2010 (talk) 14:16, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about an interesting figure in the Georgian era. Born into wealth and privilege, her life reflects the trends of the period, including an expanding press who were eager to report on dissolute aristocrats. I hope you enjoy and find it worthy of FA. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:16, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods. Now updated. –Ruby

File:Sarah_Lennox,_1760_(Francis_Cotes).jpg needs a US tag. Ditto File:CharlesJamesFox_ByJoshuaReynolds.png. US tags added. –Ruby
When and where was the latter first published? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:04, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Per the British Museum's website, it was produced in 1762. It's a print by James Watson (c. 1730 – 1790) from the original by Joshua Reynolds, which I have not been able to locate. I cannot find further publication details, unfortunately. Ruby2010 (talk) 13:14, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

What is the earliest known publication? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:06, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:George_Napier.jpg: when and where was this first published? I wasn't sure, so I've replaced it with a similar image where its origin is better known (from the National Portrait Gallery). The original sitter date isn't stated, but it was published in the late 19th century. –Ruby

I wasn't sure, since their website provides instructions for using the image in commercial and non-commercial settings (and Creative Commons, which is the option I chose when downloading it). Perhaps I misunderstood these options. What tag would you suggest is used? Ruby2010 (talk) 13:14, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

None of the options suggested by the website would be usable here. Is there another reason the images would be free? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:06, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: Thank you for your image review. I've added comments above. Ruby2010 (talk) 23:56, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: I've added replies to your comments above. Ruby2010 (talk) 13:14, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to disagree with me and sorry that what started as chronological order devolved into chaos.
The quotation beginning "has thoroughly convinced me..." is longer than 40 words and is thus recommended by MOS:QUOTATION to have a blockquote. I would reword slightly to move the quote to the end of the paragraph then it could conveniently be blockquoted.

The word "offense" is US English, whereas the rest of the article is written in British English, which makes sense for the subject. I would suggest also adding the English variation to the talk page, e.g. {{British English}} or {{Oxford English}}

Thanks for catching this, I've corrected the word. As an AmEng speaker who actively edits articles on British subject matter, I strive to use BrEng but sometimes miss small differences. I see there is already a British English tag on the article, so I will leave it there. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I redlinked it with the thought that this could become an article soon. I started doing early research, but had trouble finding enough reliable sources and put it on pause for now. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This redlink caught my eye, and I took the liberty of starting an article. Naturally you should feel free to continue developing it -- or let me know if you've come across any other relevant sources, and I'll take a look. (I am also aware of an 1850 publication that used the same title, but I think that's fundamentally a coincidence rather than an extension of this work.) ~ le 🌸 valyn (talk) 01:26, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Whether or not quotations start with capitals is contentious but I would try to remain consistent. "in April 1769 and declared, "Rank and beauty have been her ruin"." should surely be "in April 1769 and declared "rank and beauty [had] been her ruin"."? Pretty sure keeping 'have' makes the tense a bit dubious.

12 counts of ".[ and 2 counts of ."[. Please stay consistent; I prefer the latter but it is very much your choice.

You provide both the name of a song and quite a long quote in French, neither of which are translated.

The folk song, I think, can remain as is since a wikilink is provided that provides the translation. But I've added a note that translates the longer quote into English. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

[29][30] could be combined into a single sfn.

I would put in square brackets what "angellick" means (angelic?) or just replace it with the modern/correct spelling.

There are urls with varying access levels which are not described, which is inconvenient. These are as follows:
- Andrew, Donna (2001) – subscription
- Beasley, Edward (2017) – limited
- Crossland, Alice Marie (2017) – limited
- Johnston-Liik, Edith Mary (2006) – limited
- "Review of The Life and Letters of Lady...." – subscription or limited, not sure here
- etc. – this would be helpful to include for all links

Done. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A very well written article and most my comments are just trivial suggestions. Withdrawing any mention of votes before a comprehensive source review is completed. Great work! JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 17:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. My article Robert Jacomb-Hood is at FAC as well right now; feel free to drop by!

@JacobTheRox: Thank you for your review! You were very detailed and caught things I had missed or struggled with how to correct. Please let me know if you notice anything else. I also would be happy to look into your article's review (and intend to also look at others to help out with the backlog as I shake off my FAC rust). Ruby2010 (talk) 14:48, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

FAC is definitely busy at the moment, but that's the way I like it – more quality articles for everyone. If you could look at my nom I'd be very grateful; from this article I can see you certainly know what you're doing. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 16:44, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not my area of expertise nor my bit of history but I've heard of some of her offspring and Goodwood House is not a million miles from me.

frequently brought his young daughter with him to Kensington Palace Can we say how old she was when this started?

became a royal favourite you've said this in the paragraph above; this would be a good place to elaborate. For example, was she favoured by a particular member of the royal family and what does "favourite mean" (assume the reader didn't click the link above).

I've added George II. Royal favourite can mean different things (often a mistress or someone given royal patronage), but in her case, it seems the king just showed a grandfatherly preference for her. To keep the lead brief, I've kept this out (but I think the body later provides the necessary context). Ruby2010 (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

a long career of service seems an odd turn of phrase to me. "In service" of/to would be less odd, or you could recast the sentence.

From an early age she was a favourite do we have any idea what age?

"Favourite" could do with an explanation on first mention in the body.

"the impropriety [...] was saved" is another odd turn of phrase.

When Sarah returned to London many years later can we have even an estimate of how many years? "Many years" suggests decades to me but from context this seems to be maybe 10-15 years.

Her mother died when she was 6, after which she lived in Ireland. She returned to London at the age of 14, so we could roughly say approximately 8 years later. Now added. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

four of them would attain high ranks in the British Army or Navy This is mentioned almost verbatim a few paragraphs above.

That's it from me. Well-written and interesting with no glaring problems. I've only really really looked at prose and MoS. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:55, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@HJ Mitchell: Thank you! It's wonderful that you live near(ish) Goodwood. I'd love to visit it some day. Let me know if you have any further comments or concerns about the article. Ruby2010 (talk) 14:37, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think some indication of age would be really helpful for context. Even just the suggestion that she was five, attributed to the source if necessary or with the caveat that we don't know if it started earlier, gives the reader an idea of how young a child she was. Other than that, my comments are resolved and I expect to support once we've sorted my last quibble. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:45, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@HJ Mitchell: Thank you! I've added additional date context, as best I could find it. Ruby2010 (talk) 20:51, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy with that added bit of context. Support on prose, MoS, and comprehensiveness/depth of research as far as I can see. I haven't gone looking for other source material but the sources used seem appropriate; I checked that a handful of claims were backed by appropriate secondary sources as I was reading. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:06, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This has been open for three weeks and still hasn't attracted a support. Unless there's notable progress toward a consensus for promotion within the next three or four days, I'm afraid it will be archived. FrB.TG (talk) 21:13, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I should be able to do a source review this weekend. ~ le 🌸 valyn (talk) 21:20, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll review this in the next couple of days. MCE89 (talk) 06:43, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Sarah's subsequent marriage in 1762 with Charles Bunbury — "marriage in 1762 to Charles Bunbury" sounds a little more natural to me

There are some uses of the anterior future tense (she would later do x) throughout the article that I think could be avoided (e.g. "four of whom would become prominent officers" -> "four of whom became prominent officers")

Sarah remained a conspicuous symbol of feminine dissoluteness often attributed by the public to the upper classes — Suggest a slight tweak to "a conspicuous symbol of the feminine dissoluteness often attributed to the upper classes by the public" for easier readability.

the ordinary lives of aristocratic women in the Georgian era — Is "ordinary" needed here? I'm not sure it's adding much, and you could probably make the argument that their lives were in many ways not very ordinary

If the source allows, could you expand a little on what is meant by the "informality" of France and how it affected the children and grandchildren?

For information on her education, Sarah's letters do not include many details — This phrasing feels a little convoluted, suggest something simpler like "Sarah's letters do not include many details about her education"

Fox, in particular, was considered corrupt and unscrupulous — Could it be specified who regarded him as corrupt and unscrupulous — was it Bute and his faction, or others as well?

MOS:BLOCKQUOTE suggests that the citation should generally come before the quote at the end of the previous sentence

Suggest expanding to "member of parliament" on first usage rather than linking MP

he was often away from home on the topic — The wording of "on the topic" seems a little awkward here

MOS:ELLIPSIS suggests including a non-breaking space before an ellipsis

She might have avoided media attention had her only offence been adultery. Her clear pregnancy and impulsive choice to flee her husband's home helped to magnify the affair by violating the rules of social propriety. — This feels somewhat speculative - should it be attributed to the source rather than stated in wikivoice?

Overall the article is very well-written, just ping me when you've had a chance to look through these suggestions. MCE89 (talk) 11:22, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MCE89: Thank you! I've replied above to your comments. Please let me know if you notice anything else. Ruby2010 (talk) 15:04, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good to me! Support on prose and MOS. MCE89 (talk) 05:58, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Parsecboy (talk) 13:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Prinz Heinrich was the second armored cruiser built by Germany in the early 1900s, and it was a very influential despite being a pretty mediocre design. The article is the second to last in this topic to go through FAC, so we've very close to completing the project! Thanks to all who take the time to review the article. Parsecboy (talk) 13:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:SMS_Prinz_Heinrich_in_port.jpg: when and where was this first published?
- Germany, but I can't say exactly when; but ONI routinely collected images of foreign warships (including commercially available photos, such as this one). So it stands to reason that it was acquired not long after it was taken (and certainly while the ship was operational, so well before 1930).
File:German_Marine_School_on_"Prinz_Heinrich"_LCCN2014701613.jpg: when and where was this first published and what is the author's date of death? Nikkimaria (talk) 05:20, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Not an image issue, but there's also a couple of seas of blue to address. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:31, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to disagree with me on my comments
"...for the German Kaiserliche Marine (Imperial Navy), named after.... – this makes it sound like its saying what the Navy is named after then makes you do a double take, so I'd add the word "and"
If it is unique, how is it the second of its kind and future ones are modifications of it? That doesn't sound unique!
- "Unique" in the sense that it was the sole vessel of its design, that it had no sister ships
Please clarify whether the following redlinks are notable for inclusion: – there seem quite a few
"...than earlier Harvey armor, so less of it could be..." – the words "of it" can be removed
"...were Germany's worst designed and..." – change "worst designed" to "worst-designed"
- Grammatically, you're right, but the source doesn't have it hyphenated - not sure it really warrants a [sic] though
I would mention the year 1914 again at the start of the WWI section as it shouldn't rely on the end of the previous one
Correct cite order is [4][19] not [19][4]
When I try to find "Audorf-Rendsburg" it seems that's not a normal way of describing that area – is that the name used in the source? You could also wikilink the second half to Rendsburg, and I would add Schleswig-Holstein after.
- That's what the source uses - it may be an older name for the town. If you look at this map, Audorf is across the Kiel Canal from Rendsburg
Nottelmann, Dirk (2024) is not pointed to by any references; please remove it or make it an invisible comment if you'd like to use it later.
- Moved to a further reading section for now - I'll need to go back and look to see if it has anything worth adding
I have added {{section sizes}} to the talk page – perhaps you could even these out / add more to your liking as most sections are quite long, especially the initial part of the Design section
- I don't think much can be done - they're split up thematically, and some will necessarily be longer than others.
A very good article as the normal for a very good series of articles. I only found minor prose issues so look forward to seeing the source review come through. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 19:37, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
P.S. My article Robert Jacomb-Hood is at FAC at the moment as well; please feel free to drop by!
- I'll try to find time to take a look.

This has been open for more than three weeks and still hasn't attracted a support. Unless there's notable progress toward a consensus for promotion within the next three or four days, I'm afraid it will be archived. FrB.TG (talk) 16:13, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass

[edit]

All sources are of high-quality reliable sources.

All sources are well formatted.

fn 17: In my copy], this is on pp. 70-72 - possible different edition - check
Yes, this is a different edition than the one I have; there are two versions, one published in 10 volumes (the one I have) and the other that was condensed into 7 or so (which is the one on archive.org). Thanks for reviewing the sources. Parsecboy (talk) 20:55, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

fn 22, 23, 25: okay

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:14, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): SchroCat (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the mince pie. A staple of Christmas (and Thanksgiving), this little pie isn't loved by all, but it is very popular and comes with an interesting history. This will likely be my last FAC for a while, so enjoy it while you can! - SchroCat (talk) 13:57, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to see this here. I'll do a review at some point during this week. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lede looks okay.
It would be nice to combine multiple {{sfn}}s into {{sfnm}}s.
Description and etymology looks good.
Could the History section be split in several sub-sections? It's quite long. No other issues with the section.
The Gentleman's Magazine should be italicised.
Could the Lenten mince pies section be merged with some other one?

Surprisingly, no issues with the rest of the article. Had I reviewed a bit earlier, I would have probably spotted some errors. I won't comment on images and references. These are mostly nitpicks, so I'll vote once you respond. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:50, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Vacant0

Nothing else has catched my eye, so it's a support from me on prose and grammar. Cheers and good luck, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 12:47, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"when returning European crusaders brought back with them spices." I'd move spices to before "back". Possibly "home" for "back"
"puritans" "catholic" May seem odd to the reader.
"Jesus's" (the link). While this does not specifically implicate any of the examples of WP:OL I wonder if anyone searching for information on mince pies will not have heard of Jesus. Just for your consideration. Especially in contrast with shortcrust, which is more deserving of a link, if they are in short supply.
"Cumberland rum butter" I wonder if the reader, if puzzled by the phrase, benefits from an explanation of the former county.
"n North America, it tends to be large and intended for sharing among several people.[8][9] As the ingredients were expensive, a pie was only eaten on feast days ... " I think we've switched back to UK customs. I confess though to being generally unfamiliar with mince pies, even at Thanksgiving (US) dinner (pumpkin was more usual).

More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:54, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Wehwalt. I've addressed these ones, adding a bit of background (in a footnote) about the Cumberland rum butter too. Looking forward to anything else you have to say. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 16:41, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"and the level of alcohol in some tinned mincemeat rose to over 14 per cent in some cases.[43][17]" Some ... some. Not necessary to do it twice. The idea of the mince pie being the national dish of America until the 1940s is a bit surprising.
"In North America, "cider" is the name given to non-alcoholic apple juice." There is a distinction between apple cider and apple juice. For one thing, apple cider is usually unfiltered.

That's about it. Very interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:26, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Wehwalt, all sorted.

Support--Wehwalt (talk) 18:22, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the entry on this topic! I'm glad to see your time and talents manifest here. I think the article conforms well to the FA criteria. It is very well-written and well-researched. I am a bit unclear on one item:

You write "its current vegetarian form" but it's clear that many mincemeat recipes and most jarred mincemeat contains beef or beef products. There are many vegetarian (and vegan) recipes out there but I'd like to improve how we present that information.

Thanks again for the enjoyable read. --Laser brain (talk) 17:21, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Laser_brain. I've taken out the word "vegetarian" to fudge the issue slightly, given you're right: it's available in vegan, vegetarian and non-vegetarian versions, albeit very different to the original version. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 09:07, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just a bit of a photo drive-by, the infobox image is not the best quality, especially for the top spot. Could we find something better? I think File:Mincemeat pie.jpg that you've currently got buried beneath the fold is a much more striking image, but perhaps not the most traditional version of the pie? If you wanted to stick with the individual serving sized theme, any of File:Mince Pies (15443417714).jpg, File:Mince Pie.jpg, or File:Mincemeat tarts for the holidays.jpg would be better than the current selection, but the latice-work example really is the best image from a purely visual standpoint. RoySmith (talk) 23:56, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks RoySmith. I went with File:Mince Pie.jpg in the end. While the lattice version may be the most striking, I don't think it's representative of a "typical" MP. That obviously differs for Americans, with their larger versions, but I think non-lattice is probably best. - SchroCat (talk) 09:12, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good choice; that was the best of the non-lattice group. RoySmith (talk) 09:49, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Nikkimaria, all sorted. - SchroCat (talk) 09:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll comment as I read. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:13, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for a "sweet" contribution!

Infobox and lead

The image is much better than the one I saw on the first reading.
I wonder if we could say "Mince pie, cut" or something else?
I wonder if the former ingredients could also show, which gave the dish a completely different character.
I think the list of these historic ingredients could be shorter in the lead than in the prose.
"this then changed to their becoming associated with Christmas, when they are mostly consumed", - I think that could be said more elegantly, and perhaps without mentioning Christmas again.
I don't think we need the years of the Interregnum for this food lead, - enough later on, there's a link for those curious.
"although it was stigmatised for its indulgent and supposed Catholic connotations", - perhaps it's my lack of English but I have a few problems with this clause:
1. I would understand "because" better than "although".
2. I don't know what "indulgent connotations" would be.
3. I am not sure that "connotations" is the best term for that it seemed to come from a Catholic tradition.

"Because" would be grammatically wrong - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's explained in the body

"Connotations" is the correct word - SchroCat (talk) 16:23, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think we need the details of folklore in the lead.
Generally, too many sentences in this lead (for my taste) copy word for word what's in the body, instead of a summary.

Description

On top of the pics, I suggest simply "Preparation", what else than mince pie? Or no title, it's rather evident.
The captions could also be much shorter, for example: "Bottom and filling" - "Ready for baking" - Dusted with icing sugar".
The description begins with the current style, and later has differences only for the filling, but I wonder about "sweet" for the crust anyway, knowing of pie crusts even for sweet pies that have no sugar. Perhaps different descriptions for different ingredients or styles would be better?
It's said twice that the mincemeat can be homemade or not.

History

There is a century given for the spices, but not for the Cumberland theory.
No link needed for Middle East.
I wonder if "crust not eaten" might be mentioned in the lead.
"included mutton with the same amount of beef suet and "twice so much sugar as salt" leaves open "same" to what the fat is.
Until I saw the shapes images, I thought that pies are round. How about a reference to it in the text?
- Not all pies are round. Quite a few are square (including the mince pie, which we already mention). Aside from the square or oblong, there's very little mention of the shapes in the sources, except via diagrams. - SchroCat (talk) 16:25, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"the second was requires 3 large lemons" needs a decision for one verb.
"The mince pie was considered the national dish of America" comes as a surprise after earlier "never as popular", - perhaps also lead-worthy?
"During the Elizabethan era, when meatless dishes were required during the period of Lent" surprises me, because "meatless" was a custom for Lent observed by earlier (and later) Catholics as well.

See also

Thank you for information that was all new to me; I haven't tasted mince pie yet. Please understand that some comments may come from ignorance. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:46, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for explaining, - support. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:51, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Whonting

[edit]

Thankyou Schro for the work that you have done for this article (and for the edits at chewette). The article is in great shape and will certainly influence my writing in this area. I'm happy with how the article has developed through PR, I only have two questions on history remaining that I would like to hear your thoughts on:

a recipe similar to that of the original mince pie; from context, this "original mince pie" appears to be Markham's recipe. Is this intended?
Identifying The Forme of Cury's "tartes of flessh" as "a forerunner of the mince pie" in an image caption appears to be engaging the debate on origins.

That's all. A bit sad the lead image was changed, but it is what it is. Looking forward to supporting shortly. Whonting (talk) 11:51, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Whonting - and nice work on chewette too! These both sorted. I've tweaked both to 'a possible forerunner of the mince pie', which both explains and fudges in equal measure. - SchroCat (talk) 15:57, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou Schro for this, that resolves my concerns. Whonting (talk) 13:21, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As a Londoner, the very first thing I checked was the rhyming slang! I also noted One is that it is lucky to eat as many mince pies as possible before Christmas... others think it is bad luck to refuse to eat a mince pie that has been offered to you. so my normal practice brings good fortune! A couple of comments for your consideration.

Perhaps link tripe in para 2?
is often served with an accompaniment such as cream, brandy butter, Cumberland rum butter I don't like this, the link to the county is unhelpful there, as mentioned before. Suggest delink here and link in the footnote to Named after the historic county of the same name, Cumberland rum butter is...

Either way, I'll Support, although it might be a while before I strike because I'm off to Alicante, cheers, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 13:08, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Tim riley

[edit]

Indescribably revolting though mince pies taste I enjoyed this article – well up to SchoCat's standard for his food and foodie articles. The Elizabethans and Cumberland get more than their fair share of blue links but that is of little consequence. You may not care (I don't particularly) that some of your multiple citations are in random rather than numerical order: [26][12] & [43][17] & [11][67][46] & [74][10]. That apart, no carps or quibbles from me. Happy to support promotion to FA. Meets all the criteria in my view. – Tim riley talk 13:09, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Tim. I'm also unconcerned by the running order of the citations, but as some people are, I've tweaked them all be run in order. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 15:38, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know absolutely nothing of pies or the culinary arts in general, yet somehow, this article caught my attention. Of course, feel free to object to what I ask. Here are my comments. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 04:58, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To the other reviewers, please consider checking out my FAC nom!

Perhaps link brandy?
- I think that may be overlinking, but I've added it; I suspect someone will take it out at some point, but we'll see! - SchroCat (talk) 12:18, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - Could be true, but I didn't know what brandy was! -t
Its history is a matter of debate but it dates back to the medieval period... -> Though disputed its history dates back to the medieval period...
...tripe and ~~could also include~~ fish. Since the sentence says recipes "varied", it's safe to assume they may or may not have included fish.
- I think the original may be slightly better. The sentence opens with "The meat used in recipes" and although fish is also a meat, it's surprising how many people don't think of it as being so. - SchroCat (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
...the pies were only eaten on feast days; this then changed to their becoming associated with Christmas... -> ...the pies were only eaten on feast days; this changed to becoming associated with Christmas...
The mince pie was attacked by... This part threw me for a loop for a second or two as I didn't know pies could be attacked. That was before I finished the sentence clarifying how the pie was stigmatized. Is there any way to rephrase this?
The recipe for the mince pie was taken... -> Its recipe was taken...
...although vegetable alternatives can ~~also~~ be used.
In Britain in the twenty-first century, a mince pie tends to be... Perhaps: In the twenty-first century, British mince pies tend to be...
- No - that makes it look like a "British mince pie" is a thing, different from all the others. - SchroCat (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair. I just find sentences that go by "In [place] in [time]" to be strange. -t
...a pie was only eaten on feast days; this then changed to it becoming associated with Christmas... -> ...a pie was only eaten on feast days; this changed to an asssociation with Christmas...
A mince pie can be made at home or purchased from commercial outlets; similarly, the mincemeat can homemade or commercially produced. Perhaps: Pies and their mincemeat can be homemade or commercially bought.
- "Commercially bought" sounds like a wholesale deal. I was trying to get the point across that you can either buy a pie from a shop, buy mincemeat and make a pie or make both mincemeat and pie, and separating the sentence seems the best way to get this across. - SchroCat (talk) 12:06, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
...tripe and could also include fish. Like the above
In the Elizabethan era the recipe had not changed much since the medieval version. -> The pie changed minimally during the Elizabethan era.
The recipe for the mince pie was taken to... -> Its recipe was taken to...
It is not know exactly... I assume this should be "known"

Sorry for the delay in getting round to this. I've been distracted and demoralised by events elsewhere, but these are now sorted. - SchroCat (talk) 12:18, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Article reads great. That's a support from me. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 16:26, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This seems to be progressing fine but I bloody love a mince pie so I'm reading anyway and will offer any thoughts that pop into my head as I go through:

First thing that occurs to me is that, although you like mincemeat, you don't explain that it's fruit and not, actually, meat. The name is confusing enough that we Brits get a good laugh every year at (usually Americans!) trying to make them with minced beef so I would want to clear up that confusion as early as possible.
You abruptly shift from plural "The pies are traditionally served" to singular "Its history is", which is a little confusing for readability.
during the Interregnum should probably clarify that this is referring to England
Little bit of repetition: mince pie was banned by the puritanical parliamentarians during the Interregnum then a few sentences later: The mince pie was attacked by the Puritans during the interregnum.

That's all I've got. :) Not a full review so I probably won't support or oppose (it doesn't look like you need it!); just some things to consider. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 20:51, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Harry. Your final three points all dealt with; I'm not sure about the first one. Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 12:33, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I made a tweak to the opening sentence; see what you think. Also, while I made that tweak the link to English cuisine on "English origin" struck me as a bit of an Easter egg. Otherwise, I'm happy that my comments have been addressed. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 16:07, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Aza24 – Pending

[edit]

I had mince pie for the first time only last year, and was quite suprised (in a positive way). Will do this soon Aza24 (talk) 21:52, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting (FACR 2c)

I see you have used {{cite magazine}} for The Gentleman's Magazine, since, well, it is a magazine. But is Punch not too a magazine?
The Fletcher 1970 SBN should be hyphenated, since you have hyphenated all of the ISBNs
I gather that for locations, you are doing "city, state", except for New York and London, given the former's redundancy with "New York, New York" and the latter's lack of state? But given that you've done "Sydney, New South Wales", I'm wondering if "New Lanark, Lanarkshire" makes sense instead of simply New Lanark.
Are you combining successive refs into one? Because the current scheme is quite inconsistent at the moment.
Hirst 2011 and Hume 2024 do not have access dates

Reliability (FACR 1c)

No issues with web/news sources.
No issues with books/journal sources. I have gone through all of the references to old (pre-1950s) publications, and confirmed that there are all either in addition to a modern reliable source, or used for explicit and uncontroversial reasons ("This 1800s cookery book said..."). I must appluad for the thorough, multi-generational source on the "historically been known..." sentence.

Coverage (FACR 1c)

Some quick database searches show no obvious gaps in important sources. Although I have found one which may be worth your consideration:

Verifiability (FACR 1c and 1f)

It would be nice to have some kind of url/link for Atkins 1982. Amid the current absence of this, I assume that you used a physical copy? I see a DOI online (https://doi.org/10.1558/ppc.29657)
Since you included page numbers for Iacovetta 2012, I would do the same for Mason 2015
I believe it is quite confusing for an unsuspecting reader to see Pepys 2004. You ought to give the editor's name and an original date of some kind (i.e. something like orig-date=17th century, since a specific date would of course not make sense)
- Similarly re editor/original-date for Fletcher 1970
"something Leslie thought a "foolish custom"..." – Because of the sentences right before this, one would assume Leslie made this remark in her 1837 book, when it seems it was in her later book, accoring to your citations. A few words modifier may clarify this (i.e. "something Leslie thought in a her revised edition...")

Spotchecks – Pending

[edit]

Nominator(s): Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone. I'm back! Today I'm showcasing Dredge, a game released 3 years ago! It is a fishing, survival, and horror game. You fish, dredge, and try not to get eaten by a sea monster. Many people liked the game, so much that over 1,000,000 of them bought the game. Critics liked the game too. Before we start, I'd like to give thanks to a few people. @Gommeh: reviewed the GA nomination, while @Rollinginhisgrave, Tarlby, Z1720, 750h+, and Olliefant: all left nice comments at the PR page. I, alongside Z1720 and Baffle gab1978, copyedited the article several times. There still might be some errors left, as I'm not sure if I addressed every single comment from the PR, so a pair of good eyes shall review this nomination. Thank you and goodbye! Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support as GA reviewer. Good luck! Gommeh ^{(talk! sign!)} 19:32, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support as peer reviewer. 750 h+ 11:39, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:51, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Coming back from the peer review! I've always thought the game looked cool, but I never got around to playing it.

To the other reviewers, consider checking out my FAC nom! toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 20:38, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why is "aberrations" in parantheses?
- IIRC, this was left from the copyedit. I've changed it to: "The player can catch regular fish as well as mutated versions called aberrations". Hopefully, this is what you wanted.
...the player can improve their skills by reading books... It's unclear what improving skills exactly affects.
- By reading books you boost the player's stats. Dredge Wiki summarises these stats well. How do you want me to clarify this?
  - I've rephrased it to, ...the fisherman's attributes are improved by reading books...
...throughout the night, the game embraces horror elements when the fog appears. -> ... throughout the night, the game embraces horror elements when a fog appears. Sounds weird to my ears calling it "the" fog when it was never mentioned hitherto.
A passive mode is featured in Dredge, which disables enemies from hunting the player. -> Dredge features a game mode that disables enemies from hunting the player. For clarification, does the mode disable enemies from existence or disable their aggresive behavior?
- Never have played passive mode, so if we trust what the Internet says, it means that their aggression is disabled. They still appear in the game, just without the ability to hurt the player.
I see that the image caption links sea monsters. I'd imagine this link should also be utilized somewhere in the body as it seems pretty relevant.
- There actually was a wikilink to sea monsters in the prose but I've removed it because of a PR comment "seems like a borderlineMOS:EASTEREGG violation". What is your opinion on this? Should I reinstate the wikilink?
  - I've rephrased ...the player is chased by massive enemies... to ...the player is chased by massive sea monsters.
In its original conception, Dredge would be a top-down turn-based game with elements similar to the final version, and not feature fishing mini-games. -> Dredge was conceived as a top-down turn-based game with elements similar to the final version but without fishing mini-games.
...and the mobility mechanism. Do you mean the movement system of the boat?
- Yup. What do you want me to do here?
  - I rephrased it to ...and the movement system. as I think the lack of demotic wording confused me.
...the team developed four additional biomes (archipelagos). I don't see the need to put archipelagos in parentheses.
- Done (removed the entire part, if that's what you wanted me to do, of course).
The game's programmer and author, Joel Mason, stated that the player can visit other archipelagos in any sequence, although the second location... The fifth and last region... This stretch says the exploration of the archipelagos has no order yet you list them as the "first", "second", etc. This doesn't make sense to me.
- Okay... I'll explain. Dredge is an open world game, meaning that you can go wherever you want in any order you want. HOWEVER, despite this devs have actually made an intended order of which islands to visit in which order. So, Gale Cliffs is the second archipelago of the game that the player should visit. But they don't have to, they can go to Stellar Basin instead, or Twisted Strand. Do you get what I mean? How should we clarify this?
  - I've rephrased it: ...stated that the archipelagos can be explored in any sequence, but were designed to promote a specific order; the second...
As someone who doesn't know much about oceans, I didn't know what a blue hole is and I'd prefer not having to click the link per MOS:NOFORCELINK.
...to avoid focusing the game on jump scare horror. -> ...to avoid utilizing jump scare horror.
Is it possible to define or describe Lovecraftian horror? I know what it is already, but I'd imagine there are some readers who do not.
Probably worth it to include the release date of Dave the Diver like how you did so with other game mentions.
Edwin Evans-Thirlwell of Eurogamer and Zoey Handley of Destructoid disliked the plot. No clarification?
- Destructoid: "The plot is lifeless". Eurogamer: "The plot doesn't develop much". :/
  - Eurogamer seems to describe the game as lacking depth compared to traditional Lovecraftian stories in the succeeding sentence. I think you can include this.
...heads-up display (HUD)... I'd assume there's no need to abbreviate heads-up display as HUD if there is no other use of the term in the article.

Thanks for the review, @Tarlby:. I've mostly implemented everything you suggested but left a few questions on some points. Hopefully all is alright. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've dealt with the questions above; review my responses and bold CEs (revert or alter if needed). From an indie game FAC nommer to another, I support. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 07:02, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much. I approve the prose changes. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:21, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As always, these are suggestions, not demands; feel free to refuse with adequate justification.

Firstly, by my calculation, 625 of around 3,000 prose words in the body (over 20%) are sourced to this YouTube documentary, which seems, from my cursory inspection, to be mostly composed of interviews with the developers. Those 625 words comprise the wide majority of the "Development" section. With that in mind, could you please clarify how the article complies with the following from the core content policy WP:PRIMARY: "be cautious about basing large passages on [primary sources]"? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:58, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, most development sections rely on interviews with people who made the game. I'll give quick examples from recently-promoted FAs: Splatoon 3: Side Order's development section mostly comprises of interviews, while Hogwarts Legacy does it slightly less. Tony Hawk's Pro Skater 2 (GBA video game) also relies on interviews. Outer Wilds, a slightly older FA from 2024, heavily relies on Noclip in the development section. Another current FAC nomination, Horizon Zero Dawn, somewhat relies on Noclip, but considering that it's a much much bigger game, it also relies on other interviews. Speaking about my previous FAs, Smash Hit's development section mostly relies on primary sources (personal articles published in reliable sources). Same goes for Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures (interviews). Nobody complained about this in any of those FAC nominations. I think that it'd be counterproductive to not include such information in articles (even though they are primary sources), considering that there's no other way of obtaining such answers than directly asking people who made the game about various aspects of the development. Technically, not including such information in articles would mean that they do not meet FA#1b criteria (comprehensibility). I might be wrong, but this most likely applies to other forms of media (films, songs, albums), not just video games. I'd love to hear opinions of others, because I don't think that this has been ever been brought up in FAC nominations which rely on interviews for development sections. I'd say that WP:IAR should apply here if we'd want to improve Wikipedia and obtain more high-quality articles (FAs and GAs). Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think we've got off on the wrong foot here. I don't think obtaining FAs and GAs necessarily contributes to improving Wikipedia (invoking IAR is a bit much), and I'm not really interested in discussing seven other FA candidacies. That said, I take your point that the nature of video games perhaps lend themselves easier to interviews explaining the progression of development, and doing a bit more research, it appears that Noclip might be viewed as a secondary source in some respects. Would you agree? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:10, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I agree. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:14, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~~Placeholder – reviewing now.~~ --Laser brain (talk) 13:17, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ at this time, I'm sorry.

I shouldn't be finding basic grammatical errors at FAC.
Reading through the "Art style" and "Gameplay" sections, I find the prose to be clunky and not engaging. Passages like "He was inspired by Disco Elysium (2019) because of the game's abstract nature. The water shaders were altered multiple times during the development process." lack context and there is an overall lack of a cohesive narrative through both sections. "Gameplay" jumps right into "The upgrading system" without any explanation or context.
"Dredge has a low-poly (a polygon mesh that has a low number of polygons) art style" – a high number of statements like this are attributed to Gabriel Moss who is listed as a "freelance reviewer" and I can't find any information on his notability as a video game journalist. One would hope for better sources, for the most part.

These are just a few selections but I'm not encouraged that this is up to FA standards at this time. --Laser brain (talk) 10:30, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to hear this LB. I've made further changes to the article to include your suggestions. Hopefully another editor will chip in with another copyedit. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to help out, but can you address the sourcing issue? Has the use of Moss been reduced? I'm not sure of the current sourcing standards for video games articles but I'd think we'd prefer more notable journalists if possible. --Laser brain (talk) 01:01, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Laser brain, quick heads up that I heard of your comments here in an off-wiki chat with Vacant. Just on the point on Moss, the art style being low-poly isn't something that should need a high bar of sourcing, or even really any. Identifying works like File:Wikipe-tan pixel art.svg as pixel art for instance wouldn't be considered WP:OR. Even if it were, much more relevant than a writer being staff or not staff for reliability is the outlet publishing the piece under the IGN brand, staking their brand on the review's quality. Are there more contentious statements being sourced to Moss that you are more concerned about? Whonting (talk) 12:53, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm not troubled with Moss if you're saying we are using that source for non-controversial claims. I wasn't previously aware of IGN's process for vetting contributors. Thanks for the clarification! --Laser brain (talk) 13:20, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey LB. I'll do another round of copy edits today and look to address the rest of your concerns. In the mean time, we can discuss on improving the prose. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 14:11, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Should be done now. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 15:45, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, striking my opposition as things look more polished. I'll run through it again this weekend with an eye toward copyediting and hopefully we can get this thing across the finish line. --Laser brain (talk) 17:50, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Close to supporting, but I have a piece of feedback about the Reception section. You write in the article "Abbot and Handley praised the soundrack" but Abbott writes only, "Scored by quaint piano music..." and Handley merely says something like "The music is rather nice" which, combined, I would hesitate to classify as "praise". I would remove this section altoghter unless you can find some other notable criticism of the score. --Laser brain (talk) 11:36, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'll look into that and respond when I finish. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 17:24, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review – Pending

[edit]

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 03:33, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

FACR 2c

Typo in Ref 5 ("Mangificent")
I would probably link to Tom Hull (mathematician) (ref 23)
Ref 66 missing access date
Ref 77 missing access date
Ref 79 missing access date
No issues with name, date, title, publication inclusion
- Spot checked accuracy in these things, and no issues either
Optional Recommendation: Ref 23 more specific date of February 2006
Optional Recommendation: Consolidate the Notes section into references (possible with References larger section, and Notes + Citations smaller sections, or a similar titling scheme). Having a single note as an entire section seems silly, but completely up to you.

Reliability

FACR 1c

Most of the commentators are publishing on a reputable platform, which typically establishes substantial notability alone. However, Destructoid (ref 16) looks to be a more casual blog (it is self-described as a blog, whereas PC Gamer, IGN, Gamspot etc. are described as websites/magazines/digital media etc). What makes Zoey Handley a subject matter expert? Moocroft-Sharp also seems on the edge, though his bio with a GamePur role seems perhaps sufficient.
No isses with the others refs, I believe. And the YouTube ref is good as the uploader is a professional group in this field (and nicely done with the timestamps!)

Coverage

FACR 1c

Seems solid, but I am seeing a mention in the 2025 book Video Game Ecologies and Culture. Normally a few mentions would not be pressing, but given that there are very few academic sources in this article (to be expected with a topic of this flavor and recency, and certainly not a fault), you should prioritize the usage of any that are available. I also see mention in The Game Needs to Change. Totally understood if their information is not relevant, but otherwise use what you can.

Verifiability

FACR 1c and 1f

I do not see anything uncited, aside from plot content per the usual standard
Please specify the page of the Hull source. It's good to keep the whole range, for citation formatting purposes, so maybe this is an {{rp}} moment? Or you can do "Math Horizons. 13 (3): 10–12 [10]"
I admit that I did say the timestamps were nice above. But I really think you need a timestamp range. For instance, when I spot checked 36:27 (first ref of the "Release" section), it took until 38:05 to get all of the information. This feels more like a page range, then a single page, if you see what I'm saying. Make verifiability as easy as possible here with time stamp ranges.

Ref 3 F Green – Good
Ref 9 A Williams – Good
Ref 20 B Noclip — – Good by 2:56
Ref 23 Hull – Good
- By the way, why are you doing "a [[stealth game|stealth]] game, and Dredge" instead of "a [[stealth game]], and Dredge"?
Ref 20 J Noclip — Good by 38:05
Ref 41 C Tailby – Good
Ref 44 D Abbott – Good
Ref 63 Castle – Good
Ref 84 Baker – Good

Pass for the spot check. The Source review as a whole is still pending – Aza24 (talk) 05:01, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Images should have alternative text per MOS:ACCIM to allow those unable to see them to receive the visual information they contain (I see broad consensus in the ongoing discussion on WT:FAC that there is broad consensus that this is so, seperate from any definitive statements about what that text should look like -- there are many good guides online).
File:Dredge Cover Art.jpg: textbook fair use; no issue here.
File:Dredge gameplay screenshot.jpg: ditto -- one screenshot to illustrate gameplay is standard in video-game articles, and the FUR is good.

UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:41, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"as he travels by boat through an ocean,[2][3] who can help inhabitants of various islands" - the use of "who" here is not correct. The ocean cannot help the inhaitants of various island
I like the gameplay section for being quite precise, but at the same time I feel like it glosses over important details. For instance, how do you help inhabitants of various islands? It has a skill tree but how do you level up in this game? What does the skill tree do? What is money used for in the game? For a fishing game, there is basically no mention of how you fish in this game. (You should at least say that there are fishing minigames). The development section said the game pushed players to explore at night but did not specify how they did it.
There should't be a two-sentence paragraph. Consider integrating the third paragraph of the gameplay section with the first paragraph.
" tentacled sea monster attacks the oil rig, destroying the drill before being eaten by the Leviathan" - Just to make sure I am reading this correctly. The tentacled sea monster was eaten by the Leviathan after it ate the oil rig?
"The team announced the game in August 2022 with a trailer,[17][18] and showcased it at Gamescom later in the month" - should be in the release section
"Early versions of Dredge were conceived as a top-down turn-based game that already contained some elements of the final release, though fishing mini-games had not yet been implemented." - Because you already established that it was an early version of the game, just said that "Early version of Dredge was conceived as a top-down turn-based game" is sufficient.
"The first six months of development were spent refining that region, particularly its controls and movement systems" - the controls and movement systems have nothing to do with that region? They are fundamental gameplay systems not limited by region.
"they were subtly designed to encourage a particular progression. Gale Cliffs, for instance, draws on Scandinavian aesthetics" - It seems that this is suggesting the game's aesthetics have a role in influencing how players progress?
"For these nighttime sections, the team also created a fog shader centered on the player rather than the camera" - not easy for general readers to understand. Should at the very least wikilink shader and camera.
"unlike the fishing systems like the one featured in Stardew Valley" - I don' think we need to write about Stardew Valley as most players would not be familiar with it or its fishing system
"Initially scheduled to release in late 2024, the studio delayed the game to 2025;[28] it was released on February 27, 2025, for iOS and Android platforms" - "Initially scheduled to release in late 2024, the studio delayed the game to February 27, 2025, for iOS and Android platforms"
"The third DLC, The Iron Rig, was supposed to come out in the fourth quarter of 2023, but was delayed to 2024" - "The third DLC, The Iron Rig, was supposed to come out in the fourth quarter of 2023, but was delayed to August 2024" and then remove the last sentence of the paragraph.
"Steven Green of Nintendo World Report called Dredge a "near-perfect indie game"" - doesn't feel quite right to have this sentence in the first paragraph which serves as a overview/summary. Can be seen as WP:PEACOCK.
"Harrison Abbot of Bloody Disgusting described the experience as "well-balanced and thought-through",[44] while Nicole Carpenter of Polygon called it "dark yet cozy"" - it is unclear what they are praising. The overall gameplay? The overall game experience?
The reception section often said something is praised/criticized, but did not specify why it was praised/criticized, which is perhaps more important. (This is especially true when you have sentence pattern like "A approved B but C disliked D because it is boring".
"Abbot compared the game's open-world design to that of Breath of the Wild" - what is the "open world design" then.
"Mejia complimented the game's relaxing atmosphere" - WP:CRS: don't write subjective statements in wiki-voice.
" it became more enjoyable as the player upgraded their equipment" - what does "it" stands for here? The "relaxing atmosphere"?
The third paragraph of the reception section is a mix of many concepts. The parts about actual game design should be moved back to the first paragraph.
"Multiplayer.it writer Giulia Martino praised the Italian translation of the game" - I am not exactly sure about this. You picked an Italian reviewer and he praised the Italian translation, but you could have also picked a German or a Chinese review and they could have said the same thing. Singling out Italian translation seem a bit odd to me.
"DLC's game design, particularly the narwhal." - why is the narwhal an example of "game design"? Narwhal is a creature.
"more gameplay were added to the DLC" - not exactly what he said? He seems to feel that there is not enough content in the DLC, but he doesn't seem to be asking more gameplay additions.
"it's a shame the world of Dredge doesn't have a stronger reaction to the events of The Iron Rig" should be rewritten, because I am not sure what's the "reaction" and the "events" they are talking about.

That's it for now. OceanHok (talk) 06:28, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 10:33, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article had an unsuccessful FAC followed by a PR, both in the second half of last year. One of the major concerns has been sourcing; I have used the best sources possible, but I literally cannot just create sources that don't exist. However, I am here to vehemently defend the article if need be, as that's the best I can do. Hopefully the prose and images should be fairly straightforward by now due to the attention the article has received during the previous GAN, FAC, and PR. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 10:33, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by comment from MSincccc

I am unable to undertake a full review at present due to time constraints and other commitments both on and off-wiki, but I would suggest going through the prose again. In the meantime, I have made a few minor revisions. MSincccc (talk) 17:02, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Early life (Family)

with unpublished material from the Christ's Hospital school archives
- You could link to "Christ's Hospital" on first mention.
- Done
You could link to Bardon, Leicestershire as a whole.
- Currently Bardon Hall is a relink to Bardon, but I plan to change this because the house and estate is 100% worth an article (I have many sources on it). I've delinked Bardon Hall for now and linked Bardon, Leics.
How about the rephrased sentence: He was baptised in Riseley on 21 February 1822, according to unpublished Christ’s Hospital school archives. or similar versions?
- Done, but I want to make sure it's clear that the happening and place of his baptism aren't just in unpublished archive material, which is what the disclaimer is for.

MSincccc (talk) 09:49, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Usernameunique

I came by this article given the notice here, and (given the comment above from MSincccc) have been giving it a copyedit (still in progress) over the past couple days. In doing so, a couple issues have stood out:

Primary sources: The first nomination ran into issues regarding primary sources, and I don't think these have been fully resolved. I'm sympathetic to the use of primary sources, but they need to be employed judiciously. (See WP:PRIMARY: A primary source may be used on Wikipedia only to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source ... Do not base an entire article on primary sources, and be cautious about basing large passages on them.) So while I understand things like using his birth certificate from Ancestry.com for his birth date, we also have substantial passages (particularly in the "Education" section cited to his Christ's Hospital papers. One glaring example was noted by Hog Farm in the first review, but is still present: is it that important the name of the person who signed him out of the school if we're having to guess from the archival material who this might be and that the secondary literature on RJH apparently does not mention this at all?. There are at least a few other instances where the primary detail adds little. The article does a good job of signposting when primary sources are being used, but I think you need to also take a careful look at each time place you use the sources, and decide if you really need them.
- I am happy with the length of the article without the primary sources, so if you want to highlight any text for removal I will do that. For the Family section, I am planning on creating a separate article on Bardon Hall that will contain some of this detail as there's currently quite a lot.
  - I see you've taken some out, and the article looks better as a result. Like I said, I do think some use of the primary sources is fine, such as when a secondary source says X happened (but not the exact date), and the primary source gives the exact date of X. I also like that you have a source independent of Christ's Hospital for the baptism, given that there might have been an incentive to fudge things with CH to gain admission. (See tihs source re Rupert Bruce-Mitford: Rupert was baptised, perhaps with a view to his going on to Christ's Hospital for which baptism was a desirable if not essential condition. At a glance, two things that I'm still not sure you need are He is described as a civil engineer and his father a "gentleman"; neither had been previously married and His marriage certificate once again listed him as a civil engineer; however, his now-dead father was listed as an "esquire" rather than simply a "gentleman". Owing to the death of his former wife, he is described as a "widower"; Thornton was listed as a spinster, meaning that she had not been married previously. What do these add to the article? --Usernameunique (talk) 14:20, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - I have removed all of these except his father's improving status: gentleman is the lowest title of the landed gentry rather esquire is the highest before you get to proper titles. Maybe if in the (near) future there's another more suitable article to move this fact to I will.
Diaries: Understandably, the article leans heavily on RJH's published diaries. As the editor of the diaries notes, the copy to which he had access "appears to be a sanitised and highly summarised version of what were probably more revealing diaries, almost certainly later destroyed". Given this, are we sure that (a) the diaries are reliable, and/or (b) when there is a reason they might not be reliable on a certain point, the article adequately signals (i.e., in prose) that the claim comes from the diaries?
- I would say the diaries are not a primary source. Jackson inserts comments in square brackets that clarify information, which suggests that he did his own research as otherwise he wouldn't have been able to add this extra context. When Jacomb-Hood writes things that are a bit puffy in his diary, like his watching the trains and wanting to become a railway engineer, Jackson makes light of this. In terms of the sanitisation, the in-and-out of his career is unlikely to have been affected – had anything really so scandalous or bad happened it would have been reported on in other sources, so it's likely that his personal life was cut out, and the diaries are used less prominently in that section. The article only became dependent on the diaries to make it independent of the obituary, whose own problems were brought up in the first FAC.
Cites: I'm also sympathetic to extensively citing articles; many if not most of my nominations here have had at least one reviewer noting the large number of little blue numbers. Here, however, we have both sentences with the same source cited multiple times—and, on the other end of the spectrum, paragraphs with only a single cite at the end. The latter is permissible at FAC, but the former instances should be revised so that the cite appears only once.
- I think this has arisen from the fact that the two main sources, the obituary and the diaries, have had their reliability questioned. Therefore, I have tried to insert in other sources corroborating information to show that the information in these main sources matches that of others. If you want me to be a little less specific by collating references at the end of sentences, for example, this is absolutely fine. Let me know your thoughts.
  - Spreading sources through a sentence when they support different clauses is fine to my eyes (e.g., "clause one,[1] clause 2,[2], clause 3.[3]"). Where it becomes overkill is when the same source is used multiple times in a sentence (e.g., "clause one,[1] clause 2,[2] clause 3.[1][3]"). In that case, just put the duplicate source at the end of the last clause it supports, which may well be at the end of the sentence (thus, for the previous example, "clause one, clause 2,[2] clause 3.[1][3]"). --Usernameunique (talk) 14:24, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - I have tried to cut this down a little more.

The substantial amount of work and research that has gone into this article shows, and, on balance, it appears to be in decent shape. The above issues, if addressed carefully, should not be an impediment to promotion. I'm still working on my copyedit, and may return with some line-by-line comments. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:45, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments.

These issues—particularly the primary sources and over-citing—look a lot better to me now. I'm collapsing those issues to mark them as resolved. I'll also try to come back for some line-by-line comments. --Usernameunique (talk) 15:21, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Family

the daughter of John Kemp — Any word on what he did?
- Not in the sources, hence why it wasn't included
the Beechhill estate — What is this?
- Just another estate where he lived – but shows he's a member of the aristocracy in contrast to Jacomb-Hood's mother.
Is there anything to which to link for Bardon Hall? If not, is it worth a red link?
- Currently Bardon Hall is a redirect to Bardon, Leicestershire so I don't want the two next to each other as that would be confusing. The estate is definitely worth an article as there are loads of good sources out there discussing its history, including a whole load of quarrying and railways. However, I don't have the time to write it at the moment.
If Robert Jacomb the elder became Robert Jacomb-Hood upon William Hood's death in the 1830s, doesn't that mean that Robert Jacomb-Hood the younger (the subject of the article) was actually born Robert Jacomb—without the Hood? If so, this should be stated somewhere.
- Yes, and now you say it it seems obvious lol. I've changed it in the infobox and prose but I'm not going to change them all to Robert Jacomb before the inheritance as that would just increase the confusion even more.
Did the inheritance of Bardon Hall come with an inheritance of money as well?
- The term "estate" generally refers to the land, house, and the money attached to it, so short answer probably yes
I spent some time searching on British Newspaper Archive, unsuccessfully, to try to pin down the date of William Hood's death. In doing so, however, I came across an 1833 article discussing the death of Rev. R. Jacomb, who was related to "the late Edmund Hood, Esq. of Bardon Hall". Any idea who these guys were?
- There is a Rev. R. Jacomb who is the paternal grandfather of the subject of the article, as mentioned on page 10 here, but he is said to have died 1806. Maybe it's just another one? Even if not the most direct relation of Jacomb-Hood, it would still make sense they're all related to both families.
What was the Worshipful Company of Fan Makers, and why would a tenant farmer be a part of it?
- That's kind of the point – having inherited an estate, being admitted to one of the livery companies would have shown that he'd moved up in society and was now a proper tradesperson.

Education

he was sponsored by George Green, the governor for donations at the school — Is this particularly relevant? From what I can tell, the salient point is that his tuition was free because his family was poor. Is that correct?
- Reduced to his being sponsored, just to point out it wasn't e.g. government funding
As a result of his father's inheritance of Bardon Hall, he was removed from the school in 1835 — Perhaps worth clarifying that it was the improved economic status that came with the inheritance that led to his removal from the school.
Jacomb-Hood's father was unhappy with the quality of instruction — Why?
- That's all it says in the source; I guess it just wasn't a good school
Bardon Park, where the father was undertaking renovation works — What's the difference between Bardon Park and Bardon Hall? What were the renovation works?
- Bardon Park is the estate and Bardon Hall is the house, I've fixed the inconsistent use. His renovations are described in the paragraph starting Robert Jacomb's[b] cousin....
Jacomb-Hood was educated in Hathern, Leicestershire, as a precursor to him studying at the University of Cambridge — Where in Hathern—a school? Why would this be a precursor to Cambridge?
- Well the lack of a school suggests he was educated by someone rather than at a school, but no name is given. In those days, getting into university wasn't really the same so to get into Cambridge was about having had a certain background or education, rather than certain grades/intelligence. The tutor in Hathern would have taught Jacomb-Hood about the style of education at Cambridge and the kind of things they wanted a student to have done (e.g. learned Latin), so he would be suitable for admission. If you think it necessary I can add a footnote.
the family moved to Cheltenham, Gloucestershire — Why? What happened to Bardon Hall?
- Well in those days that was normal – they had inherited an estate in the middle of nowhere so using the money to buy houses in bigger settlements would have made sense, and then Bardon Park would have been their retreat.

1841–1846: Early career

After he finished his work for the M&BR, Jacomb-Hood was tasked with managing the parliamentary work of the Manchester, South Junction and Altrincham Railway, before being promoted to Resident Engineer of the railway from 1 September 1844. — How does this fit into his previous work, i.e., who was employing him at this point?
- It doesn't. I've clarified that this was a change of job essentially.

1846–1850: Early LB&SCR work

in rented accommodation — Should this be in a rented accommodation?
- Don't think so? Accommodation isn't an individual thing you can have one of, but a concept?
The rate of construction led to his salary being increased — What do you mean by "The rate of construction"? Also, note that the previous sentence was about how his work did not always involve construction.
- Reworded – he was building railway lines quickly so he got more money for being efficient
Rather than giving the title of the paper followed by a footnote with the full title of the paper, you could just say "Earlier that year, on 2 April, Jacomb-Hood had presented a paper detailing [DESCRIPTION]". This would obviate (a) the footnote (because the full title is already in the cite) and (b) the part following the semicolon (which is the description you move to the fist clause).
Is the final paragraph a bit out of order? You talk about the paper discussing the Grand Surrey Canal bridge before you talk about the bridge itself. Should it not be (a) he engineered the bridge from October 1848 and June 1849, and then (b) he presented a paper on it in April 1849?
- I mean technically it's not chronological but I think it reads nicer that way
a Council Premium of Books — What is this?
- Just an internal prize within the Institution of Civil Engineers that they award to the best papers

1850–1860: Expansion of the LB&SCR

The Crystal Palace has a link, but you could perhaps explain what it was.
- Added a little context but sceptical about going on a tangent
Was the Crystal Palace Board part of the LB&SCR?
- No, but they were heavily connected. This is explained later when Jacomb-Hood takes up the directorate
he had been responsible for the construction of the railway line serving it — Isn't this already said in the previous paragraph?
and would open on 11 October of the next year — Not sure what this means. The railway opened on 11 October of the next year? Then just say that.
- Would is used in English to refer to events in the past, but that were in the future from the given reference point. For example, Mozart wrote his first piece at age 5, and would go on to write many symphonies, because someone at the time would have said Mozart has just written his first piece at age 5, and he will go on to write many symphonies. Would is the past tense of will. This is somewhat proscribed by Wikipedia:WOULD but that is merely an essay and for advanced prose in an FA I will write how I think appropriate.
Does his younger brother John merit a red link? What about George?
- I don't think so, because they don't seem to have done anything genuinely significant – every railway company had many engineers at one time
His assertion that railway engineers should design their own stations was highly innovative and unusual for the time. — According to whom?
- According to the source. I have added attribution
Did that paper lead to any discernible changes in the way stations were designed?
- I haven't seen any sources that discuss it; station design has become closer to what Jacomb-Hood wished, but as sources do not attribute it to his work/paper it would be OR to include that.
the roof does not survive today — This is sourced to a 2005 article. Perhaps just say the roof was no longer present by 2025? Anything else you can say about it?
- Unless they collect the scraps and rebuild it, which they won't, the statement is going to remain true. I don't see the benefit of adding a random year when we don't know when it was dismantled. The station's own article discusses various rebuilds but without access to the sources it's hard to know.

1860–1869: Full-time private practice

the pair assumed all of the company's engineering works contractually from November 1863 — What does this mean?
- Whereas beforehand Jacomb-Hood was an employee paid as part of his job to do the work, he was now working for himself and just being contracted to do it.
Does George B. Black merit a red link?
- I have no evidence for his notability. His commons category seems fairly mundane.
it is part of the National Portrait Gallery's collection — Maybe add that it was purchased by the NPG in 1966?
In December 1865, Jacomb-Hood travelled to Edinburgh to enter the competition to design Edinburgh Waverley railway station. The station redesign was instead carried out by James Bell ... based on a design for an extension he submitted in 1869. — It took four years to decide on the winner?
- That's what the sources say so I'm keeping it per WP:VNT. I think it's probably insinuating they just let people enter until they found one they liked, rather than having a deadline.
On 28 April 1866, a bridge being built in Sutton, London as part of Jacomb-Hood's work collapsed, killing six men. — Anything more that can be said on this?
- I've added a little more information from a news article of the time

1869–1883: Semi-retirement

It was as a result of this report that the Alabama Great Southern Railway Company was formed in 1877 — This implies, but does not expressly state, that Emile Erlanger & Co. bought the Alabama and Chattanooga Railway. What happened?
- I know little about American railway history or where to find out about it reliably. I would also disagree with this insinuation, as the article on the railway itself suggests that the local government there reorganised the company into the new one, in which presumably Erlanger then bought shares.
Charles Schiff also convinced Jacomb-Hood to join the board of the New Gas Company in September 1878. — Anything more that can be said here?
- I can't find stuff online, mainly because "New Gas Company" is not very unique. I think it is worth including because it shows that in this time he was doing a bit of everything.
The scheme never came to light and no work has been undertaken on the line since February 1869 — The "has been" makes it seem that, 150 years later, it could still be restarted. Is this correct?
In November 1879, there were mass resignations among the board of directors at the Crystal Palace Company, including the chairman, deputy chairman, and Jacomb-Hood — Why? It sounds as if this was a big event, but it's not even given a full sentence here.
- I don't know and it's not mentioned on the Crystal Palace article. It may not be that dramatic – a group of people had gone into the project together and they may have just collectively decided they'd done enough.
The only extant remains of the railway are the station building in Louisbourg. — This reads as footnote material. In that footnote, you could also mention that it was added to the Canadian Register of Historic Places.
- It had already been removed for HogFarm, but I've added it back as an efn.
In May 1881, Jacomb-Hood submitted an entry to the design competition for Liverpool Exchange railway station, something he had been working on since December of the previous year. — I've already reworded this, but you use this format (X happened, which came after Y happened) several times throughout the article, when, more often than not, the format "Y happened, then X happened" makes for better reading.
- I've obviously just written what I think sounds good; if you have any other ones you want to make more chronological just point them out.

1883–1900: Later work and death

William Jacomb—the cousin and former business partner of Jacomb-Hood—died suddenly on 26 May 1887. — What is the relevance of this?
- William Jacomb had been a significant figure in Jacomb-Hood's life, as his cousin, pupil, and then business partner. I think it's worth including
Jacomb-Hood started attending the International Railway Congress — Based on the years of attendance, would it be correct to say that this was a biennial conference? If so, may as well say so.
- It's a good question and I'm not sure. Google won't tell me so I think we can leave it to the reader to figure out it's every two years.
The name was removed around 1906 — Why?
- Trains get named, denamed, and renamed. I don't think it's that unusual or scandalous, hence I don't know of a source that tells me.
showing the extent of his financial success — What does this mean?
- I've removed that wording.
Why is the paragraph about the painting by his son here, rather than in the following section?
At the time, he was still working for the LB&SCR — But only nominally, no?
- Well how do we know? He was still on the board; it would be OR to say he was less active because he was near death, especially considering he died suddenly.

Personal life

his work included depictions of his father — Other than the painting that might be of Jacomb-Hood discussed above?
- Removed as sounds too grandiose
His second son, John Wykeham Jacomb-Hood, also became a civil engineer — Second son, but what overall child?
- Indeed I don't know. It's annoying as I wrote the article for him and couldn't definitively include it.
Any details on Elizabeth Thornton?
- Not that I can find; it's also not a very rare name which doesn't help. Mostly google just returns sites like Ancestry which aren't reliable for notability or content.

@Usernameunique: I have responded to all your comments; sorry for the delay. Let me know if there's anything else you'd like me to do. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 14:44, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reading through the article now, it's clear it's well researched and ably written. Nonetheless, here are some early thoughts or suggestions:

I find it interesting that you've used different citation styles for primary vs secondary sources (using a different symbol for each style). I'm not opposed to this, but am curious on your reasoning. Is this useful for the reader?
- The primary sources have been highlighted on many occasions as a weakness in the article. Were anyone to just write a biography of him all this stuff would become secondary but alas, we are where we are. I want the reader to be aware that the cited statements are coming directly from the records rather than a secondary source, which should be a point of caution for the reader.
  - Drive-by comment: Chiswick Chap and I did something similar in Martin Rundkvist. That article contains many cites to primary sources (namely his own publications and bios), and—due to a relentless effort to delete the article once, and then again—we needed to make obvious that many secondary sources also existed. Here, I agree that the distinction similarly helps to show that the primary sources are mostly buttressing and giving finer detail to information that's in secondary sources. --Usernameunique (talk) 15:28, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - Thank you for your comment and that's exactly what I'm aiming for here – it's helpful to have primary sources that can just add that little bit extra flourish or context (e.g. a date).
Is there a wiki article for St Mary And All Saints Church? If not, is it worthy of a redlink?
- It's Grade II* listed so a pretty certain yes. One redlink added in the prose but a second in the caption is unnecessary imo.
  - I have created an article on the topic and sent it to GAN.
"...by building a New Hall in 1835 and demolishing the Old Hall building around 1840..." Are these proper nouns that need to be capitalized?
- Multiple sources capitalise them and suggest "Old Hall" and "New Hall" were literally what the buildings were called
I was confused by who inherited William Hood's estate until reading more about it in the "Education" section. Could you make this clearer in the "Family" section? (Both persons being unoriginally named Robert, it's a tad confusing to keep track).
- Yes, and unfortunately your edit to the infobox is not correct. The subject of this article, Robert Jacomb-Hood, was born with that name. He inherited the estate from his father, who was born Robert Jacomb and then became Robert Jacomb-Hood. (Still following?). His father, Robert Jacomb-turned-Robert Jacomb-Hood, had inherited the estate from William Hood soon after Robert Jacomb-Hood-the-younger's birth. Robert Jacomb-Hood-the-younger (the subject of the article) then sold the estate, and thankfully, according to my knowledge^{[better source needed]} named none of his kids Robert!

On a serious note, some sources use Senior/Junior, and some I and II. However, I am sceptical of these because they're not the names anyone would have called either, but rather historians making their own lives easier. I have added two efns explaining the situation and hope that is enough. However, I can envisage others saying these efns are unencyclopedic in tone.

Will leave some comments below - I intend for this to eventually be a full review but I can't promise as there is some stuff going on IRL for me the timing of which isn't in my control. Hog Farm _Talk 23:46, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Several of my comments from the prior FAC have not been addressed.

"A former classmate from Hathern, Albert Pell, had been employed at the company, however, and warned Jacomb-Hood against working there" - the writing in the source seems a bit stilted to me, but I'm still not reading the material in the source as being a clear reference to Pell, although it's certainly possible from the wording. Unless you have a reason to be highly confident that this is a direct reference to Pell, I think it's better off to just drop the reference to Pell the text of your article
- I have reread the source and I'm still sure that when it says "his former classmate" it's a reference to his only named former classmate, Albert Pell, with whom he went to see railway construction.
What are your thoughts on the "fortunate" truncation I reference in the prior FAC? I'm not a huge fan of using a different word than RJH's actual quote and still putting it in quotation marks, but this is a bit of an awkward circumstance with the current phrasing of the article not really permitting a true quote
- I have expanded the quote
"On 10 June 1850, Jacomb-Hood attended the opening of The Crystal Palace on its new site with his wife, having been responsible for the construction of the railway line serving it and later becoming a director on the board." - Jackson specifically states this was 10 June 1854 and the obituary doesn't mention this visit. The Crystal Palace itself opened to the public in 1851.
- The crystal palace opened on its new site on 10 June 1854, the date mentioned by Jackson (I've corrected it). This is the same fact as on The Crystal Palace's article, in the sentence:

Within two years the rebuilt Crystal Palace was complete, and on 10 June 1854, Queen Victoria again performed an opening ceremony, in the presence of 40,000 guests.^[1]

"By 1855, Jacomb-Hood's salary had reached £1,059" - like mentioned in the prior FAC, there is a semantical difference between salary (750 pounds) and total compensation (the 1,059 figure). This is seen even in the cited source (Jackson)
"he would start this work on 7 August 1858 and would open on 11 October of the same year" - as noted in the prior FAC, Jackson indicates that the work began on 7 August 1857 and was completed on 11 October 1858, so the former year needs corrected (which is not unexpected, given that two months to finish a railway would be remarkably good time)
" tasking him with work in Portsmouth and Newcastle before finding him a job in Bombay, India (now Mumbai) in October 1858" - like noted in the prior FAC, Jackson places all of this information under his header for 1857, not 1858.

JacobTheRox - could you please respond to or correct these issues which were identified in FAC1 and then respond to me? It's admittedly frustrating to have to go back through the prior FAC line-by-line and see what has actually been addressed. Hog Farm _Talk 00:10, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"which he had described in his memoirs as "too dilapidated for residence, and the situation was low, damp and unhealthy"" - is it really an appropriate level of detail to include information which apparently can only be found in a self-published work?
- Well ultimately the diaries themselves are a primary source. Some of this information will be moved to the Bardon Hall article once I create it, but I don't have time at the moment, and I don't really like the idea of removing information that is valuable to a reader without placing it in a separate article.
" Jacomb-Hood wrote highly of Wild and Buck in his diaries, describing them as "one of the cleverest draftsmen" and "a most excellent master", respectively" - who is Wild? RJH is stated not long before to have been studying under draftsman Charles Heard. Jackson references "Charles H Wild"
- Yep, I can't read and fixed this for Stikkyy
Paragraph beginning On 10 January 1849, Jacomb-Hood was appointed as the engineer to the Portsmouth line ... - can you please confirm citation placement? Is all of that first big chunk fully supported by the 1850s minutes document?
- It's supported by page 54 of Jackson. I also found more information about William Jacomb on that page which I've now added
"By 1855, Jacomb-Hood's salary had reached £750, as well as a dividend bonus of £350" - source says the dividend bonus was 309 pounds?
- Yes, it was correct in the inflation template, so I think this time I the problem is I can't type
"but agreed to work on his ongoing projects until 31 December 1860 in return for a fee of £3,500" - my understanding of reading the source is that he agreed to assist in the completion of all projects which were still ongoing as of December 31. As it's currently written in the Wikipedia article, this reads that he was paid 3,500 pounds for three months of work
"Having been employed by his brother in various ways (likely as a result of nepotism), George Jacomb-Hood hosted a farewell party on 24 November 1863 before leaving the country to engineer the Scinde Railway in India, ending his pupilage" - I'm not a huge fan of the pagination here when it comes to the nepotism claim. Jackson uses the word twice (once to refer to a cousin's employment and another to the "casual nepotism that was a feature of the period") but neither of the direct statements of nepotism are found on the cited page
- The source says On Brunel's death, cousin William Jacomb had set up an office on his own in partnership with W B. Lewis. Once again nepotism prevailed: an entry for 8 March states: 'I began to employ him in making drawings and inspecting ironwork and superintending erection'. – it seems like Jackson feels like nepotism was a significant factor in William Jacomb's employment. I have added p.58 where the quote is from.
" and branded their partnership as 'Jacomb and Hood'" - the source refers to 'Hood and Jacomb'?
"On 28 April 1866, a bridge being built in Sutton, London as part of Jacomb-Hood's work collapsed, killing six men. On 29 May of the same year, the LB&SCR stopped all its work due to the railway company being in financial difficulties, and Jacomb-Hood was instructed to withdraw or suspend all of the company's parliamentary proposals. Nevertheless he was still able to continue his work with the South Eastern Railway and the London, Chatham and Dover Railway, as well as assisting negotiations between the Great Northern Railway and the Edgware, Highgate and London Railway" - cited to p. 58 of Jackson but all or primarily seems to be found on p. 59?

Ready for the semi-retirement section; please ping me once you've addressed these. Hog Farm _Talk 23:24, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"and Jacomb-Hood was sent to Malta to assist in the company's affairs in July 1872" - based on Jackson this should be July 1873, right?
- Fixed and mentioned his second visit
" Jacomb-Hood agreed and incorporated the visit into a wider holiday of his between January and May 1872, which included visits to southeast Europe, West Africa, and the Atlantic coast of South America (see image for full route). He arrived back in the United Kingdom at Southampton on 13 June. Upon his return, he gave up his last Westminster office, which closed on 8 July 1872" - this is sourced to p. 61 of Jackson but is actually found on p. 60 (note that the source and the PDF have pagination which is offset by one page)
"but the path (red line) is only indicative of the rough route Jacomb-Hood would have taken." - this feels like textbook original research
- I've amended the efn – what it's trying to say is that the red line is just joining the lines dot-to-dot without going over land, which obviously isn't possible in a ship. I've not used any particular shipping routes/logic to say the exact route.
"and no work has been undertaken on the line since February 1869, when the LB&SCR made an agreement with the South Eastern Railway that rendered the line useless" - why the "has been" phrasing? It doesn't seem necessary to extend to the present that an abandoned infrastructure project from the 1860s remains unfinished, and we can't support that something continues to today with a source from the early 1950s
- Reworded, I just wrote what sounded natural originally rather than insinuating it could be out of date.
"The only extant remains of the railway are the station building in Louisbourg." - I'd cut this sentence as not directly related to RJH

Through the semi-retirement section. Hog Farm _Talk 01:44, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Linking to Americas feels like a bit of a WP:OVERLINK
"Beginning in 1887, Jacomb-Hood also started attending the International Railway Congress; [...] and Paris in June 1893". Where does the source indicate that RJH attended an 1893 International Railway Congress in Paris? The 1893 meeting in Paris Jackson mentions is for a Joint Steamboat Committee? From looking around at other documents, I don't know that there even was an International Railway Congress in Paris in 1893
- Not sure where this came from, but it has been removed

"He was selected as the first Resident Engineer of the LB&SCR in 1846, a mere five years after entering the industry" - this is phrased in the lead as an extraordinary accomplishment "a mere five years", but the article body doesn't really support that this was unusual? He was even a Resident Engineer for a different railroad in 1846 according to the article
- The LB&SCR cannot be compared to the MSJ&A railway. Jackson twice suggests that Jacomb-Hood's progress was impressive/unusual – "His progress was now rapid" (p. 52) and "at just 24" (p. 53).
  - Well - then we need to actually verifiably state this in the article body, which will probably involve an attributed quote from Jackson. I don't think this difference is obvious to most readers and with this only explicitly called out in the lead, it just looks like editorializing. Hog Farm _Talk 13:54, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"This included contributions to the Crystal Palace Company between 1869 and 1880" from the lead but the article body states that he resigned from the Crystal Palace board in November 1879?
- This has already been fixed for Stikkyy.

I still don't think this is quite ready; I'm concerned by the number of variances between the sourcing and the article content that still remain after one FAC which failed for largely the same reasons. Hog Farm _Talk 01:49, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is wrong to say that was why the first FAC did not lead to promotion. The main issue was the source quality, and such a long time was spent on that and image issues that by the time it was archived, there had not been a thorough source review of any kind. The problems you have raised seem to almost all have been existent during the last FAC. The number of discrepancies is regrettable and I can only apologise but I think it would have been better had the first FAC been archived earlier if anything, because I think I rushed to essentially rewrite the article from being obituary based.

I have responded to all your comments. I think that the question that would have to be asked is: what would the benefit be of failing this FAC now and coming back for a third? I took the article to PR between the two candidacies and while there were helpful comments which I implemented, they did not transcend to this level of detail. Secondly, if the issue is simply that the number of comments have been extensive, surely the fact I have responded to them is what is important. I can't thank you enough for being so thorough in your review, but seeing as I have responded to all comments, and will respond to more, I don't see a barrier to promotion. Even the argument of WP:FIXLOOP – as Mike Christie himself writes, "The first option is fine if the reviewer wants to put in the work, though it would be better for the efficiency of GAN and FAC if that work could be done before nomination.". Had it been done before nomination that would have been great, but by sending to PR you can't say I didn't try. Let me know your thoughts. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 09:07, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My concern is more this - if there's a bunch of source-text integrity issues called out in one FAC to the extent that it fails, the expectation is that the nominator should go through their own article and proactively double-check everything and correct any errata; as the reviewer I shouldn't have to be the one going line-by-line through Jackson and identifying everything that is wrong. This, coupled with the need to recapitulate the unresolved comments from the prior FAC, has made this a frustrating FAC to review. It's good FAC etiquette to if a prior nomination has failed, to do a close reading of the failed FAC and make sure everything outstanding and actionable is addressed, and to proactively re-review areas of identified issues. And yes, I still do need to take another look at that old Ashton-under-Lyne FAR, but I've had very little time and energy to devote to Wikipedia the last several months). Hog Farm _Talk 13:54, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

But the FAC was archived because after a month, the structural sourcing and image issues had only just been resolved and these issues were not discussed in great detail. I did miss one section of your review which I apologised for, and that did include some of these comments. However, the FAC started on 27 July 2025, the related comments were left on 25 August 2025 and the FAC was closed as archived on 26 August 2025. So the two FACs have faced different issues. Even if the article was not ready to return to FAC, and that was my mistake, if I have fixed the problems now I don't understand what the point is of failing it? Because I had missed those comments, I had not realised that there were issues with prose–source disparities until the article returned to FAC here, because they also weren't really raised at PR. I will have another look through Jackson, the obituary, and the article, and make sure I can't see anything else, and thank you for devoting so much effort to helping me with this article. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 18:27, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please let me know when you're done with the read-through (I think I traced the majority of the article's statements to the Jackson source where applicable) and I'll take another look at this article. Hog Farm _Talk 03:14, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I will do that tonight for the whole article. I think there may be a couple of wrong page numbers as well but that should be fairly fixable. While I understand your concerns, most your comments seem to be misplaced cites/page numbers or wrong numbers (e.g. dates/figures), rather than genuinely false facts worming their way in. I hope you don't see this as bad faith on my part as I have obviously only tried my best to keep the article as good as possible. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 14:44, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have done this and reported my findings in the coordinator section. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 22:56, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Brennan, Joseph (2020). "The Atmospheric Road: Croydon". Columbia University. Archived from the original on 15 May 2025. Retrieved 12 August 2025." - what is this source? Being hosted on a Columbia server does not make it automatically an RS. Brennan is apparently an "adjunct associate professor"; I don't think we'd automatically consider something written by an adjunct, even at a major university, to be high-quality RS for the featured article criteria. I think we'd need to see evidence of Brennan being treated as a subject-matter expert in this field, or of Brennan's work having a major scholarly impact, or this particular web series by Brennan by cited by other high-quality RS
- Brennan writes many things associated with the railway history of the 19th century hosted on the Columbia site. I did consider using [20] and its indexes, essentially the same source, for my work on Isambard Kingdom Brunel, but decided it was too in-depth and article length is already becoming a problem after one source sweep. According to [21], Joe is an Adjunct Assistant Professor at Columbia University, where he teaches a graduate architecture course on advanced methods of technology implementation and computational design.. My personal feeling is that for someone whose contribution to the article is that the atmospheric railway was "built by the London and Croydon Railway" and that its "conversion finished on 4 May 1847" is minor, not particularly controversial detail.
  - Surely there has to be a better source for these claims at least, though? WP:FACR #1c explicitly calls for high-quality reliable sources, and this appears to be essentially a self-published collection by Brennan, as I don't think there's any independent review of this material, despite being hosted on the Columbia site. We'll need something greater than pointing to that he is an adjunct professor that teaches a class about using computational design for his essentially self-published writings to be a high-quality reliable source for railway history. Has Brennan's work in this field been cited anywhere? Has Brennan published anything on railway or architectural history outside of this? Hog Farm _Talk 13:54, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - Would you be happy with [22] as an alternative? Less scholarly in nature but published in Railway Magazine, which is a respected source.
" Chrimes, Mike. "British and Irish Civil Engineers in the Development of Argentina in the Nineteenth Century". p. 689. Retrieved 1 April 2026 – via Scribd." - do we have any other information for this citation? What is this from? Is this part of a book? Is this a WP:ELNEVER issue from linking to a webpage potentially violating a copyright? See the concerns listed at WP:SCRIBD.
- I never knew this about Scribd. I unfortunately think the page is a copyvio. Its information can be found here, which supports it being RS, as it was a paper published at a respectable conference hosted at the University of Cambridge. I have reformatted the citation and removed the EL.
"Fenn, R.W.D. "The Bardon Hill Quarries: 1858–1918". pp. 2, 9–10. Archived from the original on 8 August 2025. Retrieved 1 April 2026." - this seems like a potentially incomplete citation. Was this published as part of something? Is this self-published? I will note that I am seeing some use of this document as a source in other publications, which is a point in its favor
- I could add a date based on [23] which lists it as from 2003. The article Bardon Hill says it is from 2015 and is published by "Aggregate Industries", who seem to have owned the site. I disagree with this, as the aforementioned link has on the left-hand side that "I am very grateful to both Keith and to John Carney at BGS for their invaluable help and advice throughout the research. I would also like to thank - Jonathan Campbell, John Shenton and Richard Page at Aggregate Industries UK; Rev. R.W.D. Fenn and Alice Cox for their help and for access to the archive at Bardon Hill Quarry. RWD Fenn, here a Reverend, is not listed as belonging to the company but rather it seems he has been publishing archive material held in an archive from the quarry.
" His grave is inscribed with 2 Timothy 4:7 as translated in the King James Version: "I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I have kept the faith".[56][‡ 7]" - if the sources (other than a Find A Grave index don't comment on this, I don't see why this would be an appropriate level of detail to include; it's not at all unexpected for a headstone from that time period to have Bible verses inscribed on it
- I think this is a really nice fact to have and adds a bit of colour to prevent the article just being a list of what he did. However, this is not the first time this has been raised. ~~May we settle on an efn?~~ I have converted to an efn.

A few more comments listed above. Hog Farm _Talk 01:55, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

References

I will leave the discussion of the sources to those who participated in the previous FAR.

Are the titles of 'Resident Engineer' (as found in the body) and 'Chief Engineer' (as found in the infobox) synonomous?
- Vaguely, but Resident Engineer is more accurate so I've fixed the infobox
Robert Jacomb's cousin, the barrister William Hood, died in the 1830s.–I think that the information in the footnote should be moved into the body.
- I'd rather keep the clarification on which is which inside efns as it doesn't feel encyclopaedic having them in the prose
Jacomb-Hood wrote highly of Wild and Buck in his diaries, describing them as "one of the cleverest draftsmen" and "a most excellent master", respectively.–Who is Wild?
- This has been raised by HogFarm as well. My mistake was writing "Charles Heard" instead of "Charles H Wild" somehow earlier in the paragraph
which he would become heavily involved in the construction and management thereof–"which" and "thereof" are doing the same work.
- You or someone else has fixed this
In 1879, he resigned as a board member of the Crystal Palace Company—In November 1879, there were mass resignations among the board of directors at the Crystal Palace Company, including the chairman, deputy chairman, and Jacomb-Hood–Repeat information.
- Fixed so it is more chronological
This included contributions to the Crystal Palace Company between 1869 and 1880–But he resigned in 1879?
William Jacomb—the cousin of former partner of Jacomb-Hood—died suddenly on 26 May 1887. He gave up the seats he held on the boards of the Alabama Great Southern Railway Company and the Sydney and Louisburg Railway in 1886, ending his involvement in engineering in the Americas that he had held since 1872.–I think the chronology needs to be repaired here. Also the cousin of former partner of Jacomb-Hood does not read quite right.
- Fixed, and it was supposed to be "the cousin and former partner"

I'm going to make a CE pass, feel free to revert any that you think are not improvements. Stikkyy (talk) 19:57, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

he had only first visited mainland Europe on 29 May 1849, showing the extent of his financial success. I would trim this. Stikkyy (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- I personally think it can't be trimmed without losing detail.

Thank you for your comments so far and I will keep an eye out for anymore

There's a long list of comments, but no clear supports and even comments that lean towards an oppose, so it feels more like a Peer Review than a FAC. Though consensus to promote still seems distant, I'd like to give it a few days hoping that might change. Otherwise this would have to be archived. FrB.TG (talk) 16:34, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For what it's worth, I've just finished my comments on the body of the article, and (pending my comments being addressed) it looks to be in reasonable shape in terms of prose (where I've made made copy edits) and content. I haven't looked closely at the sources, however, so at this point would defer to Hog Farm on how accurately the article incorporates them. --Usernameunique (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the same boat as Usernameunique, I won't weigh in before a source review. Stikkyy (talk) 01:01, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a few more comments as well - mostly bearing on source quality/formatting. I think the source-text integrity issues are all resolvable, but it's concerning for their to be apparent factual errors easily findable in here when it's on its second FAC. Hog Farm _Talk 01:55, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As aforementioned, this article was sent to peer review where comments were given and implemented. The truth is that FAC is carrying a lot of the weight of PR because PR isn't active enough, and I understand why. I think that the issues with the article, even if there have been many, are instances of things that need fixing rather than massive overall issues like last time, where the quality of sources used in the nominated version wasn't good enough. I have high hopes and don't see why, once Hog Farm is happy the statements in the article are verified, that promotion is not in reach. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 09:10, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc @Hog Farm @Stikkyy @Usernameunique I have undertaken a full read through of the article and checked every source. The diffs are [24] [25] [26]. For full transparency, the main issues I found and fixed are:

The article stated that Jacomb-Hood was employed by the MSJA to do their parliamentary work then promoted to resident engineer, when actually he did that work still under Baker and was then employed by them directly as Resident Engineer.
He moved in with his brother George in 1848 not 1847. I've added an efn on them moving to westminster later.
The bridge over the Grand Surrey Canal was not a swing bridge but a lift bridge, as all sources say. I've added a bit more information as well so it's not so heavily reliant on the primary source. I've left an invisible comment in the new source explaining its reliability.
Jacomb-Hood's London Victoria was completely destroyed in 1896–1909 and replaced, which is discussed on the London Victoria station article but enough information is given on the Network Rail source to just use it. I've replaced the photo with one showing the old(est) station.

Hopefully there should be no more of these issues, but obviously I can't guarantee something hasn't slipped through the net. Hopefully Hog Farm if you're happy that the issues of article–source mismatch have been dealt with, then there should be no remaining barriers to promotion. Thank you everyone again for your contributions; I will try to repay them in the future. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 22:20, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Railway civil engineering is one of my pet subjects so I'm happy to offer some thoughts. I'm afraid I have concerns. Normally I would oppose and suggest withdrawal but I can see you've already been through a PR and a previous FAC so I'm going to try and give you some detailed feedback:

Sourcing

I'm a little worried about the sourcing; a lot of it appears to be primary/non-independent. Now, this isn't Stephenson or Brunel so maybe there aren't going to be multiple full-length books to rely on, but the article relies very heavily on what appears to be the subject's own diaries, then on an obituary (a usable source if perhaps not the best backbone for an article but certainly fine for basic biographical facts). But then the rest seems to be patched together from random news reports and web sources. As a side note, I have a copy of the Biographical Dictionary of Railway Engineers (ref 53) and pp. 79-84 covers multiple entries from Fenton, James to Fothergill-Cook, Sir William (great name! Sadly, Jacomb-Hood isn't listed); which entry are you citing? I don't get the impression that most of the cited sources contain much, if any, detail about Jacomb-Hood. Is there nothing else? Is he in the ODNB? Is he covered in any books about the LBSCR? I've scoured my books and he's not mentioned in BHRB, his son gets a passing mention in Civil Engineering Heritage: Southern England, but he does get one brief sentence in Civil Engineering Heritage: London and the Thames Valley (wrt Victoria station). That references London's Termini by AA Jackson (which I don't have but I suspect Ritchie333 might) and JTH Turner's book on the LBSCR (which I also don't have but seems looks findable in libraries or £14 on Amazon); no idea if either of those go into more detail.

Alas I can't write books. Well I can, but then I couldn't include them anyway. It's true that Jacomb-Hood isn't very well covered in sources, and there's not much I can do about that. No he doesn't have an ODNP entry, or an Encyclopaedia Brittanica entry. However, I think this article is a testament that just because a person doesn't have books written about them, it doesn't mean they're not notable or interesting or hugely influential. The truth is that anyone could write a book on him, they just don't think it is worth their time / will earn the money / will be interesting enough. It is true that a lot of the sources that provide a little extra detail are tangential, but it is mainly based on the obituary, diaries, and other heavier sources such as Dobraszczyk (2006), Moffatt (1981), and Fenn (2003). I've spent too much time scouring the web for sources at this point, and I'm not sure more looking will do me any good.

about the "Biographical Dictionary of Railway Engineers", that was a long winded mistake. You see, on Liverpool Exchange railway station that book is Marshall 1978, and the correct book is Marshall 1970, but it is given by a template so in source view the only Marshall is '78, which was thus erroneously copied. I have fixed the error.

Ref formatting

This is much less important but you have a mix of 10-digit and 13-digit ISBNs, some apparent book sources have no ISBN or other identifier, hyphenation of ISBNs is inconsistent.

I have standardised as 978-XXXXXXXXXX

Drive-by comment: Some inconsistency here is fine, so long as the books with the 10-digit ISBNs don't also include a 13-digit ISBN (this applies to many pre-2007 books). Per WP:ISBN, use the ISBN-13 if both are provided by the original work. However, if an older work only lists an ISBN-10, use that in citations instead of calculating an ISBN-13 for it. This is because ISBNs are often used as search strings and checksum differences between the two forms make it difficult to find items listed only under the other type. --Usernameunique (talk) 23:17, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

I don't think we do post-nominal in the lead any more.
- Done – you learn something new every day
Is "Resident Engineer" a proper noun?
It's not clear (to those who don't know their UK railway history) what you mean by "amalgamation"; I would just go with "formation", especially in the lead.
Born to a working-class family in Bedfordshire, Jacomb-Hood's father inherited This isn't as clear as it could be—was RJH or his father born on the estate? It might be better split into two sentences.
It seems odd that you mention his leaving school before you've mentioned anything else about his life, even starting school.
However, he quickly dropped out "However" is a word to watch and it's not adding anything here; the sentence would be fine without it.
rising through their ranks quickly whose ranks?
finances were tumultuous, with some years seeing is a bit sloppy. Years don't really "see" anything, and don't use "with" to splice two parts of a sentence. Splitting it into two sentences is probably the way to go, though an emdash might work.
"Fired" is colloquial
motivated him to enter semi-retirement; as part of this, he switched his focus is a bit of a run-on sentence; just split it at the semicolon.
This included contributions to the Crystal Palace Company seems odd coming straight after a mention of international opportunities. It's also a run-on sentence which gets confusing at the end because you have to keep switching subjects.
the companies he had been a board member of is not great grammar for professional-standard prose (generally, avoid ending a sentence on a preposition in formal prose)
he saw success not only as the designer and engineer of railway projects, but also as the director of various companies across four continents feels like editorialising based on the previous few sentences. Is this an opinion lifted from a source? In which case it would be fine but would need attribution.
- I've removed it as I don't think it can be properly attributed
You use the phrase "saw success" (which I don't love but there are worse turns of phrase) twice in quick succession.
- Fixed by having removed the sentence
saw academic success, being awarded don't use a comma like that to force a tense change. A dash or colon or semicolon or a new sentence would be better, then you can discuss the awards in the past tense. It's another long sentence anyway so a good opportunity to split it.

That's only the lead. I'd be happy to advise or copyedit the whole thing, either outside of FAC or if the prose is the only thing holding it back from promotion. Sorry it's not what you want to hear but I hope it's helpful feedback. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 21:59, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

- Seeing as your suggestions are minor prose issues, I am more than happy for you to just edit the article yourself rather than having to write them here. Obviously more contrived ones may be better adding here so you don't waste time trying to work out rewordings, especially as outside of the lead cite placement will get involved. I imagine the lead is worse than the rest of the article because it hasn't really been touched since the first FAC was archived. Thank you for your comments. JacobTheRox^{(talk | contributions)} 22:56, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Phlsph7 (talk) 13:13, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dualism is a family of views proposing a fundamental division into two separate principles or kinds. Dualist views span many domains and disciplines, including theories such as mind–body dualism about a sharp divide between mind and matter, ethical dualism about good and evil as antagonistic forces, and epistemological dualism about a fundamental gap between experience and reality. Thanks to BorgQueen for the suggestion to tackle this article, to Shapeyness for the GA review, and to Streded for the peer review. Phlsph7 (talk) 13:13, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here shall be an image review from me! Arconning (talk) 13:53, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dualism.svg - CC0
File:Mind-body dualism.svg - CC0
File:Ethical dualism.svg - CC0
File:Theological dualism.svg - CC0
File:Platonic dualism.svg - CC0
File:Epistemological dualism.svg - CC0
File:Kapila (cropped).png - Public Domain
File:Yin yang.svg - Public Domain
File:Frans Hals - Portret van René Descartes.jpg - Public Domain
All of the images have alt-text for accessibility, proper captioning, and are all relevant to the article.

This is my first ever attempt to review a featured article candidate. I'm not sure how to format it, so I'll improvise. Streded (talk) 15:36, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Streded and thanks for giving FA reviewing a try! There is no fixed format here and different reviewers use different styles, so improvising in line with Wikipedia commonsense should be fine. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article is well-written, as required in the WP:FACRITERIA.
The article seems comprehensive. As I noted in the peer review, there are aspects of the subject that the article doesn't cover, but to the best of my knowledge, no sources exist that cover them and this will probably stay that way for the foreseeable future.
The sources used indicate a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. I have yet to review whether the citations are well-placed and support the content that cites them. I'll try to do some spot checks later.
The article is neutral. It seems to present dualist and anti-dualist points of view fairly and proportionately for an an article about dualism. It mentions criticism of the concept itself as a precise analytical category. It features dualist thought from diverse cultures and philosophical traditions.
Aside from incremental improvement by the nominator, the article is stable.
I haven't noticed overly closed paraphrasing, but I haven't checked this thoroughly.
The first paragraph of the lead section summarizes the first section. The second paragraph summarizes sections 2–7. The third paragraph summarizes the eighth and final section. All summaries seem fair.
The structure seems good.
I see no issue with Arconning's review of the images.
The article doesn't seem to go into excessive detail, but I haven't checked this thoroughly. Also, it covers the term "dualism" to some extent in addition to the subject itself. I think this is mostly fine, since you'd expect to see coverage of the term in a "Definition" section, and the criticism regarding the vagueness of the term also concerns the concept itself. Still, I hope that the focus on terms as opposed to concepts can be decreased.

§ History, third paragraph:
- Replace "Yingyang" with "yinyang".
  Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Replace "arose" with more specific wording, since Wang doesn't suggest that the yinyang school existed at any time outside the 1st millennium BCE.
  I changed it to "flourished" but I'm not sure if that's what you meant. Unfortunately, we have to remain vague concerning the timeframe since sources are themselves not certain about it. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  
  This addresses the problem I had, but now it's more positive than the source actually supports. How about "was active"? Streded (talk) 03:35, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  I don't think it's a peacock term in this context, but "was active" works also, so I changed it. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:45, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  Having encountered this in another article, I understand now. From now on, whenever you use the word "flourished" in this sense, please link to floruit (although I personally prefer "was active"). Streded (talk) 09:28, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Consider noting the relationship between the dualism of yin and yang and the dualism of being and non-being, using Ko's statement that [t]he ultimate dimension of non-being transcends the contradictory phenomenon of yin and yang.
  Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Is it true that non-being remains unaffected by phenomena according to Wang Bi? Ko says that his major concern is how to keep the realm of non-being unfettered from changes in the phenomenal world. The foundational nature of non-being implies that non-being shouldn't be affected by anything, but the statement from Ko is very confusing.
  It probably depends on whether you can interpret the term "unfettered" in a different way. However, this part is not essential, so I replaced it with your suggestion about about transcending yin and yang. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:28, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  I like this change. What confused me was "his major concern is how to keep". It seems to suggest that Wang Bi endeavored to protect the realm of non-being from changes in the phenomenal world. I know this is a nonsensical interpretation, but that's how it reads to me. Streded (talk) 17:36, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
After digging into it, I'm certain that the yingyang school that Wang describes is actually the School of Naturalists. Wang's book Yinyang: The Way of Heaven and Earth in Chinese Thought and Culture makes it clear. Please pipelink yinyang school of thought to School of Naturalists. Also, Needham's Science and Civilisation in China, volume 2, chapter 13, sections (c) and (e) is a great source about this school of thought and the origin of the yin-yang dualism. I recommend reading it if you ever have the time. Streded (talk) 05:35, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I added the wikilink. I'll look into the book when I have the time. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:48, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Streded, just checking whether you are satisfied with the responses so far and whether you have more suggestions. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:09, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I currently have no issue or suggestion regarding the article, and see no reason it shouldn't be promoted to FA. I still plan to continue my spot checks (probably today). Streded (talk) 09:35, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Streded: that sounds good. For concluding the review, it would be good if you could state whether you "support" or "oppose" the nomination so assessing consensus is easier for the coordinators. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:41, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Placeholder. MSincccc (talk) 16:22, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, MSincccc, nice to see you for another review! Phlsph7 (talk) 17:31, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Phlsph7 I am currently involved in three active nominations at FAC, one of which I intend to conclude by tomorrow. I have also promised another user a review, which can be done in parallel with yours, have an open listing at PR of my own, and am preparing for my next set of examinations.

So this might take some time, but I look forward to another engaging read. Cheers. MSincccc (talk) 17:46, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads-up. The nomination just started, so there is no rush. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:51, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Definition and related terms

You could tweak the section heading to include "etymology".
It could be done but it would make the section heading longer than it needs to be. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You could link to linguistic systems.
Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For instance, the metaphysical pluralism of the pre-Socratic philosopher
Since monism, dualism, and other forms of pluralism
- Do we need the comma after "and"?
  I don't think there should be a comma after "and". The comma before the "and" is the Oxford comma. As I understand it, the comma is not mandatory in general but it's needed here for consistency. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
they differ from nihilist or eliminativist theories
"differ from each other by the type of division and principles they posit" → "differ in the type of division and principles they posit"
Reformulated. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"shaping how to understand" → "shaping how we understand"
While philosophical texts use this kind of language, I'm careful because it usually doesn't take long until someone complains about MOS:WE. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The first known use was in 1794 by the satirist and scholar Thomas James Mathias.

A few minor suggestions to begin with. I will take a look at the lead at the end. MSincccc (talk) 12:05, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey MSincccc, just checking whether you have had the time to take at look at other parts of the article. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:36, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have not had much time yet, as I still have Rain World's FAC to conclude, along with some commitments both on- and off-wiki. However, I expect to leave a few more comments by tomorrow. MSincccc (talk) 09:12, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mind-body dualism

objects but also contents of consciousness, including cognitions and emotions.
a mental pain experience,
explaining how or why the two separate realms are synchronized

MSincccc (talk) 16:35, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Religious dualisms

MSincccc (talk) 07:22, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Platonic dualism

None here except a few stylistic suggestions.

MSincccc (talk) 09:39, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Epistemological dualism

"perception is not directly in touch with the world" → "perception is not in direct contact with the world"
which represent or stand for those objects but are not identical to them

Other forms

Criticisms

However, some arguments seek to undermine dualism as a whole
"general patterns found in most or all of its forms"

→ "general patterns in most or all of its forms"

History

→ "challenged the view that forms have independent existence"

Lead

"a family of views proposing a fundamental division"

→ "a family of views that propose a fundamental division"

Bottom line

I'll do a source review for this. Shapeyness (talk) 03:11, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did spotchecks for the good article nomination and found no issues with source-text integrity, close paraphrasing, or plagiarism.
There are some url= that I think should be chapter-url=
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Some Google Books links have an access date, others don't
Since they are typically offline books, I think none should have access dates. I removed them. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Some SEP links have access date, others don't
As online articles, I think all should have access dates. I added them. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fontaine 2023 should be in title case
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Gerson 1986 - doi not found
Fixed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hill 2019 - I think the date should be 2008 (per title and copyright in frontmatter), also I think this should maybe be cited as a journal article (link to journal special issue here)
I changed the date and used the journal template instead. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Kissi, Dompere Kofi (2017) I believe should be Dompere, Kofi Kissi (2017) - I'm not very aware of the publisher but it seems ok here
Fixed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Rich 2017 - this is a reliable source but I think for FA I would want sources within academic philosophy to satisfy HQRS for philosophy content
I replaced it with a better source. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sahakian 1974 - I wasn't sure about Barnes & Noble as a publisher here, but it appears to be part of a university textbook series and the author looks all ok, plus it is used in a citation with plenty of other supporting sources so I think this is fine
All other sources used are HQRS
Hi Shapeyness, thank you for taking care of the source review! I addressed your points, I hope I didn't miss anything. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:38, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Phlsph7: I made some small changes, I think the new Blackburn source needs a page range. Shapeyness (talk) 12:56, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The changes look good. I added the page information for Blackburn. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:14, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Phlsph7, the source review is a pass. I also support this article for FA based on my assessment at GAN; the only things I noticed then that would hold it back from FA were source-related issues that have now been resolved. Shapeyness (talk) 12:02, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the support and all the help with the GA review and the source review! Phlsph7 (talk) 17:13, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hawkeye7

[edit]

I have read through the article a few times and can see no issues. It takes what is a complex subject and makes an intelligible Wikipedia article from it. I support its promotion to Featured Article status. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 23:21, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hawkeye7, thanks a lot for reviewing the article and for your support! Phlsph7 (talk) 09:15, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This subject isn’t my area of expertise, but it was written very well after I read it. Despite its complexity, Phlsph7 definitely nailed it again! 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 02:44, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Boneless Pizza!, thank you for the feedback and the support! Phlsph7 (talk) 08:27, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:50, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about... a church cantata by J. S. Bach for Ascension Day, first performed on 30 May 1726. It would be great to have the article in best shape for the anniversary. The feast falls on 14 May this year. - The last cantata to become FA was Unser Mund sei voll Lachens, BWV 110, in January. Bach composed this cantata after three months of no new cantatas (quite unusual for him), and he followed the text model of his cousin, making for a longish text to handle, in 11 movements (also unusual). The scoring has been described as opulent, and the opening movement is outstanding, while the others ... find out. - The article just received a GA review by Kyle Peake. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:50, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

History (Background)

You could link to Pentecost and Easter.
done --GA
It is unclear, if he possessed
- The comma could be dropped here.
  done --GA

History (Readings and text)

which is used for six consecutive movements (5 to 10) of the work in eleven movements
- Could this be rephrased to avoid repeating "movements"?
  perhaps but I didn't find an easy solution, - perhaps drop the eleven, - that was said before? --GA
"from the gospel" → "from the Gospel"
done --GA
both an idea from Psalm 68...and its quotation in the Epistle to the Ephesians
- "both" is redundant with "and".
  yes but should stress two things to come --GA

History (Performance)

Another performance by Bach is documented by a violin part, but cannot be dated.
- "but cannot be dated" → "but it cannot be dated"
  if you say so --GA
performed the cantata's first part in Halle at least twice

MSincccc (talk) 10:01, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Music

Bach structured the cantata in eleven movements, in two parts.
- Do we need the comma or could it be dropped?
  Most cantatas are not in two parts, - intended to give it more weight. --GA
"nothing that follows can balance" → "nothing that follows can balance it"
"which" is what nothing can balance --GA
Due to the long text, the work unusually features rather short arias and five recitatives
- Drop "rather"?
  if you think so --GA
"refers in the end to the view towards heaven" → "ultimately refers to the view towards heaven"
"at the end"? - the end of the movement is meant --GA
"like in Bach's Orchestral suites" → "as in Bach's Orchestral suites"
yes --GA
notes that the soprano and alto lines were too low for trumpets to play along, and that Dürr suggested that trumpeters played violins for that movement
You might retain the "that". It was only meant as a suggestion of the clarity would not be affected. MSincccc (talk) 04:40, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 15:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line

Critical reception/assessment? - I don't see any material about how the cantata is assessed by critics, either back in the 1700s, or in the modern era. Can such information be included in the article? Alternatively, if the cantata is unremarkable and not considered special in any way, readers will want to know that also ... are there any sources that would support such a statement?
Critical reception of church music was not existent at the time. (Even today, it would be rare, especially of a piece meant to be performed only once, or a few more times.) Only when he took the post was noted in the press, and without a remark about the music. All works by Bach are notable, just by being by Bach. --GA
I understand that all works of his are notable. But readers will want to know: "Are there any music scholars (of any era) that have performed an analysis of this cantata? What attributes do they ascribe to the cantata? How do they describe its musical qualities (tone, harmony, etc)? When scholars compare it to other cantatas of Bach, what do they say? Relative to Bach's other cantatas, is there any data that gives readers an idea of its popularity (e.g. frequency of performance/recording; or rating by notable musicians or scholars)? Noleander (talk) 16:00, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
To be more specific: the article already has some analysis by musicologists, for example "Joachim Schulze notes that the "energetic repeated pitches, spacious broken chords, and sweeping passages" give the aria a heroic character, although the triple meter might indicate a dance type" ... there are a handful of these that are commenting on a specific movement, but I don't see any that address the entire cantata. For example, the Dürr source has these notes on BWV 43:
"The text of this cantata is unorthodox in form, for it consists largely of a poem in six strophes (nos. 5–10). The explanation for this has been uncovered by the American Bach scholar William H. Scheide..."

"The New Testament words, Mark 16.19, are drawn from the Gospel for Ascension Day, and the following strophic poem :: and the defeat of Satan, leading to the hope that the Saviour will prepare for me, too, a dwelling in heaven. "

"In its festive scoring for three trumpets and drums, two oboes, strings, and continuo, "

"... it is exceeded a little only by the Ascension Oratorio among Bach’s works for this occasion. "

" This cantata leaves behind a somewhat mixed impression... "

"The extensive text may explain a certain brevity—even scantiness—in its setting, which is reﬂected in the short arias and no fewer than four plain secco recitatives. Only the opening chorus forms an exception. "

"... perhaps Johann Sebastian here modelled himself consciously on a work by his cousin Johann Ludwig. "

Other sources on BWV 43 that might have insights that readers would benefit from include:

Granted, these latter two sources are not as famous as Dürr, but they are quoted in other WP articles. Noleander (talk) 19:27, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The bolded Dürr facts are all in Text and/or Movements (the summary right under that title, cantata as a whole), afaik, and some also in the lead. Why would they be in the body twice? Mincham was rejected as not a RS (by Brian Boulton), and is available as external link, as also Traupmann-Carr who had something special to offer to the Christmas Cantata BWV 110, but less so in this case. I'll check Crouch. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Classical Net was also among the unwanted self-published sources, and the short writing also provides nothing new. "Time constraint" is nonsense, - Bach wasn't obliged to write this cantata at all, - he could have used his cousin's work as on 18 other occasions. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:40, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One voice that I usually quote is Gardiner who recorded all church cantatas over 2000 Bach Cantata Pilgrimage, but not this one then (too much noise in the live recording), but later. I tried to access the liner notes, but no luck here, nor on the Bach-Cantatas site. Can you perhaps see something there? - Another resource of commentary is the Netherlands Bach Society, but they haven't recorded this cantata yet. Other sources would be the Swiss project of Lutz, but it's a spoken lecture in German, and a MDR broadcast, same. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:13, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

... are marked by green background under the header ... - WP:COLOR suggests that the article cannot use color alone to convey information. The table is okay, because it has the word "period" (in addition to the green color). Perhaps the "key" in the body text can also focus on the word "period" rather than the color?
In earlier versions (of other cantatas), there were two colours and different texts within both. --GA
The WP:COLOR says that WP articles should not rely on colors to convey information to readers, because some may be color blind. So, better would be ... are marked by the word "Period" in the Instr. column ... or ... are marked by the word "Period" and the color green in the Instr. column ... Noleander (talk) 16:00, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
adopting --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Single paragraph? The final movement "11" at Gott_fähret_auf_mit_Jauchzen,_BWV_43#11 is the only movement with 2 paragraphs. Will some readers think the 2nd paragraph is a summary or conclusion to the "Movements" section (which has an intro paragraph at the top)? Even I'm not 100% sure if the 2nd paragraph is a summary of the whole cantata or not; I'm guessing it is not because the content doesnt read like a summary. But I had to stop and ponder. Consider merging the two paragraphs.
A summary is rather given on top, right under Movements. I wonder why a reader would expect one under header 11. The instruments seem a completely different topic from where this music came from. I hope for a Lilypond rendering between the two paras, - is that possible, Michael? --GA
Alt text missing in some images:

Source: orig vs translation? The source Schulze, Hans-Joachim (4 April 2024). "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Commentaries on the Cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach. Windsor & Downs Press. ISBN 9780252056703. seems to have several editions:
1. 2006 Original German edition
2. 2024 English translation by Univ of Illinois Press
3. Digital "companion" to the 2024 English translation
- Suggest clarifying by:
  - a) use "language" and the "trans-title" fields to identify original language; and use "translator-first/last" fields identify the English translator; and "orig-year" field to display "2006".
  - b) I cannot tell if (2) and (3) are the same book with same ISBN. If they are distinct, the source details should clearly identify one vs the other.
  - c) Is publisher Windsor & Downs Press? or Univ of Illinois?
Thank you for the details. FAs BWV 249 and BWV 110 have the kind of "abridged" version, but why not improve, for those readers who can deal with the original title? I can't answer b) and c). Otherwise taken. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 19:52, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: I'm still a bit confused. The citation should describe the edition that the editor read (not the edition that is recommended for readers). If the editor read the German edition, the cite should be something like: Schulze, Hans-Joachim (2006) "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Die Bach-Kantaten: Einführung zu sämtlichen Kantaten Johann Sebastian Bachs, Evangelische Verlagsanstalt (in German). ISBN ... If the editor read the English 2024 version, the cite should be something like: Schulze, Hans-Joachim (2024) [2006] "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Commentaries on the Cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach . Translated by Brokaw II, James A. Windsor & Downs Press. ISBN ... The cite now is a mixture of the 2006 German and 2024 English editions: Schulze, Hans-Joachim (4 April 2024) [2006]. "Gott fähret auf mit Jauchzen BWV 43 / BC A 77". Die Bach-Kantaten: Einführung zu sämtlichen Kantaten Johann Sebastian Bachs [Commentaries on the Cantatas by Johann Sebastian Bach] (in German). Translated by Brokaw II, James A. Windsor & Downs Press. ISBN ..... The cite should describe only the edition that the editor read (the other edition can be mentioned in "Further Reading" section; or in parenthesis after the "main" edition). Noleander (talk) 15:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I misunderstood your earlier comment. Trying again. As the German version is not online, and most readers will not be able to read it any, no further reading. They will find it when reading about the author. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:43, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source titles should use a consistent algorithm for capitalization (per WP:CITEVAR as of 2025. Article has mixture:

"Bach composed rather few cantatas during his third ..." The phrase "rather few" sounds wrong to my American ears. Consider "few" or "relatively few" or ".. fewer cantatas in his third year than in the prior years ...".
well, it was rather dramatic (every (weekly) occasion here, three months without any there), and "few" seems too little, - suggestions? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:07, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It depends on what the sources say. Why are they saying "few"? Are they emphasizing that Bach's productivity slowed down in his 3rd year (vs years 1 and 2)? Why did he slow down? Health reasons? Busy with other obligations? Bored with the cantata format? I have not read the sources, so I cannot give concrete suggestions ... it depends on what the sources are trying to tell their readers. Noleander (talk) 16:05, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I consider "few". Speculations about why are not in the sources, and wouldn't matter much for this cantata anyway. Bach's first two cycles (imagine the immense stress they must have meant for him and the musicians: a weekly world premiere of a 20-minutes piece, and daily for the high holidays) are mentioned in Background. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:01, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify "cycle" vs "year" for groups of cantatas. The article uses the words "cycle" and "year" in a way that may confuse readers that are not experts. Some readers will assume that cycle 1 = year 1, cycle 2= year 2, etc. I'm not sure how they correlate. I see that "cycle 3" redirects to Church cantatas of Bach's third to fifth year in Leipzig. So maybe it is:
- cycle 1 = year 1
- cycle 2 = year 2
- cycle 3 = years 3,4,5
  - In any case, readers will want clarity on how year # relates to cycle #
    Well, this is so, because Bach composed fewer cantatas, and it took longer to have something for at least more occasions than the few from the third year. But as we are in the third year and the third cycle, it's still as expected, no? - It crossed my mind (before you asked) to change that linked article to a table sortable by both performance date and occasion, - I'll see ... --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:32, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thanks for the information. My point is that non-musician readers coming to this article will get confused by the terms such as "3rd year" or "3rd cycle". Bach experts have no confusion. It will help readers if the article provides a brief note helping readers associate cycles to year. For example, a small "efn" footnote could describe how years map to cycles. Noleander (talk) 16:08, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    well, this is new, - in previous articles people seemed to have understood that in his first year on the post he wrote the first cycle of cantatas, and in his second year the second cycle, and in his third year the third cycle. I believe that Background says that, no? "Year" doesn't mean calendar year (but 12 months), because he took office in the middle of the year, but that is said as well. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sources are grouped into three groups:
- Bach Digital (a single source)
- Sources by author
- Other sources
  - It is odd that "Bach Digital" gets its own group. Consider simplifying by combining "Bach Digital" into "Other sources"
    Bach Digital - as you may have seen - is The source, not any other. Compare other FAs such as Easter Oratorio (where admittedly there are many more under the header) --GA

5 singers? The SWF recording in the table is: boy soloist of the Thomanerchor, Nobuko Gamo-Yamamoto, Annelies Westen, Horst Wilhelm, Dieter Slembeck It appears to be naming 5 people. All the other recordings have exactly 4 people. Is it correct?
oh no, - thanks for catching that! - no boy in that recording, must have happened when copying. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:21, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I'm still puzzled by the small amount of material on assessments/reviews that describe the emotion/mood/impact of the piece. Including extensive review/assessment material is common in pop music articles. And when professional musicians talk amongst themselves, impact/mood is front-and-center ... so this article appears deficient to my eyes. However, I gather that articles on classical music tend to bury those kinds of facts down in the individual per-movement sections. I am satisfied that the article complies with WP:FACR. Noleander (talk) 12:32, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! There may be more about moods in general publications about the cantatas, but it would not be about this specific one. For example I heard on radio that Andreas Bomba said (about a then upcoming project to present Bach cantatas at a festival) that regardless of denomination or no faith at all, listeners find a consoling element in his music. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:58, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"in two parts to be performed before and after the sermon."I might say "broken into two parts, performed before and after the sermon.
"broken" sounds negative to me, how about "divided"? --GA

Fine.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:19, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The poem may have existed separately, quoted by the librettist" I might add an "and is being" before the "quoted" (you may not need the comma in that case).
We are in "may be" territory, and can't suddenly say "is". How is this: "The anonymous poem may have existed separately/previously, being quoted by the librettist"? - actually, we might also drop the whole "quoted" clause, because what else? --GA

I guess. Maybe ", and was quoted by the librettist"?

"expresses that God makes the prisons captives,[1] in syllabic declamation.[14]" What does "the prisons captives" mean? It feels like there is either an apostrophe missing or an "s" surplus?
Complicated. This is the translation of a paraphrase of a line in the Bible (of an originally Greek line), "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. The Biblical line was already mentioned in "Text" further up. The Baroque librettist paraphrased "captivity captive" as "prisons captive" (Da die Gefängnisse er selbst gefangen führt = "since he leads the prisons themselves as his captives", - this is the Dellal tranlation, while Jones stayed in his less literal translation closer to the Bible, which means closer to the Greek. We could do the same. What do you think? --GA

That's fine.

That's it.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:53, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 17:37, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Wehwalt (talk) 18:20, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Aza24 – Pending

[edit]

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 02:50, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting (FACR 2c)

Strange "&" before ref 16 Marshall 1972?
oops - fixed --GA
Bach Cantatas Website + Princeton in Braatz 2005 vs Bach Cantatas no Princeton in Oron 2026
no Princeton --GA
What's going on with Quinn 2013? The website is not Bach Cantatas and I don't see that date anywhere on it?
website fixed, the date is in the url, see also first para in the review --GA
Why does Vernier 2026 say "in German"? I'm seeing an English article when I click it
copied and not eliminated, sorry --GA

Reliability (FACR 1c)

No issues, all recent academic publications. The 1970s source could perhaps be improved, but it is simply a relaying of text on the original parts

Coverage (FACR 1c)

Looks solid. Have you checked the Wolff/Koopman: Die Welt der Bach-Kantaten (2006)?

Verifiability (FACR 1c and 1f)

Confused by Märker 1999. We not cite the pages indvididually for each ref? Too much crossover?
So is the Märker ref an excerpt from the book that was put online? Do we know the page range of the original for this section?
Märker is the foreword, one page each in German, English and French, of the Carus edition, and a reader of German would want a different page number than a reader of English. The title page has no number. Would "type=foreword" help? --GA
For the sake of thoroughness, it may be worth a reference for the Note A
It's just an explanation of the abbreviation BWV, which has also been done differently in other cantata articles (and I like this because a missed friend invented it). --GA
Can we cite the Neue Bach-Ausgabe somewhere more directly if your movement table is following it?
That's an interesting new request. The table relies on the Dürr "bible" which relies on the NBA. How can we do that? --GA

Thank you for a thorough look! It is basically a rather old article which I expanded (in some haste that shows) for the upcoming 300th anniversary. Your diligence and expertise is greatly appreciated! Do you have the Wolff book? Could you add from it= --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:37, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Spotchecks – Pending

[edit]

ALT text should be capitalized. Otherwise I see nothing problematic with licencing, placement etc Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:29, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): TheDoctorWho (talk) 11:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Late last year I took a deep dive into the Yellowstone franchise, watching the parent series and both prequels in a little under two months. Since then a sequel has premiered, and another is on the way; but at the time, 1923 was the series that I was most in awe with. From the storytelling to the production value, I became deeply obsessed with the show and realized how underdeveloped Wikipedia's coverage on it was. So I did what any rationale person would do: wrote an article about the second season... first (the first season is next on my list, then improving the parent article). After three months in the draft space, during which I wrote one of the most in-depth articles of my Wikipedia "career", I spent significant time polishing it off through a good article nomination, peer review, and copyedit from the guild. While the PR didn't get much activity, it helped me clear up many of the citation issues that would have arisen here. The result is an article I'm proud to bring to FAC and believe it meets the criteria. I look forward to addressing any comments or concerns the community may have. TheDoctorWho (talk) 11:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave some comments sometime in the next few days. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:33, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Season two was also noted for its positive economic impact in Montana and Texas, and set viewership records" Perhaps re-word this? The viewership records should either be a separate sentence or have changed wording, since it doesn't have a lot to do with the economic impact.

Not super familiar with this kind of cast list formatting, but do cast lists need to be cited when done like this?

Sourced the main cast primarily for the roles. The guest cast, along with the roles they play, appear in the closing credits of the episodes themselves. They should therefore be covered by the same concept as WP:CITEPLOT/WP:PLOTSOURCE I believe, in that the work itself serves as a primary source.

Would it be possible to give some kind of synopsis of season 1 prior to the episode list? As someone who's never watched the show it's very confusing since I have no idea who these characters are or how they got into these situations initially.

In a broader sense, the two seasons are connected closely enough that the brief premise given in the lead is essentially that of the first season as well (obviously just without going into much detail). I did attempt to briefly elaborate in the episode table here and there (why the Dutton ranch is having financial issues, why Zane and Alice are in jail, Teonna's situation and the fact that Spencer and Alex are separated is already mentioned). If you truly think it needs it, I could add a more in-detailed plot of season 1, although I'm not aware of any other featured season list that does and I'm not sure if it would be out of scope for this page?

"In the series' final scene, however, they reconnecting once more, this time in an afterlife" Typo here. Also not sure if in "Despite the title of the series, the end of the second season extends into 1924" 1924 is meant to be italicized or not.

Done on the first part. 1924 is not meant to be italicized as it refers to a year/setting, not a work.

"Roché said he had mixed emotions filming this scene because, although violent, he believed it was well-composed." Not quite sure this sentence is needed, since it doesn't really add much and is a bit confusing.

"Photorealistic creature work was done by Rodeo FX, who created a wolf and a mountain lion; Folks VFX, who added elk; and Outpost VFX, who was responsible for cattle." Commas should be used instead of semi-colons here, since the bits after them are not independent clauses.

What are the reliabilities of JoBlo Movie Network and The Playlist? I would also advise removing Screen Rant, since WP:VALNET sources are considered low quality for usage in FAC.

ScreenRant removed. For JoBlo, there's an about page that clearly lists editorial oversight and (albeit brief), a history of the site. There's been little discussion about it at RSP over the years, but I can see it's been used in several promoted FA's within the last five years (RoboCop, Saving Private Ryan, Terminator 2: Judgement Day, and John Wick), which I believe speaks to it's reliability.

The Playlist similarly has an about page, that mentions an editorial process. The author of the article this page is citing is the editor and chief. Additionally, that author has written for SPIN Magazine, MTV News, and IndieWire has covered both the site, and quoted the author at which point (if the about wasn't convincing enough), we'd likely be approaching subject matter expert territory.

For the multiple citations attributed to the Whitfield storyline, I'd insert the multiple citations after the first sentence, and then distribute relevant citations after the particular reviewers for proper attribution.

@TheDoctorWho: Mostly some minor comments, but this is the bulk of my comments. I'd also go through and make sure you're careful about tensing, since I noticed the article tends to hop between present and past tense a fair bit. Ping me when the above are addressed.

Thank you for the comments, should have time to get to these later today, tomorrow at the latest TheDoctorWho (talk) 10:12, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I haven't checked for tensing yet, but I did address most of your comments. I left a few replies above just to see if it cleared up other concerns, or if not, for further input (mainly around plot and sources). TheDoctorWho (talk) 18:04, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@TheDoctorWho I think that should be everything addressed. Happy to Support since I trust the tensing issue will be addressed (And is not a super big deal all things considered). Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:25, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This has been open for three weeks and has received just the single general support. Unless this nomination makes significant further progress towards a consensus to promote over the next three or four days I am afraid that it is liable to be archived. Gog the Mild (talk) 18:39, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I support this becoming a featured article. I cannot see any major issues with this - the only thing that confused me were that Sources #109 and #110 are listed as "AI Referred" by Cite Unseen, but I think this is a mistake. This seems good to go! DaniloDaysOfOurLives (talk) 19:54, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@DaniloDaysOfOurLives: Quick clarity for you (or anyone else seeing this comment): I did use ChatGPT very sparingly only as part of my research process to find sources for part of this article. I did not use it to generate any text in this article nor did I input any information it gave me. Once I accessed the links it directed me to, I read them in full and verified the reliability of the sites myself. This caused tracking categories in those links, which were the only cause of the "AI Referred" message, but I have now removed those from the URLs. TheDoctorWho (talk) 23:19, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"Season two was developed after its creator and showrunner, Taylor Sheridan, determined that the story needed more episodes to reach a proper conclusion."
"...and is set in Montana, United States, between 1923 and 1924." --> I personally hate offsetting "United States" with a comma – I would phrase this as "Montana, in the United States, between..." – but this is really just a personal preference.

Episode summaries

I will come back to review this when I have finished with the rest.

Development

I'm not sure "executive-produce" is a verb. Perhaps rephrase as "served as executive producers for the series".
"The second season of 1923 cost $22 million per episode ~~to produce~~, totaling $176 million."

Casting

"Harrison Ford and Helen Mirren were both initially contracted only for the first season ~~only~~"
Is there a better word or phrase than "self-tape"?
"Janet Montgomery, Augustus Prew, and Andy Dispensa appeared in the season, playing the characters Hillary, Paul, and Luca, respectively." --> Recommend rephrasing the section in italics, perhaps something like "joined the cast this season" or something similar.
"but he ultimately believed it was his purpose." --> What does that mean?

Writing

"These include the Dutton ranch preparing for a harsh winter, attempts to prevent Whitfield from acquiring the property, dealing with cattle thieves..." --> This section in italics reads a little awkwardly.
"The arc explores his morality and the group power dynamics between him and two sex workers, Christy and Lindy, whom he has been holding hostage, and Lindy becomes his sexual partner." --> Something about this wording sounds awkward.
"Whitfield provides the origin story for the train station a frequent location in Yellowstone where major crimes go unpunished because the area is not populated~~, meaning a jury could not be called~~."
"Another secondary storyline revolves around Geraghty's character's recovery..." --> That double possessive is super awkward.
"for marrying interracially" --> Recommend rephrasing as "for interracial marriage".
"Within both seasons, it was derived from the true story of such schools." --> Both awkwardly written and unclear.
"During this time, she is ~~being~~ pursued..."
"Nieves noted that Cole Brings Plenty was excited for that aspect..." --> Recommend rephrasing/clarifying the section in italics.
"A fictionalized version of Sal Maceo is featured this season after Spencer returns to the United States."
"A new character to the plot is Mamie Fossett, a U.S. Marshal based in Anadarko, Oklahoma, who was also partially based on true events; a marshal of the same name worked in Indian Territory at a time when female law-enforcement officials were uncommon." --> A person is not an event; probably "based on a real person".
"Carpenter attempted to research Fossett's life, but faced difficulty after finding that little had been written about her."
"Although Carpenter's character narrative has her primarily interact with Teonna's..." --> I don't think "Teonna" needs the 's.
"In the season's penultimate episode..."

Production design

"the station's lighting fixtures from the 1920s"
"No snowfall occurred during production, except on the last day"
"~~Sometimes, a combination of the two had to be used, and~~ salt was added to ensure the horses had proper traction." --> Recommend deleting this phrase
"believing costuming to be essential to every character's story"
I'm not sure "co-costume designer" is a real phrase.

Filming

"A week later, they were informed that production had been delayed by the 2023 Writers Guild of America strike."
"Other Texas filming locations included Galveston, Lockhart, and Bartlett, which were made to appear as Fort Worth and Amarillo, Texas, and Anadarko, Oklahoma." --> You might also consider switching "stood in for" in place of "were made to appear as".
"Carpenter's goal was to use her lower vocal register; she stated that the extreme heat in Texas assisted her ~~in this~~, but made filming both interior and exterior scenes uncomfortable."
"It was reported that he received applause from cast and crew afterward."
"A body double was used for these scenes."
"Prior to filming ~~them~~, Geraghty researched the symptoms of head injuries so he could properly portray the signs."

Post-production

"For Pete's horse accident, WeFX made digital doubles of both Guana and his horse."

Impact

"business owners criticized the Montana state legislature for not continuing film-tax credits so as to ensure that Montana remain the primary production location."
"It was estimated that production of the second season would spend over $51 million in the Austin economy upon its move there." --> The section in italics reads awkwardly.
"It was believed that hotels and businesses would benefit as well."
"In the Greater Houston area, the program was one of two major productions, the other being season two of the Netflix series Mo, that was attributed to a 138% economic increase from 2023 to 2024, with a reported $27 million spent there." --> The section in italics reads awkwardly.

Critical response

JoBlo Movie Network is a real thing?!?
"saying that while he frequently writes similar narratives, they always feel distinct from each other."
"Andrew Murray considered season two to be too melodramatic and concluded that it is closer to a soap opera than a period drama."
"Anita Singh to some extent agreed with this sentiment, but said that it is still an elegant narrative."
"Kieran Fisher with /Film said that unlike other violent storylines, such as those at the boarding school which have a stronger purpose..."
"and said that it would have better suited Sheridan's 2011 horror film, Vile."

User:TheDoctorWho: I will review the episode summaries in a little bit, but this should give you something to work on. Please let me know when you've had a chance to examine my comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:55, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: I believe that I have addressed all your comments, rewording or clarifying things that you left in italics and adding or remove words/phrases where suggested. (Yes JoBlo Movie Network is a real thing). Thank you for the review! TheDoctorWho (talk) 23:15, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Episode summaries

"He visits a speakeasy, where McDowell informs him that Zane and Alice remain separated and in jail for miscegenation."
"After escaping from her boarding school, Renaud and Kent continue hunting Teonna..." --> The way this sentence is structured, it sounds like Renaud and Kent are the ones who escaped from a boarding school, when I know that is not the case.

"They discover that a hungry and likely rabid wolf has slaughtered the ranch's chickens"
"the wolf bites Elizabeth, who is later forced to take a rabies vaccine."
"Despite Maceo's warm hospitality toward Spencer for having saved Luca,"

"where their doctor informs them that Zane is suffering from a subdural hematoma"

"The sheriff of Fort Worth picks up Spencer and demands that Spencer continue delivering the whiskey so he can find the destination."

"where Anders informs them that Teonna has fled across a long stretch of wide-open plains."
"After discovering that Alexandra's connecting train had been canceled, Hillary and Paul invite her to join them."

"After traveling hundreds of miles through freezing conditions, Alexandra awakens to discover they have run out of fuel during the night, far from civilization, and that Hillary and Paul have died from hypothermia."

User:TheDoctorWho: Please let me know when you have had a chance to examine these comments. Bgsu98 (Talk) 20:27, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98: Done! TheDoctorWho (talk) 23:14, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You don’t seem to like relative pronouns. 😉 Bgsu98 (Talk) 23:38, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I am going to suggest that you read the article again carefully to make sure you are using the correct verb tense (past v. present), as I get that plot summaries are generally rendered in the present, whereas production details are rendered in the past. Bgsu98 (Talk) 00:06, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Comments to come Olliefant (she/her) 05:50, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review

[edit]

Image sectioning is fine. File:1923 season 2.jpg should have its NFCC#8 rationale capitalized. File:Anadarko 1901.jpg has a broken source. File:Ben Richardson at the Drinking Buddies premiere.jpg is there no better image? Banal ALT text if at all. What is "Taylor, Drew (March 15, 2026). "Every Taylor Sheridan Show, Ranked from Yee-Haw To Hell Naw". Archived from the original on March 28, 2026. Retrieved March 28, 2026."? What makes https://www.lonestarlive.com/, https://tasteofcountry.com/, and https://www.theupcoming.co.uk/2025/02/23/1923-season-two-show-review/ a reliable source? https://www.atlasofwonders.com/2022/12/where-was-1923-filmed.html has a very banal About Us so I must ask what makes it a reliable source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:20, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:43, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the logistics of Operation Forager, the capture of the Mariana Islands during World War II. While I have written about the logistics of the campaigns in North West Europe and the South West Pacific, this is the first article on Wikipedia about the logistics of one of the campaigns in Micronesia. Due to the vast size of the Pacific Ocean, just getting there with what was needed was an achievement in itself. Subsequently, the islands were developed into naval and air bases from which the final campaigns against Japan were launched. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 18:43, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed this article's recent A-class nomination, and it seems to have been improved since. I'd like to offer the following comments:

"carrying 5,000 different items, such as toilet paper" - suggest deleting everything after 'items' as this example seems oddly specific for the lead
Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This doesn't seem to have been done? Nick-D (talk) 09:43, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted again. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 11:26, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Marine divisions were authorized to have a shore party - suggest deleting "to have"
Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"but the United States military remained on the island" - in what capacity?
The US Navy administered the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands until 1951. Added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Were any of the construction or logistics units deployed to the islands African-American units? This isn't noted at present if so, but would be worth noting given the racial policies of the time meant that it was the main way African Americans contributed to the Pacific War. Nick-D (talk) 04:46, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. African-Americans served in base companies in the Pacific Area. An African-American sailor appears in the image at the top of the page. Two African-American Seabee units were organised: the 34th and 80th Naval Constriction Battalions but the 80th served in the Atlantic and the 34th on Guadalcanal and Okinawa. The Army's 1882nd Engineer Aviation Battalion served on Saipan in 1945. Race relations were very poor, as demonstrated by the Agana Race Riot. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:48, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My comments have now been addressed, and I'm happy to support this nomination. Nick-D (talk) 11:39, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Background

MSincccc (talk) 05:47, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Naval logistics (Shipping)

Naval logistics (Food and water)

Naval logistics (Fuel)

each of which had three oilers, escorted by at least two destroyers or destroyer escorts

Naval logistics (Ammunition)

MSincccc (talk) 04:34, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ship-to-shore

The lead uses "LVT" without mentioning the full form whereas the body gives the full name (LVT) twice. How about doing so once each in the lead and body?
Added to the lead; remove duplicate from the body. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:42, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
five days' of supply
You could split a few of the longer sentences, but the section is otherwise fine as it is.

I intend to conclude the review by tomorrow. MSincccc (talk) 16:54, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Base development

"so in order to not interrupt fighter operations" → "so as not to interrupt fighter operations"
Maintenance Unit 515, arrived with the assault
The 7,000-by-150-foot (2,134 by 46 m) was sealed
North Field was commissioned on 3 February 1945,
Guam hosted 100,000 Vietnamese refugees in 1975,

Bottom line

Three weeks have passed, and only one general support has been received. Unless this nomination shows significant progress toward a consensus for promotion within the next three or four days, I'm afraid it will have to be archived. FrB.TG (talk) 17:13, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed the article's images at the A-class review (here) and there have been no changes to images in the article since then (in other words, the article passes for image licensing and related issues). The only unresolved issue is for File:Initial supply by classes for Saipan, Sicily, Luzon and Normandy.jpg, which could be improved with a color, .svg version, but I note that Hawkeye requested assistance at the Graphics Lab and has yet to receive a response. Parsecboy (talk) 11:58, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Hawkeye7, happy to review the nomination. I don't know much about the topic itself, so I'll stick to prose comments.

transferred to DUKWs or Landing Vehicles, Tracked, (LVT)s on the reef should there be a comma between "Tracked" and "(LVT)s"? The linked article does not use a comma.
I spent some time thinking about this. It is a parenthetical comma. These can always be replaced by parentheses, but the sources always use the comma (as does the article). The "s" should be inside the parentheses - that is an error. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- an LST broached and Landing Vehicles, Tracked, (LVTs) and same question as above. Also for consistency: should it be "(LVT)s" or "(LVTs)"?
  LVTs. The purist would use LVT rather than LVTs, but that reads awkwardly to me. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- similar question for Landing Craft, Tank, (LCTs), Landing Ships, Tank (LSTs), landing craft, vehicle, personnel, (LCVPs) and Landing Craft, Mechanized (LCMs); should "landing craft, vehicle, personnel" be uppercase?
  Uppercased for consistency. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Operation Forager, the U.S. invasion of the Mariana Islands during World War II involved the add a comma after "World War II" to mark the end of the relative clause
Added comma. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The V Amphibious Corps Headquarters ordered 25 to 50 percent of all supplies and two to five units of fire of ammunition be loaded on pallets. There is something wrong with this sentence. Maybe "ordered that" or "ammunition to be loaded"?
In military-speak we would not use it, but added. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This proved to not only be inefficient in the use of cargo space, but presented difficulty I'm not sure that it is strictly speaking wrong, but there is something odd about this construction. Maybe: "proved not only to be ... but also to present ..."
It is grammatically incorrect: verb/tense disagreement. Native speakers of English like ourselves often sense when something is wrong but struggle to explain why. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
resupply was from the West Coast though the bases in Hawaii should it be "through"?
Yes. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
were drawn for Army stocks while replace "for" with "from"
Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
with the depots months in advance remove "the" since this seems to be a general, non-specific reference
I think it is correct. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Chemical Decontamination Company, who had no training replace "who" with "which"
Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Copahee shuttled back and forth between the Marianas and Eniwetok. On 7 July, it took back captured Japanese aircraft should it be "she" rather than "it" (referring to the ship Copahee)?
For consistency, yes. See Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Archive (ships as "she") for the debate on this contentious topic. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't aware that this is such a controversial subject that it has its own overview page of past discussions. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:15, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Solace was full to capacity "at full capacity" sounds more natural
Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
to take on a capacity of 585 cases can we leave out "a capacity of"?
Deleted. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
loaded in a LCT and "an LCT"?
Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
the 34th, 152nd and 1341st Engineer Combat battalions should "battalions" be uppercase? I guess it would be uppercase for a single one (e.g. 1341st Engineer Combat Battalion) but I'm not sure about plural cases.
Yes, it should be. Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
target of five days' of supply and desired ten days' of supply remove the possessive "'" after "days"?
The apostrophe is correct. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
marston mat does it require upper case?
Uppercased. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fuel had to initially be supplied in drums. putting "initially" at the end may sound more natural.
Split infinitive? Re-worded as I feel that I have used "initially" too often. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Race relations between white and African-American personnel was strained, replace "was" with "were"
Corrected. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Phlsph7 (talk) 13:37, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this! Much appreciated. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. A few more:

Phlsph7 (talk) 17:17, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A few more on the way to finishing line:

A crucial problem was the provision of sufficient shipping to maintain the fleet and ground force. In the event, a shortage of ships and cargo space forced units to leave some vehicles and unit equipment behind, and some units had to travel on separate ships from their equipment. I think it would sound better without the "In the event".
Unloading was facilitated by the use of wooden pallets, but not all cargo ships had the space or equipment to accommodate them, and on Guam the reef prevented landing craft from directly accessing the beach and required stores to be transferred to DUKWs or Landing Vehicles, Tracked, (LVTs) on the reef. I would turn the clause starting with "on Guam" into a separate sentence since it presents a new idea.
Resupply direct from the United States was I think "Direct resupply from..." or "Resupply directly from..." would sound more natural

Generally speaking, the prose is effective and manages to convey many details. In some cases, I had the impression that the focus on details made me miss the bigger picture. In part, this is probably because I'm not familiar with this type of topic and I'm not sure how to best address this issue. Correct me if I'm wrong, but on a high level, there seem to be three key aspects to the operation logistics: moving the items across the water while sustaining the fleet at sea, getting the items from the sea to the land, and building bases. Maybe adding a summary sentence along these lines to the first lead paragraph would be helpful. Similar short high-level passages could be added at the start of each of the sections "Naval logistics", "Ship-to-shore", and "Base development" to better orient the reader regarding the main developments. You probably know better than me whether that would be a good idea. Phlsph7 (talk) 08:37, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): AA (talk) 17:40, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the English international cricketer Dimitri Mascarenhas. Born to Sri Lankan parents in London, Mascarenhas spent his youth in Australia, before securing a contract in English county cricket with Hampshire, who he played for between 1996 and 2013. He later captained Hampshire with success in limited-overs cricket. He was best known as a limited-overs specialist, playing both One Day International and Twenty20 International cricket for England, playing in two T20 World Cups and notably hitting Indian bowling Yuvraj Singh for five consecutive sixes in an ODI - in the process scoring the must runs in an ODI over for England. His all-round abilities as a bowler and an attacking batsman drew the attention of the Rajasthan Royals, captained by Shane Warne (who played alongside and captained Mascarenhas at Hampshire) with Mascarenhas becoming the first English player to take part in the Indian Premier League. Setting a precedent that would be followed by countless other English cricketers, Mascarenhas is considered a "T20 revolutionary" and featured in several T20 leagues around the world. All feedback for this article greatly received. AA (talk) 17:40, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

―Howard • 🌽³³ 21:48, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How annoying. I'll remove the photo until it is confirmed, though I don't hold much hope - the uploader hasn't been active on Commons since 2011 and Flickr since 2014. AA (talk) 22:40, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've added an additional picture and used the |upright parameter to make the image a little bigger. There is another image option, though it is poorer detail. Both show the ground when Mascarenhas scored his first century, and before it was redeveloped and increased in size. AA (talk) 22:58, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Additional review:

File:England vs Sri Lanka.jpg: OK (source on Flickr says CC BY-NC, but a 2006 Commons reviewer confirmed it was CC BY at the time; I am therefore adding c:Template:Flickr-change-of-license). ―Howard • 🌽³³ 10:01, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Early life

When he was a child, his parents emigrated again, to Melbourne in Australia.

His father ran a chain of successful fast-food restaurants there

You could drop the link to "batting".

having been impressed by him.
- You could drop this phrase, since the previous clause already formed this idea.

"fostering ambitions" → "with ambitions"

Well, we finally have a modern-day cricketer at FAC. How about Stokes, Buttler, Bethell, Root or Brook in future?

More to follow. MSincccc (talk) 07:25, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cricket career (Early years)

"He played minor counties cricket for Dorset in 1996" → "He played minor counties cricket for Dorset that year"

Linking "7/64" to Five-wicket haul could mislead the surface reader to think that the figure itself had an article on it.

with Mascarenhas claiming 16 wickets in his first two matches.
- Wouldn't "taking" be more natural and common among general readers?

"he was afflicted with a back injury" → "he suffered a back injury" (A suggestion)

and with the bat scored 645 runs at an average of 28.04,
- How about dropping "with the bat"?

Apart from Early years which is a level-3 heading, all others are level-4, causing them to come under "Early years". I suppose that's not your intention.

Could we include at least one picture of Mascarenhas in the article? No worries, if not (since I did not come across any on Commons).

Comment. I was surprised there are no pictures of him freely avaliable. Annoying the original photo in the infobox seems to have been uploaded by someone who nicked the photo from elsewhere. I asked a few weeks back on WP:CRIC if anyone had photos of him, as some of the project members went to T20 finals day's in the early 2010s, but nobody responded to say they had any :( AA (talk) 19:41, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 08:41, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

First century

His Championship appearances were limited by a back injury sustained in a Championship match in May, keeping him out throughout June.

- You could avoid repeating "Championship" in the sentence.
He was appointed Hampshire's T20 captain in 2007
- Do we need more than two links to "captain" (one each in the lead and article body)?

Comment. I tend to treat the lead and article as two separate entities that compliment one-another. I tend to link important terms in the lead, especially here with Mascarenhas having been Hampshire's captain. AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"taking one five-wicket haul" → "including a/one five-wicket haul"

"in a 46 runs victory" → "in a 46-run victory"

"a second placed finish" → "a second-place finish"

Do we have finer alternatives for title of this sub-section?

Done. Funny you mention this. I have been unhappy with that sub-section title for a while, been bugging me. He really becomes established as Hampshire's main all-rounder during the period the section covers, so I have gone with "Established all-rounder". How does that sound? AA (talk) 20:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 09:04, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

International debut

with his all-round performance in the first of 31 runs from 14 balls, including four consecutive sixes from Jeetan Patel's bowling,[67] and 2 for 19 from 4 overs contributing to England's victory by 32 runs and earning him man-of-the-match.
- You could rephrase this to make it easier for a general reader to understand.

Done. How does this read now? "He played in both T20I matches that opened the series. In the first, he scored 31 runs from 14 balls, hitting four consecutive sixes off Jeetan Patel's bowling, and took 2 for 19 from 4 overs. His all-round performance earned him man-of-the-match in England's 32-run victory."

Twenty20 revolutionary

Mascarenhas played for the Rajasthan Royals in the 2010 IPL season, but injured his Achilles in his second match against Delhi Daredevils, forcing him to return home from the tournament;[85] this caused him to miss the beginning of the English season and ruled him out of the 2010 World Twenty20, having been named in the initial 30-man squad.
- You could split this sentence.

"taking 5 wickets at an average of 30.40" → "taking five wickets at an average of 30.40"

- It's more common to spell the number if it's under ten.

"expletive laden Tweet" → "expletive-laden tweet"

"He had nursed torn tendons" → "He nursed torn tendons"

"defeat to Lancashire" → "defeat by Lancashire"

"During the course of the competition" → "During the competition"

Retirement

"In July, Mascarenhas had announced" → "In July, Mascarenhas announced"

Playing style and statistics

I would suggest converting this into a section itself rather than including it under Career as has been done for many players.

"being able to score quickly to accelerate the total" → "being able to score quickly to accelerate the scoring"

"which assisted with accelerating an innings" → "which helped to accelerate an innings"

"remaining so until" → "remaining so until it was"

"inclusive of T20Is" → "including T20Is"

AssociateAffiliate I look forward to your response and intend to conclude my review soon. I hope that my comments so far have been helpful, and I have made a few minor revisions along the way. MSincccc (talk) 07:40, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Coaching

"choosing not to renew his contract for a second season" → "choosing not to renew his contract"

Personal life

None, except optional stylistic tweaks.

Comment. Be nice to have less "Mascarenhas" in that section, but probably unavoidable given that Warne and Hurley are mentioned in prior sentences, so "he" wouldn't be correct to use. AA (talk) 21:26, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line

Thanks for the review, much appreciated. One or two things happening over the next few days, but will attempt to work my way through! Cheers again, AA (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc found myself having some spare time this evening, so have gone through your comments. Please find above my responses, and thanks again for taking the time to review :) AA (talk) 21:22, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@AssociateAffiliate I will support the nomination. It would be great to have a T20 era player reach featured status. MSincccc (talk) 04:50, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your support and taking the time to review. I wonder if we have any T20 era players that are FAs... I count four on this list (Collingwood, Gilchrist, Kieswetter, Trescothick). AA (talk) 20:08, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here from my talk page. I'll confess that I've never warmed much to the T20 format, but as an Australian I can hardly say no to a bit of Shane Warne. At first glance, this looks like another nicely put together cricket biography. I'll get started on my review soon. – Michael Aurel (talk) 00:17, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Let's get underway:

My first thought is that it might be nice to have an image of Mascarenhas. I'm guessing that this has to do with the red link File:Dimitri Mascarenhas.jpg that I spot above? Copyright is always a headache, but do you think it'd be possible to put something together?

Comment. I've searched high and low for a free image of him, and I know some Wikiproject Cricket members have been to T20 finals days back in the early 2010s where Mascarenhas played, but none of them had photos of him. Sadly, think I might have reached a dead end there. AA (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Adrian Dimitri Mascarenhas (born 30 October 1977) is an English former international cricketer who played One Day International (ODI) and Twenty20 International (T20I) cricket for England – No genuine issues here, but we do have "international" three times: as the last two are part of names, I think only the first one can be omitted.

played ... cricket for England, alongside a 17-year domestic career in England with Hampshire. – Hmm: does one say that one plays "alongside" a domestic career? ("played ... alongside a 17-year" almost led me to think we might be introducing a "17-year-old" person!) Perhaps go for something like "cricket for England, and English county cricket for Hampshire"? It's worth noting that we don't give the duration of his international career, and we can add back "17 years" lower down in the lead if we want. While you're at it, you might link county cricket.

Done. Now reads: "...is an English former cricketer who played One Day International (ODI) and Twenty20 International (T20I) cricket for England, and county cricket for Hampshire." I haven't reintroduced the "17 years" into the lead, as the lead mentions his debut in 1996 and his retirement in 2013, so the 17 years seems a bit redundant. I've also linked "county cricket". AA (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is (I promise!) the final one about the opening sentence. We have "England"/"English" three times: might it be possible to remove one?

From a Bharatha Sri Lankan family, Mascarenhas was born in England in Chiswick. – Perhaps "born in Chiswick, London"? I think specifying the city might be handy for non-Brits.

While playing club cricket, ... to play cricket in England. After playing one match ... would play for Hampshire – We use "play"/"playing" four times in two sentences: perhaps swap out the third for something like "After a single appearance in minor counties ..."?

Mascarenhas made his senior debut for Hampshire in 1996, aged 18; he would play for Hampshire until 2013, making 195 first-class, 237 one-day and 74 Twenty20 (T20) appearances for the county. – We have "for Hampshire" twice as well as "the county"; I'd replace the second "for Hampshire" with "the county" and remove the latter phrase from the end.

winning several one-day and T20 titles. It was in one-day and T20 cricket that he excelled as an attacking all-rounder. – Maybe something like "titles; in these formats he excelled as an attacking all-rounder"?

In 2008, he became the first English cricketer to play in the Indian Premier League, leading him to be considered a "T20 revolutionary" due to his participation in the nascent years of franchise cricket – Hmm. I think we're explaining why he's considered this in two ways ("leading him to be considered" and "due to his participation"); I think removing one of the causal links would work here.
One other thought: who called him this? Or this more of a general paraphrase of opinions surrounding him at the time?

He held the record for the most runs in an over in an ODI for England, with 30, scored off Yuvraj Singh against India in 2007. – The tense here led me for a moment to think that he held the record at the time he debuted. I'm assuming it's in the past tense because he no longer holds it? If so, perhaps go for "In that year, he broke the record ...".
30, scored off Yuvraj Singh against India in 2007 – I think "scored off" might be a tad informal: maybe something like "scored againt Yuvraj Singh's bowling while playing India"?

Done. Now reads: "In that year, he established the record for the most runs in an over in an ODI for England, with 30, scored against Yuvraj Singh when playing against India." AA (talk) 22:17, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Having failed to recover from injury, he retired from playing following the 2013 English season. – I think "from playing" can be omitted here.

Mascarenhas moved into coaching after his retirement. – Perhaps connect this to the previous sentence. For example: "season, moving into coaching"?

He coached Otago in 2014, – Per MOS:NOFORCELINK, I'd maybe add something like "the New Zealand first-class team" here, as this is the first time we've mentioned this country.

Dimitri Adrian Mascarenhas was born in Chiswick on 30 October 1977 – We had "Adrian Dimitri Mascarenhas" in the lead and the infobox. Unless he swapped his first and middle names at some point, I'm guessing they're around the wrong way here?

Terribly pedantic, but the image caption Mascarenhas scored the first century ... technically requires a full stop, as it's a complete sentence.

Ditto for the other two image captions. Also, consider switching out "off" in "hit five consecutive sixes off", per above.

born in Chiswick on 30 October 1977 – Similarly to above, I think it might be worth specifying that this is in London.

They emigrated to England in the mid-1970s. – Was this before Dimitri's birth? (I think 1977 is about on the edge of "mid-1970s".) Also, this sentence is a bit short: perhaps connect it with a neighbour?

When he was a child, ... He initially grew up there, playing cricket at under-12 level for Ringwood, before the family relocated to Perth – Most people grow up when they're a child, so I'd consider removing the first phrase of the second sentence, and possibly connecting it with the previous sentence.

In Perth, he played club cricket for Melville. – Katich or Mascarenhas?

I'd also remove "In Perth", as I'd say we're already situated there, and I'd consider adding some dates (is he older than 14 at this point, for example?).

He captained Western Australia at both under 17 and 19 levels – I think hyphens should go in the mix here.

at both under 17 and 19 levels, with him having ambitions to play for Australia. – "and hoped to play for Australia", maybe?

Coming to England, Mascarenhas joined Bournemouth and helped them win the 1996 Southern Cricket League. – "In England", maybe? I think it could otherwise sound as though he won the competition while he was on the way there.

played minor counties cricket for Dorset that year, making one appearance against Cornwall in the Minor Counties Championship – While this is definitely true, judging by the lead what's more important than him playing once against Cornwall is that he only played one game in total in this format. A comma after "appearance", I think, would imply this.

he took bowling figures of 7 for 64 in Cornwall's first innings. – It might be handy to explain this a little more: I think some readers won't understand that the 64 here represents runs, and some might not even be totally clear that the 7 represents wickets. You could also consider adding a brief explanation of "innings" in brackets, per MOS:NOFORCELINK.
He began playing for the Hampshire Second XI in the season, and made his senior debut, aged 18, – By "senior debut", I think we mean his debut in the First XI? My hesitation here is that I'm not sure everyone will catch this distinction on first read. "second team" and "first team" don't sound entirely right to me, but maybe something like that will make things clearer here?

Done. I've worded it as "second team" and "first team". Been scratching my head as to whether there is another way to word this, and I'm not sure there is, without getting too wordy! AA (talk)

Two days after his one-day debut, Mascarenhas made – Maybe "List A"? I'll confess that I spent a moment perplexed about what "one-day debut" meant, and whether it's any different to multiple-day debuts!

Done. Have swapped out "one-day" for "List A"; the prior mention of "List A one-day cricket" maintains the useage of one-day throughout the article when referring to that format. AA (talk) 08:34, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mascarenhas made his first-class debut against Glamorgan at Southampton in the County Championship, – I'd consider whether it's worthwhile putting in brackets or something that first-class matches span multiple days, to make clear that the different between List A and first-class is one of format rather than level.

taking 6 for 88 in Glamorgan's first innings, the best figures by – I think we might still need to help the reader along a little: maybe specify "wickets" and "runs", or add "bowling" in somewhere?

A second Championship appearance against Kent followed, with Mascarenhas – I think this could make it sound as though this was his second game against Kent. Maybe "A second Championship appearance followed, against Kent, ..."?
played in all of Hampshire's matches in both first-class and one-day cricket – Very small, but how about "Hampshire's first-class and one-day matches"?

Done. Per your suggestion.

In 17 first-class matches, he took 30 wickets at an average of 33.33, and – We used "match"/"matches" twice in the previous sentence, so I'd go for "appearances" here.

Done. Per your suggestion.

His 63 runs against Leicestershire in May helped Hampshire avoid an innings defeat, having earlier – I'd consider adding a brief explanation of "innings defeat", as the linked page doesn't seem to explain the concept anywhere near the top.

His 63 runs against Leicestershire in May helped Hampshire avoid an innings defeat, having earlier shared in a partnership of 114 runs with Adrian Aymes for the fifth wicket in their first innings. – Hmm. "having earlier" is suggesting to me that the 63 runs came in the second innings, and that he scored around the same amount in the first? Or were the 63 runs scored as part of this partnership?

Done. I can see that implication! So I have reworded it: "His 63 runs in the second innings against Leicestershire in May helped Hampshire avoid an innings defeat, having earlier shared in a partnership of 114 runs with Adrian Aymes for the fifth wicket in their first innings." Hopefully that's made it a bit more clearer that the partnership with Aymes came in the first innings? AA (talk) 22:49, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

semi-final of the NatWest Trophy against Lancashire he demonstrated his all-round abilities, with Mascarenhas being adjudged man-of-the-match for his – I'd omit "with Mascarenhas".

No hyphens in "man of the match", I think.

for his half-century (73 runs) and figures of 3 for 28 – Something like "for his 73 runs and 3 wickets for 28"?

Mascarenhas' back problems arose again midway through the 1999 season, keeping him – Technically, I think MOS:POSS prefers a s's here.

This is down to the end of the "Early years" section. There's nothing consequential to quibble with here, and my only lingering wonder is whether some of the more technical and statistical stuff might be a bit hard to follow for readers unacquainted with cricket. I shall head onwards to the later parts of the article soon. – Michael Aurel (talk) 16:34, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the first part of your review. I've addressed some points (I'll cross off on here tomorrow), for now time for bed! Thanks again :) AA (talk) 21:31, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Aurel I'm on nights at work for the next few days, apologies if actioning slows down! I have a few footnotes to add to the article! AA (talk) 12:34, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No problem at all. I'm not exactly a paragon of promptness myself! – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:57, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:19, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hopefully, this time it will work. Misti is a volcano in Peru, a nearly perfect cone which is among the most dangerous volcanoes in the world. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:19, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

―Howard • 🌽³³ 21:31, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the images. Going by the mentions of ALT text at Template talk:Portal I doubt that there'll be consensus to add ALT text to these modules. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:19, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is acceptable to me. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 13:27, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The previous nomination was archived on 17 Jan 2026. A log of the changes to the article since then is here. That change log shows a new source, and quite a bit of copy editing.

I reviewed this article in the prior nomination, and supported it then. Regardless, I'll review it again here, from a fresh perspective.

Looking at the prior FAC nomination, there were two "cannot support" reviews, from User:Esculenta: and User:RoySmith. Both gave prose quality as an explanation, saying it was "prose to be clunky and not of a professional standard" and "I find the overall style to not meet WP:FACR’s 'engaging' requirement". So, I'll try to focus on that.

Misti is considered one of the most dangerous volcanoes in the world, as it lies only 12 kilometres (7.5 mi) from Arequipa. The city's population exceeds one million people... - Some readers may think the word "dangerous" by itself means the volcano has killed large numbers of people in the past. Is it better to say "potentially dangerous" or "potentially deadly" or something like that? *: I am not sure that most people would make that assumption. Also, if my understanding is correct, one shouldn't use templates like {{green}} in FAC as it can break the WP:PEIS limit Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the FAC template/PEIS rules are pretty confusing. I think the FAC page says that color templates are acceptable: "For technical reasons, templates that are acceptable are ... templates such as Template:green that apply colours to text and are used to highlight examples without altering fonts." If I'm interpreting that wrong, let me know. Noleander (talk) 13:42, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@FAC coordinators: JoJo Eumerus mobile (main talk) 08:33, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, the green template is acceptable. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:27, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

... the mummies on Misti form the largest known Inca human sacrifice. The word "largest" is a bit ambiguous: By volume? By hectares? By body count? Do the sources suggest a more precise word that would eliminate all ambiguity?
Body count, I don't know of any better word but then English isn't my first language. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It is unclear whether the Inca were the first Altiplano political entities to influence the region or whether previous cultures played a role. Phrase "political entities" sounds odd in that first location. Consider "culture", or "civilization", or "peoples" And "influence" is very vague: what exactly are the sources trying to say? Is it Scholars are not certain if the Inca were the first peoples to settle in the region around Misti. or Scholars are not certain if the Inca were the first civilization to inhabit the region around Misti. ?
Went with civilizations. Narrowing down "influence" probably isn't going to work; even Love 2017 doesn't specify that much. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A second station ("Mt. Blanc Station") was after 1888 built at the volcano’s base; Grammar seems wrong there ... unless that is some British dialect I'm not familiar with. My ears want to hear "was built sometime after 1888".
Recast this. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A range of distances, with two units: extends for roughly 1,000 kilometres (620 mi)-1,500 kilometres (930 mi) The Template:convert template includes a built-in range feature, described here that should automatically display a more elegant pattern like 1,000 –1,500 km (620 –930 miles) . The latter is a lot better for readers, in my opinion.
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
n-dash vs hyphen? Same sentence as above: MOS:RANGE says to use a n-dash (not hyphen) for number ranges. If you use the Template:convert template range feature, it displays the n-dash automatically.
Is there a script that can do that change? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The volcano is about 20 kilometres (12 mi) wide[70] and rises abruptly[i] from the surrounding terrain. The footnote [i] says: The volcano rises about 3.5 kilometres (2.2 mi) above Arequipa. Would the footnote be better in the body text? The sentence could simply state the width & height of the volcano in km.
Did the recast. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Continuing with the above sentence: The word "abrupt" is vague & ambiguous in this context. Does it mean steep? The slope was presented above as only 30%. Does it mean "tall"? Abrupt not a good word for "tall". Does it means that there is a cliff or escarpment at the base of the volcano? If so, say so. Consider eliminating the word "abrupt" or add words explaining precisely what is meant.
"Abruptly" in the sense that it's not a gentle ascent, but a sudden transition in slope/terrain. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The snowline lies above the summit. During December–August, snow can cover an area of 1–7 square kilometres... The word "snowline" is ambiguous .. it can mean the current (today) snowline, which varies a lot; or it can mean the permanent snowline (above which is snow-covered all year). From context, I'm guessing this article means "permanent snowline" ... but why make the reader do that work? Consider re-wording to simply say There are no permanent snowfields on Misti. During December–August, snow can cover an area ...
Expanded this a bit. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
List of recent eruptions: Radiocarbon dating has identified eruptions 8,140, 6,390, 5,200, 4,750, 3,800 and 2,050 years ago; the 3,800 eruption deposited fallout on Nevado Mismi more than 90 kilometres (56 mi) northwest of Misti. The Global Volcanism Program lists eruptions in 310 BCE ± 100 years, 2230 BCE ± 200 years, 3510 BCE ± 150 years, 4020 BCE ± 200 years, 5390 BCE ± 75 years and 7190 BCE ± 150 years. This uses two units of time: "years ago" and BCE. That is not helpful for readers. If the sources use two units of time, readers will want the WP editors to convert to a single unit. (Exception: times long ago may use different units than recent times ... but this green text above is only a single span of time).
I must confess that I don't remember the conversion formula. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Continuning with the above: I'm confused why the "Radiocarbon dating" gives on list of eruptions, and Global Volcanism Program gives another list. If there is an important reason why the two lists are different, the article should explain. If there is no good reason, it is simply confusing to the reader: readers don't care what primary sources the WP editor relied on: just give us the summary information. If the two sources are both valid but came up with different sets of dates: just silently merge the two lists (and maybe discuss the two sources in a footnote).
It's a pretty banal reason: Two distinct sources with different format. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Did you make any changes to the article for this issue? Noleander (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Contradictory statements? Most sources state that there is no clear evidence of eruptions after the arrival of the Spaniards, while the Global Volcanism Program reports a last eruption in 1985 and INGEMMET says it's the third-most active volcano of Peru. Mudflows descended the southern valleys until the 17th century. The mountain is sometimes reported to be "smoking" at its summit, including water vapour clouds. Phreatic eruptions may have taken place in 1577, 2 May 1677, 9 July 1784, 28 July 1787 and 10 October 1787
1. If "most sources" say no eruption, but only one (GVP) says there were ... readers don't want to know the identity of that one outlier source ... just say "most sources" and leave it at that.
2. "INGEMMET says it's the third-most active volcano " is in the same sentence as "no clear evidence of eruptions", but "active" can mean just seismic activities and other stuff not qualifying as an eruption... why mix eruptions with activity in a single sentence? Consider separating into two sentences: eruptions & activity.
  That's a good point - but in this case, GVP (most important English language source on global volcanism, perhaps most important source on global volcanism period) INGEMMET (most important Spanish language and Peru-relevant source) and "most sources" are all relevant so we need to cite them all. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
3. "Phreatic eruptions may have taken..." Here the article tells the reader that reliable sources state that eruptions are likely to have happened after the Spaniards arrived ... seems to contradict the "Most sources state that there is no clear evidence of eruptions after .." in the 1st sentence. If "Phreatic eruptions" are minor and don't qualify as "full" eruptions, okay, but that needs to be explained. Alternatively, if the article is trying to distinguish between "eruptions proven by solid evidence (none)" and "speculative eruptions that have poor/no evidence (several)", that is okay, but needs to be clarified.
  I am not sure that everyone regards phreatic eruptions as bona fide volcanic activity. And yes, they are hard to prove empirically but I don't have a source for that. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:33, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That's all I have for now. Noleander (talk) 23:08, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support on MOS and prose. I have not done a source check or image check. Noleander (talk) 13:11, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jo-Jo, I'll review this. I'll warn you my reviews aren't too speedy but I'll try not to be too slow either. ;-) It's late tonight so only time for a couple of things tonight that jumped out at me just now.

The name "Misti" may derive from either Quechuan or Spanish. It means 'mixed', 'mestizo' or 'white' and may refer to the volcano's snow cover. Indigenous names include Putina,[1][2] meaning 'mountain that growls'[3] – You've got double quotes for "Misti" and single quotes for some other terms. Scanning down farther I see double quotes for "smoking" and "tornillos". Dunno if there are other instances of single or double, but please check.
Aye, single quote for the translation and double quote for the technical term and/or quote, hence the discrepancy. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:15, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Misti is the hausberg (house mountain) of Arequipa,[14] features on its seal,[15] and the residents view themselves as the offspring of the mountain." Would be nice to use a parallel structure in this sentence. (Currently the second clause, separated by a comma from the first, carries over the subject from the first, but the third clause, also separated by a comma, introduces a new subject.) More to follow, thanks! Moisejp (talk) 07:26, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think there is a better place for this, sorry. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:15, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"There are numerous dams on the Rio Chili, including the Aguada Blanca Dam and reservoir north of the volcano, El Frayle (both north of the volcano)" - I'm a bit confused here by what the "both" is referring to. Area all of Aguada Blanca Dam, the reservoir, and El Frayle north of the volcano? Or is El Frayle the name of the reservoir? In any case, the repetition of "north of the volcano" seems confusing. Moisejp (talk) 01:45, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This seems a bit repetitive to me—maybe one of the two mentions could be removed? "Misti belongs to the youngest arc (the Pleistocene–Holocene Frontal Arc),[107] which developed over the past one million years ... and the Pleistocene-Holocene Frontal Arc during the past one million years (including volcanoes of Misti's age)." Moisejp (talk) 05:19, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thought I'd take a look at this since I have an open FAC of my own.

Most faults in the region run northwest-southeast – En dash instead of hyphen.

Triassic-Jurassic sediments – En dash

Phenocrysts include amphibole, augite, biotite, enstatite, plagioclase and titanomagnetite – Replacing "include" with "consist of" would be more appropiate since amphibole, augite, biotite, enstatite, plagioclase and titanomagnetite are minerals rather than types of phenocrysts.
Went with "composed of" since they are chemistries. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It produced about 0.4 cubic kilometres (0.096 cu mi) dense rock equivalents of rock – I'm not sure if "dense rock equivalents" is needed here; "dense rock equivalents of rock" sounds weird. "It produced about 0.4 cubic kilometres (0.096 cu mi} of rock" is simpler.
Pulled. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Mudflows–not all associated with eruptions–took place – No need for the en dashes.
Went back to hyphens. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My bad, "Mudflows–not all associated with eruptions–took place" is correct. I actually misread this part of the sentence; I thought it was "Mudflows–not associated with eruptions–took place" (no all included) which would have worked with no dashes, hyphens or commas. Volcanoguy 20:47, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Seismic swarms were recorded in August 2012, May 2014 and June 2014. – I would reword this to "Seismic swarms were recorded in August 2012 and in May and June of 2014."
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Clouds rising from the mountain are sometimes mistaken for renewed activity. – I would suggest clarifying what kind of clouds these are. They could be meteorological clouds, dust clouds from landsliding, etc.
Probably the former, but I don't think the distinction is strictly relevant. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The chemistry of the deposits changed between 1967 and 2018, with decreasing zinc and increasing lead concentrations, along with a warming of the fumarolic system that may have been due to the arrival of new magma in the volcano during the 20th century. – This is a rather long sentence. I would suggest splitting it into two.
Been thinking for a while about that sentence, but I can't figure out a way to make a clean split. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
How about this: The chemistry of the deposits changed between 1967 and 2018; the zinc and lead concentrations decreased and increased, respectively. The fumarolic system also warmed during this period, which may have been due to the arrival of new magma in the volcano. Volcanoguy 14:59, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hot springs occur around the volcano, including Humaluso (Umaluso) to the north and several groups to the south and southwest (for example, Agua Salada, Bedoya (La Bedoya), Calle Cuzco, Charcani V, Chilina Norte, Chilina Sur, Jésus, Ojo de Milagro, Puente de Fierro, Sabandia, Tingo, Yumina, and Zemanat). – Another overly long sentence. It also does not differentiate what springs are to the south and southwest.
Split it up. It is a spread-out group that can't be easily characterized. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:17, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's all I have for now. Volcanoguy 18:05, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Noting that a source review passed twice already, so I'll keep it concise:

The last two links in Further reading to NASA are dead. Is there an updated page? If not, can you link to an archived version?
There are updated pages, swapped them in. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Three of the Further reading links are to a Frontiers journal. Are you confident they are good-quality? These journals range from pretty poor to not that good.
No, I am not confident hence why they are under Further Reading rather than being used as sources. Standard for further reading is somewhat lower than for sourcing especially in a FA where "high-quality reliable source" is the criterion. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would translate Investigation sobre as 'research on' or 'research about', not 'research over'
Done. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
My Spanish is rusty, but I'm not sure I would translate like this: La visión de los desastres naturales en el mundo andino durante el siglo XVI [The vision of natural disasters in the Andean world during the 16th century]. DeepL and chatGPT both suggest "The perception" instead of vision. Does that make sense with that source?
Interestingly, that source translates it as "vision", so. I concur that "perception" would probably be better. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hidrogeología de la cuenca del río Quilca - Vitor - Chili (132) -> transtitle is missing
"Ueber Kraft- und Stoffwechsel im Hochgebirge" -> transtitle is missing. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 11:52, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Done and done. The German title is a bit tough because it's one word in English and two (connected) ones in German. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Check throughout if more transtitles are missing
ChatGPT found a few more
The source talking about mummies is from 2010, and talks quite a bit about uncertainty. This 2020 source contradicts the cited 2010 source and gives much more precise information now that the mummies have been properly studied. The ages range from 6 and older, so no infants.
Figure 5 in that source might be a nice addition to the article (I found it trying to find images of mummies)
Corrected. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You use a 1958 source for most statements around vegetation, i.e. "vegetation is dominated by Franseria bushes". With climate change, are these ragweeds still present? I don't think they are called Franseria anymore. I believe there's been an upward movement of treelines and vegetation types of around 100-200 meters since the middle of the century due to climate change. Is there a more recent source?
I am sure there are more recent sources but they'd be about Salinas y Aguada Blanca National Reserve not about Misti per se. Common problem about these mountains is that they are seldom subject to individual botanical and faunistic studies. I mended the ragweed aspect, though. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That's all from me. I always do a mini spot check even for experienced nominators, and as expected that came up fully clean. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:47, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Happy with all the responses. Pass. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:44, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In general, you can make better use of images for WP:MTAU. For instance, a picture of andesitic rocks might give readers a hint what that refers to. Are there any suitably licensed papers with rocks specific from Misti? ChatGPT is quite good at finding papers with a prompt like "Find papers suitably licensed for Wikipedia that likely have pictures of X".
I don't recall many freely licenced papers about this article, doi:10.1007/s00445-017-1129-5 is one of them for fumaroles. This list has more, but I think I need some suggestions about images and terms to illustrate. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The first paragraph of the composition section is full of jargon. A lot of it isn't super important, but the key terms might benefit from an illustration (I think andisite, possibly phenocrysts (I don't understand what that sentence is doing), and adakite. All the rock types are jargon, so you're better placed to select the ones you would like your audience to learn). There's a lack of images in the eruption history, where you can use an image to explain an Plinian eruption. Fumaroles might benefit from a picture explanation too, as they seem quite key to the story. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 18:44, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Rio Chili -> I'm surprised that this is not a red-link. Should be notable under WP:NGEO, right?
Certainly. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The prose has improved substantially. My pet peeve (sentence fragments interrupted by citations) is still present in places.
If folks insist I can mend this but only after the FAC. Seen too many cases where I rearranged references, then had to go back to check something and had to do twice the work. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not doing a full review so I'm not going to insist if other disagree. But it does seem like you're making it more difficult for yourself to achieve the 'engaging' criterion. Are invisible notes an option so ensure you know what info belongs to what sources? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 06:47, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the images are amazing, like the astronaut photograph. Can you increase the default size of all the images? (maybe upright=1.3). I could not find the city without clicking on the image.
Added them. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
You could use Volcán Misti sobre Arequipa to show the mist?
I don't think that image shows the mist or fumaroles, these look like conventional clouds. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For MTAU, explain what hydrogen sulfide smells like (rotten egg)
Added. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Given the issues around flow, I would like to suggest again to omit US units. The MOS allows both ways of course, but here there is some conflict with engaging writing.
Reasonable request, but I am not sure if there is a way to do this en masse. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:39, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You could do this with AI pretty easily. From the Edit screen, copy the entire article and paste it into AI. Tell it to keep the text exactly as is, but whenever it sees a conversion template to ditch the conversion and just do straight metric. You get it to output the complete article with the changes, and you paste this back into the article's Edit screen. Moisejp (talk) 04:33, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to do a full review (except the source review above). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 16:47, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Z1720 (talk) 22:51, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a late-90s video game based on one of the most popular children's franchises at the time. Cukie Gherkin brought it to GA status in the early 2010s, and after some edits I think its now ready for FA status. Special thanks to Crystal Drawers and HurricaneZeta for reviewing this at its recent PR. Z1720 (talk) 22:51, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Gameplay and premise

It is a single-player 3D platform game in which the player controls several of the main characters from the television show to accomplish various goals.
- You could simplify this sentence to ...where the player controls several main characters.... or similar versions.

The levels can be played in any order, but some more difficult ones must be unlocked first by completing tasks in earlier stages.
- How about "Levels can be played in any order, but some must be unlocked by completing earlier tasks" or similar versions?

A few minor suggestions to begin with. More to follow. MSincccc (talk) 06:02, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Development and release

THQ created a multimillion-dollar marketing campaign for Search for Reptar, the second-biggest campaign of 1998 for a video game after The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time's campaign.
- The repetition of "campaign" could be avoided.

for all current and future game systems from Nintendo, Sony, and Sega.
- Do we need to mention "game systems" or would "systems" alone suffice?

I think the clarification is helpful here: some might think its for other media or entertainment systems (some sort of Rugrats cinematic universe or for other merchandising) so I'm OK with keeping "game"

The game was also designed to appeal to fans of the television series with level ideas inspired by television episodes.
- The repetition of "television" could be avoided.

"features voice actors from the cartoon that reprise their roles" → "features voice actors from the cartoon who reprise their roles"

"distributed among kiosks, hardware pack-ins, and on" → "distributed via/through kiosks, hardware pack-ins, and on" (avoids the lack of parallel structure)

the younger children's market
- Both "younger" and "children's" feel a bit redundant.

MSincccc (talk) 06:18, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

Reviewers stated that the game had an easy difficulty rating appealing to a younger audience, while older players, especially those who were fans of the television show or casual gamers, could enjoy the game[4][3][19][20] but might lose interest after quickly mastering the game's mechanics.
- This sentence could be split.

"sometimes the camera angle, when entering a room, would cause the controls to reverse"

→ "sometimes entering a room caused the camera angle to reverse controls"

MSincccc (talk) 16:43, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line

Lead

It was well-received commercially and was the third-best-selling game in the first two weeks of its release.
- Doesn't "third best-selling" imply commercial success?

The body

"Among the first projects announced from this deal" → "One of the first projects announced under this deal"

and on PlayStation: The Official Magazine demo discs.

That's all from me after a re-read. MSincccc (talk) 03:56, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review - pass

[edit]

Hi Z1720, happy to do the image review. The article contains the following images:

Both are non-free images with valid use rationales and low enough resolution. The source of the second image does not show the image. It had images before but they have been removed, so there is probably not much we can do about it. Both images have captions and are placed in appropriate locations. The second image lacks an alt-text, so I suggesting adding one. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:33, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Phlsph7: For the second image, the waybackmachine did not have the file saved, so I replaced it with another gameplay image from a different source, and I think it is properly licenced now. The image also has alt text. Let me know if there are any concerns (or if this is a pass). Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 18:32, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure what the policies are about using images whose sources are not available anymore, but that takes care of the issue. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:15, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Starting the review, will likely review the rest by tonight. Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 17:57, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"exclusively for PlayStation" — I feel this would work better at the end of the first sentence (so, the first two sentences would look something like “Rugrats: Search for Reptar is a 1998 platform video game developed by n-Space and published by THQ, released exclusively for PlayStation. It was released in North America in October or November 1998 and in Europe in November 1998."

"who has lost his Reptar puzzle" — Can you expand a bit? Maybe something like “who has lost pieces of his Reptar puzzle, and sets out to find them"

"The game received mixed reviews from critics, though it has regularly been noted that children will enjoy it. It was criticized for its camera and control mechanics and praised for its graphics." — Can you combine these two?

Some other short sentences should probably be merged, particularly in the second paragraph

Looks good Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 22:06, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay and premise

"of the cartoon Rugrats" — Change to "of the animated children's television series Rugrats"

Clarify that Reptar is a fictional cartoon dinosaur

I’d prefer if the 2nd paragraph started with the "The game has fourteen levels" sentence

"Levels can be played in any order, but some are unlocked by completing earlier tasks." — Sometimes I see game articles add an example after something like this, can you provide one for when levels are uncooked by earlier tasks?

"The levels that players explore are mostly based on episodes from the television show" — You can remove "television", and also try to merge a bit of the next sentence with this one, if possible

Development and release

"The deal gave THQ exclusive rights to Rugrats" — The wording makes it sound like they had exclusive rights to the entire franchise, not just the video game rights, consider changing it to something like "The deal gave THQ exclusive rights to use Rugrats" or anything similar

"One of the first projects announced from this deal was a PlayStation game to be developed by n-Space and released in 1998" — I’m assuming it was untitled at this point, maybe I’d be worthwhile to add that here if the source doesn’t state the name

"Rugrats: Search for Reptar was developed to appeal to children ages seven to twelve. The game was also designed to appeal to fans of the television series with level ideas inspired by television episodes" — These two are quite similar, merge it into something like "Rugrats: Search for Reptar was developed to appeal to children ages seven to twelve, and to fans of the television series with level ideas inspired by certain episodes"

Could you include who played which character respectively? (ex. "Actor 1, actor 2, and actor 3 played character 1, character 2, and character 3, respectively")

Is there a reason both "demo disk" and "demo disc" are used?

"The game was released in North America in October or November 1998[a] and received an "E" rating from the Entertainment Software Rating Board" — Change to "The game was released in North America in either October or November 1998[a] and received an "E" rating from the Entertainment Software Rating Board, indicating it was appropriate for "Everyone"."

Reception

Can you explain what GameRankings is?

The prose looks fine, but a lot of it is “reviewers liked [blank]”, I only see two “[reviewer] of [publication] thought [opinion]". I’m pretty sure "reviewers liked [blank]" is supposed to be used before giving several examples from named critics, not just stated and then moving on to another thing reviewers took note of. I’d prefer if it was changed to include more reviews like what you did for Doug Perry of IGN, especially so the box in the upper right corner is elaborated in the prose and not left unelaborated

I tried some rewords to remove "reviewers [verb] [blank]. Per WP:RECEPTION, having lots of "X said Y" statements is not recommended for articles, especially when the reviewer is not someone who themselves is notable. This is because adding quotes and specific statements from each reviewer extends the length of the reception section and readers are more interested in what the general consensus of a game is, not what each individual reviewer thinks. If there is unique commentary from a reviewer that should be added, please let me know the information and the source and I'll take a look. Z1720 (talk) 03:41, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Re-release and sequel

Why does this need its own section? It’s two short facts, it certainly falls under the latter part of the “Development and release” section.

@Z1720: Okay, all suggestions are now up, just ping me when you’re done. They’re all pretty minor spelling issues, minus Reception which I’m asking you expand a bit with the given sources, and the article looks close to FA status. By the way, I have a FAC open for "Chapter Seven: The Lost Sister", and if you have the time, any comments would be greatly appreciated. Obviously, no obligation to do so and it’s totally understandable if you don’t want to, just asking around Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 22:20, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Hello, just pinging to see if you’ve made any progress on addressing the comments Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 15:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It features stages based on episodes from the television show and minigames - Ambiguous construction; could be read "stages based on episodes from the television show and [other Rugrats] minigames" or "minigames and stages based on episodes from the television show"

I don't think the sources verify that the minigames were based on episodes of the televisions series. I tried rewording this a little bit to make a better distinction. Z1720 (talk) 03:50, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Its sequel was Rugrats: Studio Tour. - Year of release in parentheses would be good here (also below)

I'm not a fan of adding the years of other projects, as I think interested readers can find out the year by clicking on the Wikipedia article and it clutters the page. Nevertheless, I added it because this is not the place to have that discussion and there isn't a consensus either way afaik. Z1720 (talk) 03:50, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that, and realize there is no MOS requirement for it. Personally, I find it helps establish a timeline; since Studio Tour was release in 1999, the reader can infer that Search for Reptar was released when THQ was already working on a sequel. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:32, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

the second-biggest of 1998, - Qualifying this with "for a video game" would definitely help. There were... some rather massive releases in '98

A marketing campaign, the second-biggest of 1998, was formed in conjunction between Sony Computer Entertainment America and THQ for its North American release to bolster the children's market on the PlayStation. - "its North American" release could be ambiguous; the most recent subject was "marketing campaign"

One of the first projects announced from this deal was a PlayStation game to be developed by n-Space and released in 1998. - You don't explicitly say that Rugrats: Search for Reptar was the one developed by n-Space.

If Rugrats: Search for Reptar is the "one of the first projects" mentioned here, ideally it should be stated explicitly. The inference is there, but the sentence could be read as referring to another game. Looking at the source, it's not explicit... do any of the post-release sources mention that it was announced in 1997? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:30, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

E. G. Daily, Kath Soucie, Christine Cavanaugh, and Cheryl Chase - Potential WP:SEAOFBLUE issue here

held an aggregate score of 68.75% at GameRankings, based on four reviews - GameRankings wasn't around in '98, so I'm not sure the simple past tense works best here.

I merged this with the development section.

Four weeks have passed, and only one general support has been received. Unless this nomination shows significant progress toward a consensus for promotion within the next three or four days, I'm afraid it will have to be archived. I suggest resolving the concerns by the two reviewers above and pinging them. FrB.TG (talk) 22:29, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for the delay in responding. I have posted comments above and pinged reviewers: I ask that this be kept open a little longer so those editors can respond without rushing approvals. Thanks for the consideration. Z1720 (talk) 03:53, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:54, 26 March 2026 (UTC), 750h+ [reply]

Nearly 14 years after this was delisted at FAR, we bring Madonna up for FA re-consideration following extensive revisions. She's a prolific singer and producer who has substantially influenced the music industry. To a lesser extent, you might also know her from some movie roles and business ventures. I'm sure none of the fabricated citations remain that led to the page losing its FA status. Who here thinks it's ready to become featured again? Please leave your comments below. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:54, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’d like to give credit to the peer reviewer Mb2437, and also Bluesatellite, who’s been a primary author to this article since before I even began working on this page. I aimed to make the article as concise as possible, leading to a word count reduction of almost 3,000 (it’s now shorter than it was more than 15 years ago). We’re looking forward to your comments on the best-selling woman in music! 750 h+ 17:50, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Madonna_-_Tampa_Bay_Times_(1985).jpg: the original source credits this to the St Petersburg Times - are we certain this was not registered? It looks like a number of their publications from around that time were

When unable to pinpoint file source details for either of those, Nikkimaria, I figured it was best to replace them with File:MadonnaVirginTour (cropped).jpg and File:Frida Kahlo, by Guillermo Kahlo (cropped).jpg respectively. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:55, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing that license at the source for the former? Nikkimaria (talk) 00:25, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It was extracted from File:MadonnaVirginTour.jpg, which VRT has verified to be free for use, so that by extension applies to all crops. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 01:53, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: just wondering if this is a pass, thanks 750 h+ 02:58, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:01, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hooray! SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 03:12, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Life and career (1958–1978)

"worked as an optics and military engineer and physicist" → "worked as an optical and military engineer and physicist"
You could link "Italian emigrants" to Italian Americans.
"flown on a plane or taken a taxi" → "flown or taken a taxi"
You could link to East Village, Manhattan.

Life and career (1979–1983)

"in such publications" → "in publications such as"
"leading to a successful audition to perform in Paris as a backup singer and dancer" → "leading to a successful audition as a backup singer and dancer in Paris"
"when she requested for him to do so" → "when she requested that he do so"

MSincccc (talk) 15:46, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All done except for the Italian emigrants bit, MSincccc, since common terms like that don't need linking per WP:OVERLINK. I'm guessing you'll do the rest of this page in chunks of one or two sections at a time. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 16:42, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I plan to do a full review, but it may take some time due to other commitments (including lessons, other reviews, and my own peer review for Fashion of Catherine, Princess of Wales). MSincccc (talk) 16:50, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Curtis Wayne Penton born 6/13/1979 Are you my kin???? ~2026-25496-45 (talk) 03:52, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Life and career (1984–1987)

"Within the lattermost nation" → "In the latter nation" (or simply "In the US")
At the 1985 Live Aid concert,
- We could include "1985" inside the link as well.

this doesn’t work because it doesn’t link to a 1985 Live aid concert

The first sentence of the linked Live Aid article says: Live Aid was a two-venue benefit concert and music-based fundraising initiative held on Saturday, 13 July 1985. The short description of the same article is 1985 benefit concert.

"which also co-starred Penn" → "which also starred Penn"

Life and career (1988–1991)

"over the New Year's weekend" → "over New Year's weekend"
"a dream sequence depicting intimacy with a saint" → "a dream sequence showing intimacy with a saint"

nothing wrong with the current is there?

"the longest of any of her albums" → "the longest of her albums"
"peaked within the top ten" → "peaked in the top ten"
In October 1990, she recorded a Public Service Announcement
- Do we need "Public Service Announcement" in title case or could it be changed to sentence case?
"then-boyfriend" → "then boyfriend"
- hyphenated is more common

Life and career (1992–1997)

"the most of any woman at the time" → "the most for a woman at the time"
"The venture was a joint partnership with Time Warner" → "The venture was a partnership with Time Warner"
which featured scenes of sadomasochism and bondage and was poorly received by critics
- We could insert a comma before "and was" for clarity.

MSincccc (talk) 09:13, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: done, unless responded above. 750 h+ 11:28, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Two of your responses are fair; those were only suggestions on my part. I have replied above regarding the Live Aid comment. Best, MSincccc (talk) 11:42, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Life and career (1998–2002)

reflected this change in her perception and image
- How about "shift" in place of "change"?
create a fusion of dance, pop, and British rock styles
"within its first ten days of release" → "within the first ten days of release"

Life and career (2003–2006)

You could italicise "X-STaTIC Pro=CeSS".
"after the 2003 invasion of Iraq started" → "after the 2003 invasion of Iraq began" (more natural)
"due to the political climate of the country" → "due to the political climate"

Life and career (2007-2011)

released and performed the song
- You could drop "the song".
"granted her permission to adopt her" → "granted her permission to adopt"
inspired by her 1980s punk-inspired fashion.
- Could the repetition of "inspired" be avoided?

MSincccc (talk) 09:29, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: thanks for these and mostly done, I just don't think removing "of the country" and changing; "granted her permission to adopt her" to "granted her permission to adopt" are very helpful. 750 h+ 12:54, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Life and career (2012-2016)

the highest-earning tour of 2012 and was one of the most profitable concert tours at the time
- You could avoid repeating "tour" in close proximity.
"at a value of $400,000" → "worth $400,000"
Ref 318 is inconsistent with its title.

Life and career (2017-2021)

attempted to sell Madonna's personal items, including letters from Tupac Shakur and other belongings
- You could drop "and other belongings" to avoid redundancy since it is already coming after "including".

MSincccc (talk) 13:23, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you already made some of these changes yourself, MSincccc, and either way I took care of the Tupac bit. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:46, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Life and career (2022-present)

In August 2021, coinciding with her 63rd birthday, Madonna announced her return to Warner Records—the rebranded successor to Warner Bros. Records—in a global partnership granting the label rights to her entire recorded music catalog, including her three most recent albums originally released under Interscope.
The tour was to begin in July, but a month prior, she was hospitalized after being found unresponsive at her New York City residence.[359][360] She spent five days in intensive care, and later disclosed being placed in a medically induced coma for 48 hours due to a serious bacterial infection following a low-grade fever.
- You could trim this portion without losing any significant information.
"a commemoration the 30th anniversary" → "to commemorate the 30th anniversary"
featured on the soundtrack to the television drama
"Madonna was announced as the new face of the One" → "Madonna became the face of The One"

750h+ and SNUGGUMS That's all from this section. MSincccc (talk) 06:04, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: thoughts? 750 h+ 11:00, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+ I’m presently engaged with about half a dozen active FACs, and with lessons in RL and peer review as well, it’s a bit tight at the moment.

But please don’t worry—I intend to wrap up my review in a day or two. The article is a long one indeed, and I suppose a button click never hurts—if anything, it keeps one motivated. MSincccc (talk) 11:21, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy

You could drop the link to sociologists since it's a bit too general.
Do we need the link for "soda"?
It's [a word] part of a quote and thus should not be linked.
- A reviewer had once suggested the above to me.
"giving rise to" → "which has given rise to"
Scholars have challenged her use of racialized and minority cultures and argue that her privileged position does little
- "argue" → "have argued" since you use "have challenged"
"similar to" → "similar to that of"

MSincccc (talk) 11:35, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Artistry (Influences)

How about linking "pop artist" on first mention (that would be in the sentence "to deliver a tribute to the deceased pop artist Michael Jackson")?
- the "pop artist" for MJ means something different to what it does for Andy Warhol
"large impression" → "strong impression"
"in their works" → "in their work" (collective noun)
"is also inspired" → "has also been inspired"
"During 2011," → "In 2011,"

MSincccc (talk) 09:50, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: thanks for these. 750 h+ 11:37, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Bottom line

That’s all from me. It’s a long but comprehensive article, and I’ve made a few minor revisions rather than putting them up here. I hope my suggestions have been useful.

750h+ and SNUGGUMS, good luck with the nomination. And yes, I will support it. MSincccc (talk) 10:59, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, MSincccc! Your input definitely helped with improving the page. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 13:15, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here'll be a source review from me! Red Shell Momentum 02:14, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This table lists 9 random passages from throughout the article (2.0% of 461 total passages). These passages contain 14 inline citations (2.3% of 598 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Red Shell Momentum 17:42, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+ and SNUGGUMS: Source spot-check is all good, support. Red Shell Momentum 17:52, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status
Like a Virgin has sold over 21 million copies worldwide, making it one of the best-selling albums of all time.
53		Perone 2018, p. 112.		✅
54		theage.com.au	web.archive.org	✅
Madonna co-wrote and co-produced every track on her third studio album, True Blue.
78	a	popmatters.com	web.archive.org	✅
The Evita soundtrack, which peaked at number two on the Billboard 200, contained songs primarily performed by Madonna. These included "You Must Love Me" and "Don't Cry for Me Argentina", the latter of which topped the European singles chart.
163		Taraborrelli 2002, p. 286.		✅
164		books.google.com		✅
In May 2002, she appeared in the West End play Up for Grabs at the Wyndhams Theatre, which was poorly received by critics.
203		O'Brien 2007, pp. 368, 537.		✅
204		whatsonstage.com	web.archive.org	✅
205		theguardian.com	web.archive.org	✅
Produced in collaboration with Cirque du Soleil and choreographer Jamie King, the performance featured guest appearances by LMFAO, Nicki Minaj, M.I.A. and CeeLo Green. The broadcast drew 114 million viewers, making it the most-watched Super Bowl halftime show at the time, surpassing the viewership of the game itself.
291		cbc.ca		✅
292		cnbc.com	web.archive.org	✅
The tour grossed over $225 million across eighty shows, making Madonna the first woman to surpass $100 million in earnings from six separate concert tours.
368	a	billboard.com	web.archive.org	✅
Her video for "Hollywood" (2003) paid tribute to the photography of Guy Bourdin, though it later prompted a lawsuit filed by Bourdin's son over the unauthorized use of his father's images.
403		billboard.com		✅
Her concert tours often re-create her music videos; author Elin Diamond said that the ability to reproduce scenes from Madonna's videos in a live setting enhances the realism of the videos, arguing that "her live performances have become the means by which mediatized representations are naturalized".
478		Diamond 1996, p. 202.		✅
Madonna was the first person to be inducted into the Wembley Square of Fame in London.
522		news.bbc.co.uk		✅

Much appreciated, RedShellMomentum! This is quite a relief given the verification scandal that led to 2012's delisting at FAR. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 19:25, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This was a part I was stressing about during the rewrite, so I’m happy it went smoothly! 750 h+ 01:38, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gonna start reviewing soon, my second time participating in a FAc so I hope I don't do too poorly @11WB GrenadinesDes (talk) 11:36, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

oops wrong ping sorry @750h+ GrenadinesDes (talk) 11:38, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All good, much thanks for reviewing! 750 h+ 12:16, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead:

Seems pretty fine

Life and Career:

Joey (who died shortly after his 1967 birth from a heart defect) - I feel like a better wording here could be Joey (who died shortly after his birth in 1967 from a heart defect)
remarking that she would not remove her jacket when believing that the media per WP:WOULD, I don't think "Would" should be used here. Took me a while to come up with a good re sentencing but I'm thinking "remarking that she intends not to remove her jacket when believing that the media.
prompting Madonna's saddened rebuttal that she would not be distracted by the "ridiculous allegations" same as above, I'm thinking "she's not going to be distracted".
In April 2026, she announced that her fifteenth studio album, Confessions II, would be released on July 3.--> In April 2026, she announced her fifteenth studio album, Confessions II, with an expected release date of July 3

Optional:

The image of Madonna performing the "Who's That Girl World Tour" isn't a long the same paragraph that actually talks about it.

Overall, I'm kind of struggling to find any issues that haven't already been addressed previously. I'd say this article is very deserving of FA, maybe after the minor issues are addressed first. There's also other usage of the word "would", but they're quotes so no fault in that. GrenadinesDes (talk) 22:27, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+ GrenadinesDes (talk) 22:27, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I focused on citations in this review. I will further update my comment after I got enough time for it!

Ref 301, 305, 309, 316, 369... are alive. I think Rolling Stone articles are most treated as dead link, although they're not; also, please add |url-access=limited. For ref 368, it is not |url-access=subscription.
Ref 311: Any reason for marking Slant Magazine as Slant only? I would mark it as a full name.
I think archiving links are important, and there're some sources that are not archived yet like ref 348, 362, 363, 484–486 etc.
Ref 358: |url-access=subscription
Ref 376: ISSN, OCLC are redundant since URL is provided
Ref 569: publisher? Camilasdandelions (✉️) 06:35, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Camilasdandelions: Done. 750 h+ 09:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@750h+: Additional comments below! Camilasdandelions (✉️) 04:00, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ref 1: The URL is alive. Also you should use consistent style of title, per WP:CITESTYLE. Download this script for it, since there are more citations which violates this Manual of Style.
Ref 40, 50, 72, 81, 152, 210, 216, 218, 246: archive
Ref 45, 103(Classic Pop), 110, 128(and also its title is different), 209(Slant Magazine and The New York Times): |url-status=live
Ref 57, 72, 215: italicize Billboard in title per MOS:CONFORMTITLE
Ref 76, 110, 178: |url-access=limited
Ref 94, 217: Unnecessary ISSN
Ref 121: Do not use double quotations in citation titles per H:CS1
Ref 190, 212, Italicize the albums names, such as Music, American Life
Ref 198: |via=World Radio History
I'll stop here, since there're over 500 citations and I believe it is very difficult to fix all of them. I'll fix the rest of things after you addressed them. Nice work! Camilasdandelions (✉️) 04:00, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 04:42, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is the second FA nom for this article after the first failed due to inactivity. Aside from one other anomaly, this is my favorite video game of all time.

Rain World is a difficult game to fully represent in words. It is a really unique survival-platformer in which the player controls this little slugcat thing as it is plopped into an ecosystem that really really wants it to die. Despite its charming procedural animation, Rain World's gameplay can feel like utter bullshit. For me, it really did. Though critics were unable to persevere through the cycle of death, me and the game's dedicated fandom saw through its hardships and fell in love. I don't think any other game has made me feel so small and insignificant in such a beautiful world that does not care for me at all. Since February of 2024, I've worked mostly alone on improving this article with a peer review in mid-2025. Hopefully, I can pull this off.

@User:Vacant0 and @User:Phlsph7 gave their supports last time. Other users who gave their advice in peer reviews were pinged in the previous nom. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 04:42, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Toby, let's hope that the review gets more attention this time. From what I can tell, not much has changed media-wise. The image https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rain_World_animation_-_Green_Liz_(shortened).gif was added. It is CC BY-SA 3.0, has a caption and an alt text. Apart from that, there were some minor changes to alt texts and captions of other images. See Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Rain_World/archive1#Media_review_-_pass for the previous media review. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:05, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! At a glance this article reads very well. Here are some initial prose comments; I'll try to finish the rest soon. TheBrickGraphic (talk) 18:44, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Beginning in 2011, Rain World (funded through Kickstarter) was in development for over six years by a two-man team who intended to simulate a unique, realistic ecosystem..." Nitpicky, but I'd personally replace the parentheses with commas; the former's usage here seems off to me.

"Procedurally animated" (or "prodedural animation") is used quite a few times throughout the article, but I don't see it explicitly defined beyond the same-named article. I'm pretty sure I understand the term in the context of this game through pure context clues... but I think it'd be best to explain more precisely what procedural animation is to not violate MOS:NOFORCELINK since it seems pretty technical. Perhaps you could remove "procedurally animated" in the first sentence and move it to a new sentence after "...mirroring a cat and slug", at which point you could briefly explain it?
- I've added clarification. Does this work?
"Enemies can kill the slugcat in one attack." I presume only certain enemies can do this? Or can they all instantly kill the slugcat? If the latter is true I'd add "some" to the beginning.
- The source says enemies can and will one-hit kill you, which is a pretty vague statement. The truth is that not all enemies can one-hit and the ones that are able to don't do it consistently which makes the statement misleading. I've purposefully kept that claim vague because of this factual inaccuracy and I don't think I can make it clearer without misrepresenting the source.
Specific story information being within Gameplay seems odd; is there a reason for Plot not being its own section?
- I've been encouraged to plop the plot into Gameplay in a peer review (like how featured article Katana Zero does it). That was when I didn't include Downpour's story though. Now that it's bigger, I'll change it back.
"Far into the future when Pebbles collapsed and the rain has given way to fluctuating blizzards..." There seems to be conflicting tenses here. I'd consider replacing "when Pebbles collapsed" with "after Pebbles collapses".

"[Efn note] Sources vary between 'James Therrien' and 'James Primate'(refs)." I would personally attach all the refs that use the former name after "Therrien" and those that use the latter after "Primate" (i.e., "between 'James Therrien'(refs) and 'James Primate'(refs)) instead of stuffing them all into the end.
"Jakobsson did not intend for the game's extreme difficulty, which resulted in its mixed reception." To say, definitively, that the difficulty "caused" the mixed reception seems off to me. Unless this phrase is derived from Jakobsson's own words or is synthesis from critics, I'm not sure it's absolutely needed.
- Changed. It should match more accurately what he said.
"Rain World's animation was popularized on social media in praise of what IGN attributed to its "uncannily fluid character animations", contributing to the game's popularity pre-release; Primate partially attributed this virality to GIFs, noting one that was posted on Twitter and retweeted over 15,000 times." I'd firstly replace the semicolon with a period, since the sentence is nearing a run-on. Also, I think "contributing to the game's popularity pre-release" can be cut since it's already implied it became popular before its release, though I would keep "pre-release" itself and move it to after "social media". Lastly, is "attributed to" the correct term here? Something about it reads strangely to me, and I think "called" would be more concise.

Not a critique per se, but is there reason why the names of publications' reviewers aren't mentioned explicitly? I think what tipped me off especially was this line: "Polygon's reviewer was miserable following the loss of her multi-hour progression."
"which differentiated it from the 'typical goombas' of other games." I presume "goomba" is in reference to the Mario enemy; I'd link the associated article.
"Rain World's karma gates, requiring a positive hibernate-to-death ratio, were arbitrary goals "disrespectful" of the player's time, according to GameSpot." I've noticed that the Reception section opts for putting the publication's name at the end of the sentence as opposed to the beginning, which usually reads fine. Here, however, I'd suggest rewording the sentence to "Rain World's karma gates, requiring a positive hibernate-to-death ratio, were called arbitrary goals "disrespectful" of the player's time, according to GameSpot," just to establish early on that this isn't Wikipedia's POV.

Nothing else really caught my eye; great work overall! TheBrickGraphic (talk) 17:38, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review BrickGraphic! Should this be considered a support? @TheBrickGraphic toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 19:41, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, this’ll be a Support. TheBrickGraphic (talk) 21:29, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Did a sort of informal peer review of the article a few days ago.

The slugcat may carry three items at a time: two in their hands and one in their stomach. It can swap the items' places and uses its right hand first when throwing. It or they?
The slugcat travels to find a comatose Looks to the Moon, and revives her with the neuron fly. i don't think commas are used after a single "and" in this article, at least not above. Might be wrong though.
- Fixed. Someone else added that comma in.
He then designed an animal and posted development updates on his YouTube channel, with one YouTube commenter dubbing the creature a "slugcat". the second "YouTube" is implied i think
Rain World has over 3.5 hours of recorded music across 160 tracks. This is sourced in ref 27 but the referencing doesn't make that clear. I'd add another ref 27 just to be safe. Also remove "over", the ref 27 says "Rain World features three and a half hours of music spanning 160 tracks", no "over" implied
Any reason why the video refs aren't archived? E.g. [27] seems to load fine, it could be added. Edit: ok most video refs don't load in archives, but that one does, so it could be added.
- Done for that video and one other (the others don't work like how you pointed out).
To differentiate Rain World from Metroidvania video games, - but some of the sources do call Rain World metroidvania.[28][29][30] You could include a mention that some still consider it Metroidvania depsite the team trying to avoid that.
- Sounds like an interesting addition. Done.
With little dialogue or narration, Rain World's story was partly communicated through its soundtrack to contribute to its environmental storytelling. since environmental storytelling is linked in the lead you could link it again
- It is already linked under Gameplay
The game received mixed reviews upon release according to review aggregator Metacritic with 43% of critics recommending it according to OpenCritic. MOS:SEAOFBLUE with review aggregator and Metacritic
Ref 11 is weird. according to archives e.g. this it was published 27 March 2017, but the current URL says 28 March 2017. This is trivial though.
- I'll just keep it at March 27.
Video game journalists praised the game's art design,[e] but criticized the harshness of its gameplay mechanics, particularly its unpredictable deaths, ruthless enemies, and time-consuming hibernation requirements.[f] This is personal preference but if it were up to me I'd move efn [f] to the end of "harshness of its gameplay mechanics" and then provide a ref for each of the specific annoying gameplay mechanics a critic disliked.
- I might do this sometime later.
About ref 82. I unfortunately don't have a link for evidence but there is a part the manual of style which states that all references have to have titles in sentence case or title case. This is not consistent here.
- Done. I've known about this and funnily enough I have to switch to my alt account to run a script to change them because for some reason it doesn't work on this account lol.

That's all for now. --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 16:44, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All done now. Thanks for reviewing @Not-cheesewhisk3rs toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 19:41, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support. great article! --not-cheesewhisk3rs ≽^•⩊•^≼ ∫ (pester) 19:46, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay

"an animal akin to a cat and slug" → "an animal akin to a cat and a slug"
ruined and obtuse ecosystem
- Obtuse comes across as slightly odd here.
  - Obtuse refers to that which is unclear or difficult to comprehend. Should it be removed?
"allowing further progression" → "allowing progression"
"the slugcat is faced with problems they cannot avoid" → "the slugcat is faced with problems it cannot avoid"
"when eaten" → "when consumed"
Tripling the game's world size, Downpour adds
- How about "Downpour triples the game's world size and adds"?
Other game modes also include
- You could drop "also" here.
"being 'Downpour'" → "is 'Downpour'"
- I don't believe this is grammatically correct.

Development

How about renaming the section to Development and release?
"who taught himself how to animate sprites" → "who taught himself to animate sprites"
"He had no industry experience and played few games" → "He had no industry experience and had played few games"
"He successfully pitched Jakobsson 12 tracks" → "He successfully pitched 12 tracks to Jakobsson"
Inspired by feelings of foreignness
- The subject is unclear.
  - How so? The sentence should make it clear that Jakobsson (whom the paragraph is prioritizing up to this point) was the one inspired by feelings of foreigness: Inspired by feelings of foreignness while living as an exchange student in Seoul, South Korea... (emphasis mine) -t
"rather than serve as obstacles" → "rather than serving as obstacles"
"Though Rain World's soundtrack would originally be chiptune" → "Though Rain World’s soundtrack was originally intended to be chiptune"
- Changed to Though Rain World's soundtrack was intended to be chiptune...
"did not fit with the naturalistic mood" → "did not fit the naturalistic mood"
"between eight and twelve tracks will simultaneously layer" → "between eight and twelve tracks are layered simultaneously"

MSincccc (talk) 09:59, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Release

Rain World was released on March 28, published by Adult Swim Games for PlayStation 4 and Windows.
- Well, could this sentence be rephrased since it echoes the tone used by the media and promotional websites?
"later in 2017" → "later that year"
In August 2025, the game was released to the Xbox Game Pass.
- Do we need the "the" before "Xbox"?
  - I think this is up to personal preference as the Xbox Game Pass lede uses a "the" but the rest of it does not. For me, it sounds pretty strange without the "the", so I will not remove it.
in praise of what IGN called its "uncannily fluid character animations"
- You could rephrase to "praised by IGN for..." for smoother phrasing.
"noting one that was posted on Twitter and retweeted over 15,000 times" → "noting a Twitter post retweeted over 15,000 times"

MSincccc (talk) 08:23, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

The game received mixed reviews upon release according to review aggregator website Metacritic with 43% of critics recommending it according to OpenCritic.
- How about a comma before "according to"?
frequent repetition
- Doesn't "repetition" already imply frequency?
  - I don't think so. "Repetition" itself could imply doing something two times, while "frequent repetition" means doing something fifty times. -t
Critics especially lamented how the slugcat's jerky animations and imprecise throwing mechanics led to unwarranted deaths;
- You could replace the semicolon with a full stop.
"the New York Game Awards 2018" → "the 2018 New York Game Awards"

MSincccc (talk) 09:24, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line

I've finally read through the lead and made a minor revision beyond which only stylistic fixes would remain. I haven't looked deeply at the sources but I will support on prose. MSincccc (talk) 10:46, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support from previous nomination. The last nomination would have most likely passed had there been enough reviewers. I hope that this nomination will have more reviewers. Cheers, Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 16:18, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support from YuniToumei (source review)

[edit]

Hi Toby! This looks like a really nice article for a cute game :) I'll be doing a source review. I haven't played this game and am unfamiliar with its mechanics, so I might ask a few more detailed questions here and there. YuniToumei (talk) 21:55, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the review YuniToumei! toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 22:56, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarlby I've finished my spotchecks, see below :) YuniToumei (talk) 12:15, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

YuniToumei All addressed now. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 18:33, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Tarlby I've got just two things left in 6c and 11d. YuniToumei (talk) 22:03, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

YuniToumei Done. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 22:54, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work responding to all my nitpicks, Toby! That's a Support from my side as well :) YuniToumei (talk) 23:08, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 23:08, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay

All ok: 1, 2, 3, 8, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16
4: 4b: does not verify battling and hunting each other, only the unavoidable problems and the dynamic behaviour. And what should the accompanying ref 10a verify in that sentence? I can't find anything matching
- Added a ref and removed 10. Thought I had that ref there... weird. -t
5: updated May 7th, 2017, not sure if that should be indicated? make sure the source still supports the statements in this articles after its update
- I don't believe it's usual to indicate when refs were updated. -t

5d: Most enemies can kill the slugcat in one attack. ref says "many", not most
5e: Some have variations, such as the differently-colored lizards, which possess unique characteristics. "Some" indicates that multiple species have variations, but in both ref 5 and ref 9 only the differently-colored lizards are mentioned. Are there more enemy sub-species?
- Yes, other species also have variations which I think is what IGN is trying to say based on the way they've worded it. They do not say that lizards specifically have subspecies but that ...enemies - many of whom can kill in a single hit - have patterns of behavior (even sub-species have different abilities...) Notice how they only use lizards as an example in the succeeding sentence? I understand that it's confusing though. Do you still think this should be changed? -t

6: 6c: uses its right hand first when throwing. The ref implies that the system is much more complicated, and states first that "The left paw will be the thrower", which reads to me that if there is a default throwing paw, that would be the left? (Also why does the article refer to the paws as hands?) Also, the ref does verify swallowing, but not that the stomach is a single-slot inventory.
- Rephrased and replaced a different ref (which calls the paws "hands" by the way). -t
  - While removing the description of the stomach inventory solves your sourcing issues, does this still retain the comprehensiveness of this article (FACR 1b)? Is it an important mechanic, and if so are there really no sources describing it? YuniToumei (talk) 22:02, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - There are no other sources that allude to it other than RPS which doesn't even hold on that point for more than a couple words. You can progress through the game perfectly fine without even knowing you can swallow an item (remember, the game explains nothing). -t
7: YouTube video, primary interview. fine for what it supports, but only used to support "cycle" note which also has ref 5. Makes me wonder if ref 7 is really necessary, is ref 5 not enough (although it is only vaguely described there)? And are "cycles" really an established term in sources about the game that warrant inclusion here? They seem to be used only once or twice in this article
- Removed IGN use as it's super unclear. Whether or not to remove the mentions of cycles altogther; eh, I don't see the benefit. It's true and not that distracting. -t
11: 11a: must also compete with more powerful and hostile creatures The ref states that "The hunter must make predators into prey, killing and eating larger creatures". I understand that the hunter slugcat eats those larger creatures, rather than competing with them?

I've started with quite a detailed review of the gameplay section to get a feel for how the sourcing in this article is done. I will move on to a much less detailed spotcheck for the remaining sections, which I hope to finish soon. Feel free to address my points above in the meantime :) So far, my impression is that the sourcing is looking relatively solid, but occasionally statements are difficult to verify. Also please pass through the sources and make sure the dates are in order since I've had to fix two. YuniToumei (talk) 21:55, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Passage-by-passage Spotcheck

I've used a script to generate random passages for around 25% of all inline citations. The ref numbers refer to this revision.

Plot

Development

26b: primary interview (ok for what it supports); ok
30: ok
24f/31: ok
1g: ok
24g: ok
32b: primary speech (ok for what it supports); ok
37/38: ok / primary (ok for what it does); neither source verifies being greenlit in five days unless this is somewhere in the video other than at the given timestamp
- Weird. I remember a source saying that but I guess not. Rephrased. -t
40: ok
2i/23d: The final product resulted in a low-fi and electronic soundtrack. Neither source describes the soundtrack as "low-fi" (also, is that not more commonly spelled lo-fi?)
- Added back in the source which I think might've been removed accidentally(?) (they also spell it as low-fi)

Release

43/44/45: what does ref 43 support in Rain World's animation was popularized on social media pre-release? I don't see anything that matches. Ref 44 and 45 only mention the devs posting gifs before release, but to me it is not evidently verifiable that they were effective in making the animation become popular (popularized) just from reading those refs alone, although it is explained adequately in the next sentence and ref 46.
- Removed all three. Big slap in the face for me. -t
48/49: ok
52/53: an update to alleviate its difficulty the sources seem to emphasize that the devs tried to fix sources of frustration and "problems" without making the game "easier", while "keeping Rain World as a sometimes unforgiving experience." I would rephrase this sentence to reflect that better, as right now without further context it could be interpreted that that update was there to just make the game easier flat-out.
- Hope that adding "marginally" works. I don't understand why those sources consider adding patches that make the game easier as not making the game easier, but whatever. -t
56a: ok
61: ok
20b: Downpour's development started before the Monk and Hunter update was released, according to lead programmer Andrew Marrero. In the ref, I see "Development of Downpour’s content actually started only months after the release of the original Rain World" and, much later in the interview, "Some months later, the Hunter slugcat was added". It's not clear to me what Marrero meant with "later" in the second sentence, later than what? Also, the ref does mention a pacifist, but does not mention when a Monk update would have released. The rest of the paragraph is ok.
- 1) Some months later, the hunter slugcat was added... This sentence follows two paragraphs of original Downpour concepts and is followed by Hunter had the ability to hold three spears as well... so the Spearmaster's set of abilities was feeling especially redundant. We can logically deduce here that development began between the game's release and the Hunter was released.

2) The "pacifist" mention refers to the Saint (they are explaining Downpour concepts in that paragraph). They mention the Hunter and not the Monk because it is not relevant to the development of the Spearnaster. Though it is not cited in this source, the Monk and Hunter were explained to be a part of the same update earlier in the Development section, so it's reasonable to assume in a reader's mind that the update the Hunter was added refers to the update the Monk and Hunter were added. -t

Reception

71 and 79 seem to be duplicates
- Looks like visual editor shenanigans. Fixed. -t
17/81: ok
82: ok
6l: ok
74f: ok
6n/74g/80c/78d: ok
11d: the reviewer likened this experience to a realistic ecosystem What part of this ref supports this statement? I cannot locate such a comparison.
- The slugcat is described as "both predator and prey in a broken ecosystem." This perfectly sums up the way it feels making your way... -t
  - I think stating that the reviewer likened it to a "realistic" (that descriptor is not used in the source) ecosystem is too much of a liberal interpretation here. The focus of describing the experience is on being "both predator and prey", not on the "ecosystem": The reviewer continues after the quote by describing how it feels to encounter smaller and bigger monsters. Another problem: "both predator and prey in a broken ecosystem" here is in quotes in the ref itself. Searching for it led me to the Steam page of Rain World, which the reviewer is quoting here. As I see it, they are not synthesizing that comparison, more just confirming the devs' description of the slugcat. YuniToumei (talk) 22:02, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - Rephrased. I was going to defend the original, but I feel this is better anyways. -t
76e: ok
74j: in which the reviewer was too attracted to the artistic detail to contemplate the credulity of the man-made environment. is a bit too WP:CLOPy given the ref says "where you're too preoccupied admiring the artistry to question the logistics of how these man made environments were constructed within the fiction." The sentence structure is rather similar and words are just swapped out for synonyms. Perhaps you can rephrase this or just turn it into a direct quote instead?
- Quoted half and reworded the latter half slightly. -t
11e: ok
17h: ok
81c: ok
89: ok

Notes

8/6/5/74/22/78/76/75/3/4: ok
4/5/6/13/8/74/76/22: ok
Right now, all of the refs in the Notes section are in the WP:OVERCITE (just an essay, not PnG) territory. I understand that you want to use multiple sources to demonstrate that "several reviewers" have said X or Y, but in my opinion it would be better if you chose your three or four best sources for a statement and trim it to that. It's not a dealbreaker since this isn't done to try to refbomb for notability or anything, and since it is kind of out of sight in the footnotes instead of the article text. But I don't think it is necessary.
- I'd rather not chop them down as the refbombs are to show how almost every critic agreed on these points. -t

Hi, I havent had a chance to read the full thing yet, been too busy, but I think in the lead, modding community should be large modding community, as just calling it a modding community came across to me as it wasnt significant, I only understood why it was in the lead when it was mentioned again later in the article. Finnfrog99 (talk) 23:27, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support from OceanHok

[edit]

The player controls a "slugcat", an agile animal resembling a cat-slug hybrid, that is burdened with survival in a derelict and hostile environment. - I would prefer "The player guides a "slugcat", an agile animal resembling a cat-slug hybrid, as it fights for survival across a derelict and hostile environment."
It uses debris as weapons to evade lethal predators - Is the debris a weapon, a defensive tool, or something you use to "evade enemies"? That's three different things.
- Are those really mutually exclusive? I guess I'll change it to "ward off" instead of evade. -t
Beginning in 2011, Rain World, funded through Kickstarter, was in development for over six years by a two-man team who intended to simulate a unique, realistic ecosystem - would it be possible to split it into at least two sentences? This also kinda implies that it was funded in 2011 through Kickstarter, which is not accurate.
A downloadable content pack titled Rain World: Downpour, which was adapted from a popular community mod, was released for Windows in January 2023 and ported to consoles in July 2023, adding five slugcat characters with unique abilities - also would be good if it is split into two sentences, because this is quite long. I also think simply calling them "Downpour" and "The Watcher" is sufficient.
Rain World is a two-dimensional (2D) survival-platformer that employs procedural animation, a method that generates unique animations in real-time unlike traditional techniques - the part about procedural animation really shouldn't be here. "Unlike traditional techniques" is also not needed, because what even are "traditional techniques".
- Procedural animation coverage moved down to Development. -t
As part of a nonlinear game,[2] the slugcat freely explores screens shown individually by squeezing through pipes or walking - Because you already said that players can freely explore its world, "as part of a nonlinear game" is not needed.
The slugcat uses spears and debris to defend itself from predators in the ruined, industrial environment. - "in the ruined, industrial environment" is not gameplay and can be removed.
"returns to after death" can be linked to respawn
rain will come, killing the slugcat in the ensuing flood - "rain will kill the slugcat in the ensuing flood"
It must meet a specific karma level to pass through gates set at the borders of the game's 12 regions, allowing progression - "allowing progression" is not necessary. Also, by this description, the game doesn't really sound non-linear.
Some have variations, such as the differently-colored lizards, which possess unique characteristics - I don't think you need examples here again. Can be changed to something like "Some creatures have variations that possess unique characteristics". I also think this is the paragraph where the part about procedural animation belong. You also kind of need to explain a little bit more about what they are (since this is their first appearance in the article). Alternatively, I also think it is ok to completely ignore animation and let the development section handles it.
- Done, though I'm not sure what you mean by You also kind of need to explain a little bit more about what they are (since this is their first appearance in the article). -t
without a set path for predators to explore, the slugcat is faced with problems it cannot avoid - the two statements do not sound contradictory? What does "faced with problems it cannot avoid" mean?
Art style and environmental storytelling is also not really gameplay. I think a brief mention about its setting actually belong to the first sentence of the first paragraph.
- Moved some stuff around. What do you think? -t
The Gourmand requires a tremendous amount of food, but has access to a crafting system. - what do you craft with this crafting system then?
- Source is unclear: ...letting it combine items into new equipment... -t
Expedition provides random missions that award experience points upon completion - This is hinting at some kind of progression system. What do you do with these XP then?
Downpour's release was accompanied by full local cooperative multiplayer functionality and the free Rain World Remix upgrade, which added accessibility options, ways to customize game difficulty, and modding support so that players could modify the game easily - "The launch of Downpour coincided with the Remix update, which added local cooperative multiplayer functionality to the base game's campaigns, alongside new accessibility and modding support.". The current wordings sound like only the DLC has co-op. Also, neither source mention the title of the update "Remix". I kinda think "players could modify the game easily" is an overgeneralization of what mods actually are, because these modifications are user-generated.
He had no industry experience and had played few games[23] when development began in 2011.[14] - This seems to fall under WP:SYNTH because source 23 is an interview done in 2014 and there is no evidence to show that he started playing games after 2011?
- Removed the mention of him having played few games, though I don't believe SYNTH applies to him having no industry experience specifically. -t
He successfully pitched 12 tracks to Jakobsson after experiencing a nightmare where the game "was filled with garbage music". - From the source, it seems that the reason why he pitched music to Jakobsson is because he is intruiged by the game's visual style rather than having that specific nightmare.
- I've added that he was intrigued by the art style. Never meant to imply the nightmare was why he pitched the soundtrack. -t
The game strayed from that vision as it was expanded, taking many "unexpected twists and turns", - "taking many "unexpected twists and turns" is not needed as the previous part already stated that it strayed from its original vision.
living their own lives in which they hunt and struggle to survive rather than serving as obstacles for the player. - I do not think this is accurate or match what's the gameplay section is saying. Even if the AI has a mind of their own, they ultimately served as some kind of obstacles in the game. I would just remove this whole part because the next sentence directly following it already explains it quite well.
- This claim is accurate to what Jakobsson describes in the interview: Instead of thinking 'how can I make this creature act and serve as an obstacle in the game, I went at it from the angle of... (bold added) I would rather keep this in as it's really fundemental to what he was going for. The creatures are not obstacles, but living things with their own lives and priorities who happen to want to eat the slugcat. -t
Jakobsson added that the creatures in the ecosystem "are also individuals that can learn to recognize you" - "Jakobsson added that the creatures in the ecosystem can recognize the player's actions" to get rid of the quotes.
Rain World's story was partly communicated through its soundtrack to contribute to its environmental storytelling - "Rain World's story was partly communicated through its soundtrack" is already sufficient.
A seven-minute trailer was released by the end of the year, A final trailer was posted on March 8, 2017, revealing its release date, and and posted another trailer on December 5. - we don't usually mention the release date of trailers because they are insignificant (other than the announcement trailer).
Procedural animation was a necessary factor to creating Rain World's natural and "believable" ecosystem. - This statements needs attribution to a person.
Previews compared Rain World's design elements to other video games, including the difficulty of Super Meat Boy (2010), the environment and soundtrack of Fez (2012),[23][46] and the puzzle-platforming of Metroid and Oddworld.[47] - I don't think previews are really valuable because the press only get to play a very small portion of the game. You already have a full reception section below.
A major content update was planned for release later that year. The update was planned to include the local multiplayer arena mode, featuring over 50 rooms, and the Monk and Hunter - This does not sound like a plan. It seems that the content update was actually released.
- I think I understood what you meant here. Done. -t
Following speculation in January 2018,[53] - Is this really "speculation"? He is literally asking people if they are interested in a Switch version.
- Well, yeah, I think Videocult was [meditating] on or [pondering] [31] the possibility of a port. -t
GameDiscoverCo doesn't seem like a reliable source
- Not according to Masem who requested for its addition when I conversed with them. See this VGRS thread too. -t
Reviewers were bored by the repeated navigation & Polygon's reviewer was miserable following the loss of her multi-hour progression - I am not entirely sure the way this is written is appropriate because they do not sound neutral.
- Changed to "dislike" and added quote marks. -t
Rain World's karma gates, requiring a positive hibernate-to-death ratio, were called arbitrary goals "disrespectful" of the player's time, according to GameSpot - double attribution.
Though Rain World was a "beautiful, forward-thinking game", Paste concluded it should have been more accessible in regard to the game's "puzzles" that gave only "half of the pieces". - The topic sentence of the paragraph seems to more or less sum this up already. I think you need attribution for both parts of the sentence ("While calling Rain World a 'beautiful, forward-thinking game,' Paste concluded it should have been more accessible...").
which differentiated it from the "typical goombas" of other games - I think this should be paraphrased. Not helpful for general reader.
I don't think you need any quoteboxes for the reception section because they kind of gave undue weight to certain sentiments.
- I'd be willing to do this, though I noticed the featured article Fez also uses these type of quoteboxes and had them during the time it was on the main page. Is there a difference with how I handled RW's quoteboxes and Fez's or should I just remove them anyway? -t
  - I would support removing them. The template documentation of Template:Quote box states that they should be used with caution, and I think quoteboxes in the reception section are inherently problematic because they kinda amplify the weight of a certain reviewer over others. I would support removing the quotebox from Fez too.
Though Nintendo World Report "fell in love" with Rain World's gloomy and melancholic art style,[74] the graphics were more interesting than beautiful to Polygon - two different yet unrelated sentiments spliced together.
- I disagree. NWR fell in love with the beautiful and melancholic style of the game while Polygon explicitly rejected the idea of calling it beautiful.
While some may compare the aesthetic to that of Limbo (2010) - who?
- RPS cites this to people. I've altered the claim to reflect this. -t
Its imaginative and compelling landscape—surreal inhabitants in a bleak, alien atmosphere—recalled the spirit of games like BioShock (2007) and Abzû (2016), in which the reviewer was too "preoccupied admiring the artistry" to contemplate the credulity of the artificial environment - Author attribution comes a bit too late
Sometimes the article made subjective statements in Wiki-voice (see WP:CRS). "E.g. "Critics especially lamented how the slugcat's jerky animations and imprecise throwing mechanics led to unwarranted deaths"), "Its dark and sinister atmosphere was elegant to Eurogamer", "imaginative and compelling landscape". OceanHok (talk) 17:11, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- Did my best parsing through the section. Update me if there is more to improve on. -t

That's it from me now. OceanHok (talk) 16:57, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the thorough review @OceanHok! Just an fyi, font changing templates like xt must be replaced by simple color templates like green or red because it lags out the FAC page. I would do it for you now, but I gotta cut my work here due to IRL stuff. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 03:10, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I intend to work on these points later, in case you did not see my edit summary. toby ^(t)(c)(rw) 04:11, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support now. OceanHok (talk) 05:06, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): MCE89 (talk) 03:20, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a troupe of Aboriginal performers that toured Australia in 1892 and 1893. The troupe was assembled by a man named Archibald Meston, inspired by shows like Buffalo Bill's Wild West, for what was intended to be a world tour concluding at Chicago's World's Columbian Exposition. Ultimately the troupe ran out of money before leaving the country, resulting in an ugly legal battle between Meston and his business partner.

While it's a fairly obscure episode in Australian history, it's one that I found fascinating to write about, and I think the story of their tour reveals a lot about the experiences and treatment of Aboriginal people across different parts of Australia in this era. I hope that you enjoy reading it, and am grateful to anyone who takes the time to review. MCE89 (talk) 03:20, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

As an initial comment, I suggest adding the relevant language template (“Use...English”).

MSincccc (talk) 08:15, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MSincccc! Added that template and look forward to your comments. MCE89 (talk) 11:28, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Background

but was forced out of his seat after a failed coal mining venture forced him to declare bankruptcy
- You could avoid repeating "forced" in the sentence.
made a series of speculative property investments; his property ventures ended in failure
- How about "made a series of speculative property investments; these ventures ended in failure"?
He began to present himself as an ethnologist and as an expert in Aboriginal cultures.
Drop the second "as"?
Meston's early lectures, which featured live Aboriginal people, painted bush scenes, and taxidermied animals, became the model for the Wild Australia Show.
- Why do we use the last two commas?

MSincccc (talk) 14:49, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

History (Recruitment of performers)

You could link to northern Australia.
- It's a fair point but I'm not sure the linked article really adds much, since "northern Australia" isn't really a distinct geographical region and is used here in a general sense. MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"While he did not recruit any performers" → "Although he did not recruit any performers"
"Purcell left Brisbane three days later to travel to Normanton to collect Aboriginal people who had been assembled by middlemen" → "Purcell left Brisbane three days later to travel to Normanton, where he collected Aboriginal people who had been assembled by middlemen"
These members are believed to have been recruited by police officers
- "Members" is slightly vague here. How about "individuals"?
"violent settler incursions of their lands" → "violent settler incursions into their lands"
"public servants that Purcell was using as agents" → "public servants whom Purcell was using as agents"
On 14 September, Purcell arrived in Cairns with the 21 Indigenous people that he had collected
- You could drop the "that" here.
There, the 26 recruits who made up the troupe assembled at a camp
- Do we need the phrase "who made up the troupe" or could it be dropped?
"He travelled on his own" → "He travelled alone"

MSincccc (talk) 08:38, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

History (Rehearsals and initial performances in Brisbane)

"The Wild Australia Show troupe" → "The troupe"
"between late September and November of 1892" → "between late September and November 1892"
"They often made reference to the Wakaya tradition of penile subincision;" → "They often referred to the Wakaya tradition of penile subincision;"
"The opening performance was held in Brisbane at Her Majesty's Opera House" → "The opening performance was held at Her Majesty's Opera House in Brisbane"

History (Performances in Sydney)

Link "Queensland government" to Colony of Queensland?
"Despite this scrutiny from the authorities" → "Despite scrutiny from the authorities"
"performed its opening show" → "gave its opening performance"
- More suitable in this context?
The "The" of The Daily Telegraph has not been included within the blue link but the "The" of The Sydney Morning Herald has been.
The reviews during the show's time in Sydney were not all positive.
- You could drop the article before "reviews".
"throughout their time in the city" → "during its time in the city"
sent a letter to the Queensland government inquiring as to whether
- "As to" could be dropped.

MSincccc (talk) 10:58, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

History (Performances in Melbourne)

"for the next stop on their tour" → "for the next stop of their tour"
a less positive reception from its Melbourne audiences.
- While nothing is inherently wrong with the phrasing, isn't Melbourne implied?
"causing many residents to lack interest" → "causing many residents to lose interest"
- Since we use "causing".
  - Rephrased this, but I don't think "lose interest" would quite be right since the people in Melbourne were never interested in the show in the first place (i.e. in contrast to the residents of other cities). MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Melbourne was experiencing a severe economic depression
- You could name the crisis rather than pipe it since many are likely to be unaware of it.
"blamed Meston for abandoning the troupe in Melbourne" → "blamed Meston for abandoning the troupe"

History (Second season in Sydney and journey home)

"The Wild Australia Show troupe" → "The troupe"
"which was opening on 27 May" → "which opened on 27 May"
The employment arrangement quickly fell through, however, and the man returned to Queensland a week later.
- You could drop "however".

History (Court case and aftermath)

Purcell sought damages of £1500, while Meston launched a £2000 civil counter-suit for injuries to his "credit, reputation and character". Meston's suit proved unsuccessful, while Purcell was awarded damages of £50.
- How about including the conversion parameters here?
"must join voluntarily" → "must have joined voluntarily"
- More idiomatic?
  - The instructions he gave Purcell was that Purcell needed to make sure that everyone was joining voluntarily before they joined (i.e. that he wasn't allowed to coerce anyone) — rephrased this to make that clearer. MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"in the form of court documentation" → "in the form of court documents"

MCE89 I have read upto the end of the History section. I hope that my suggestions so far have been useful. MSincccc (talk) 16:19, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again MSincccc, all very helpful comments! Responded to all of your comments so far above. MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Performance

"Each Wild Australia Show performance" → "Each performance"
You could link to artistic control.
"Memmott believes" → "Memmott suggests"
"The stage for the performances featured a set of backdrops" → "The stage featured a set of backdrops"
"had been loaned from the Queensland Museum" → "were loaned from the Queensland Museum"

MSincccc (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy and photographs

A single comment- Why do we include "photographs" in the section heading?

Bottom line

MCE89 That's all from me. I missed your responses yesterday since I am presently engaged in multiple active FACs.

I will support the nomination. Cheers. MSincccc (talk) 04:59, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much again! Appreciate the review. MCE89 (talk) 09:53, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MCE89 I tend to prefer the button, but one doesn’t always get what one wants, right? Anyway, I look forward to your next article. MSincccc (talk) 10:07, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is a very interesting, though disturbing, article. The article is in good shape, but it would be good - if possible - to provide more information about the performers' motivations and contributions in particular:

The lead needs to note the racism against Indigenous Australians and restrictions they faced; it lacks this context at present despite it being discussed in the article
"The group was formed by Archibald Meston and his business partner Brabazon Harry Purcell" - it should be noted that the organisers were white while the performers were not
" forced out of his seat after a failed coal mining venture forced him to declare bankruptcy " - duplication of "forced" in the same sentence could be avoided
"Despite having once held virulently racist views, Meston developed an interest in Aboriginal culture and joined the Aborigines' Protection Society of Queensland in 1890" - my understanding is that being racist didn't preclude membership of the various protection societies given they were focused on racist assimilation-based views and paternalism. I'd suggest tweaking the wording here.
"The show's audience soon dwindled, and the show" - also some duplication here
Can more be said about what motivated the Indigenous Australian performers to volunteer to work on this show?
- It's a good question and it's something that the sources spend a lot of time speculating about (the book that I've used as my main source includes some interesting fictionalised vignettes about what could have motivated the performers), but there's not much that can really be said with any certainty. I've added a bit about what scholars have speculated their motivations might have been, but beyond that I don't think there's much more that can really be said unfortunately. MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can anything be said about how the performances were developed? Did the performers have input into this?
- There's no firm evidence of how the show was developed, but Memmott suggests that the performers were probably given a lot of freedom in developing the performance. Added this to the article. MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
What were the performers paid? Nick-D (talk) 05:03, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- They don't seem to have been paid any money as far as we know. I'll see if there's anything more definitive I can find on this, but based on the sources I'd say they likely only had their expenses covered. MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for the review Nick-D! I've responded to your comments above. MCE89 (talk) 11:42, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Prose: overall, the prose is professional quality, and meets WP:FACR requirements (except a few issues noted below).

MOS & Cite formatting: Meets MOS requirements (except a few issues noted below).

Grammar: The Wild Australia Show was a troupe of Indigenous Australian performers that toured Australia between 1892 and 1893. Phrase "between 1892 and 1893" is imprecise and perhaps illogical. Normally one could ignore it, but for the first sentence of a Featured Article, it has to be immaculate. Consider .. from 1892 to 1893.. or .. during 1892 and 1893.. or similar.
Done, went with the latter suggestion. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This is an excellent article on an important topic, and the discussion of images of the performers is critical, so it is essential to provide details, especially photo vs painting. That is done well here:
- Fristrom painted a portrait of the performer...
- ...who painted a portrait of a Walangama ...

but in other places the word "portrait" is used by itself leading readers to wonder if the encyclopedia is talking about photos? paintings? both?:

- [caption] Nahmbo, a 1909 portrait of Narimbu by Oscar Fristrom
- A selection of portraits of the performers was displayed ...
- ... set of properly labelled portraits of all 27 performers...

Even if the author (you) meant "painting" when using the word "portrait" by itself, readers won't know that, and may think "photographic portrait." Suggest eliminating that ambiguity in all places.

Good idea, clarified. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rare word okay for 2nd link ".. as ceremonial performances, corroborees, and dances ..." Although most articles are linked once per article, MOS:LINKONCE permits linking up to once per major section. For rare words like corroborees that are essential to understanding the sentence, consider a 2nd link here so readers that missed the link earlier in the article don't have to hunt for it.
Linked. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Compensation? I cannot find any explicit mention of pay or compensation or absence thereof. If the article is missing that: it needs to be mentioned, even if it is "The performers were not compensated".
Unfortunately I haven't been able to find anything in my sources about the performers' compensation. My guess would be that they probably didn't receive any monetary compensation, but it doesn't seem like we know for sure whether they were paid. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Clarify "The Queensland government agreed that it could not allow the tour to continue and that the Aboriginal performers must be returned to their lands" This is a pretty important sentence, but it is ambiguous and I cannot find the clarification (maybe I'm blind). Does it mean the govmt felt the performers were a danger to Queensland? or that the govt felt the show was unethical? Even if this is explained elsewhere, this here sentences should be clearer & leave no room for ambiguity.
Tried to clarify and expand on this. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"In 2025, researchers reported that 150 photographs of the Wild Australia Show troupe had so far been identified, many of which were originally uncaptioned or mislabelled." Can "so far" be omitted? Seems unnecessary.
Done. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Separate facts: The group performed in Brisbane, Sydney, and Melbourne and were photographed during their tour by Charles Kerry, John William Lindt, and Henry King. Those two facts (city list & photog list) are rather distinct, not sure readers benefit from having them packed into a single sentence. Consider separating, and (for the photographers) add a couple of words to give context here: Did the photographers work together as a team? Or separately?
Done. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Wording? "It was composed of 27 Indigenous people from across northern Queensland and the surrounding region, including 21 men, 5 women, and 1 child" the word "including" is a bit confusing, because the following people are the entire group, not a part of it. Consider "It was composed of 27 Indigenous people from across northern Queensland and the surrounding region: 21 men, 5 women, and 1 child"
Done. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
P vs PP error: pp. 232.
Fixed. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hyphen vs n-dash in page ranges? Use one or the other exclusively. I think the MOS says n-dash is preferred. Hyphen here: pp. 3-18.
Fixed. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Duplicated author-links: I think the repeated author-links are contrary to the spirit of MOS:OVERLINK and MOS:REPEATLINK. Suggest author-link at first use of the author in the Ref section.
Done. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
That is all for now. Noleander (talk) 18:30, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks very much for the review Noleander! I've responded to all your comments above. MCE89 (talk) 09:47, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The lead contains "The failed endeavour led to criticism of Meston and Purcell ..." but I dont see corresponding body text. If it is in the body text, consider adding a couple of words to that lead sentence explaining what the criticism was about. This is a clarity issue similar to the comment above above "[government said] .... that it could not allow the tour to continue". Modern readers need to know: does that mean there were some ethical white Australians that were opposed to the nature of these displays? Or were the criticisms of Meston/Purcell for other reasons (did not want indigenous in the cities, etc). Noleander (talk) 12:50, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The most intense criticism of Meston was largely for abandoning the troupe in Melbourne, while the criticism of Purcell (and to some extent Meston) came later and centred on accusations that he had kidnapped or coerced the performers. I've expanded on this in the body and clarified in the lead. MCE89 (talk) 13:28, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support on prose and MOS. I have not done a source review or image review. An excellent article on an important historical phenomenon ... this is why Wikipedia was created. Noleander (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Aza24 – Pending

[edit]

Will do soon. Aza24 (talk) 23:00, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting (FACR 2c)

Aird 2021 and McKay 2016 have the same ISSN
Aird 2021 should be listed before Aird 2022
I wouldn't expect retrieval dates for book sources, but they are inconsistent for the journals
- I've used retrieval dates where I've used a URL, but not where there's an open access DOI given that those should be persistent identifiers. Hopefully that's okay? MCE89 (talk) 04:28, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Optional recommendation: hyphenate ISBNS

Reliability (FACR 1c)

All recent academic journals or publishers. Nice work

Coverage (FACR 1c)

As expected, most sources come from Australia. Of course, this is not an issue, but I wonder: have you looked for sources from other places? I'm thinking mainly, there may be larger texts on indigenous people globally, or perhaps colonization which discuss this topic. Here are some examples with mentions: Reframing Indigenous Biography and I am also seeing mention in the A Cultural History of the Bushranger Legend in Theatres and Cinemas, 1828–2017
- Unfortunately I haven't been able to find much else. Of the two books you've mentioned, the chapter about the Wild Australia Show in Reframing Indigenous Biography is a reprinting of this essay that I've already cited, and the book A Cultural History of the Bushranger Legend seems to be talking about a different show by the same name. MCE89 (talk) 04:28, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Verifiability (FACR 1c and 1f)

McKay 2016 — no page range?

Spotchecks – Pending

[edit]

Many of the images are from a book, and are given without page numbers. I have checked and they seem to be correct, though, when there is a page number. ALT text and image placement are fine. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:32, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:50, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about Phryne, the most famous courtesan of classical Greece. She was famed in antiquity for her trial for impiety, in which she supposedly secured her acquittal by showing the jury her breasts, and for her relationship with the sculptor Praxiteles, who supposedly modeled the Aphrodite of Knidos on her. The best-known versions of both of these stories are probably heavily fictionalised, and we know little about her life for certain, but we have her father's name, a reasonable idea of her year and city of birth, and more than one event in her life which is almost certainly at least based on something which probably actually happened – which makes her one of the best attested women of her period, and indeed the entirety of ancient Greek history.

In the eighteenth and nineteenth century French artists went through something of a Phryne phase – they liked a historical courtesan whom they had an excuse to show without too many clothes on – and to the extent she is known today by laypeople it's probably due to Jean-Léon Gérôme's painting Phryne before the Areopagus. 2024 was a big year for Phryne – two entire books were published about her almost simultaneously, propelling her at a stroke into third place in the hypothetical leaderboard of ancient Greek women who have been the subject of English-language monographs (Cleopatra and Sappho have the top two spots tied down for the foreseeable future) and prompting me to once again take up the article I brought to GA back in 2022. Many thanks to UndercoverClassicist and Choliamb, both of whom provided helpful advice when I first started looking at bringing this to FAC; any remaining errors in the article are no doubt mine. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:50, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'd been wondering when this would show up here -- delighted that it has. Will chip in here soon. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:24, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On the lead image: any thought about swapping in the full-size Aphrodite of Knidos? The head isn't a great image (the contrast between the head and the background isn't wonderful), and it strikes me that the faces of ancient female statues are usually pretty standardised -- without being overly crude, it probably wasn't (just, particularly) Phryne's face that Praxitiles used.
- I don't really want to use this image currently illustrating §Model because it's looking away from the text – especially for the lead image, portraits always look better to me head on or looking towards the text (and MOS:PORTRAIT agrees with me on this). I could use an alternative image (the best for the Ludovisi Aphrodite is probably this, though it's cut off mid-thigh rather than showing the whole sculpture; alternatively there's the Colonna Venus). Or there's this as a possibly more legible image of the head.
  The other consideration is what to put in the section currently illustrated by the Ludovisi Venus, if we put a much more similar image in the lead. Two possibilities come to mind: (1) rather than an image, we could have a blockquote of one of the ecphrastic epigrams from the Greek Anthology related to Praxiteles' carvings and Phryne; (2) we could mention Antonio Corso's thesis that this is a replica of Praxiteles' Thespian Aphrodite/Phryne at Delphi. What think you? Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 10:47, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think that first Ludovisi image is a very good one for the purpose. This one is an improvement on what we have, but my reservations about faces alone would remain; given that the appearance of faces of female statues from antiquity, particularly of Venus, are overwhelmingly dictated by convention/idealism, how much of the model do we think we can really see in it? I don't have a strong opinion on what to swap it for: both 1) and 2) seem eminently sensible. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:15, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Are we considering hetaira/hetairai a naturalised word? Not convinced I'm totally sold on that, to be honest.
- I'm not entirely sold myself, but it has entries in the OED, Chambers, and Merriam-Webster, so I think it meets MOS:!EN's A rule of thumb is to not italicize words that appear unitalicized in major general-purpose English dictionaries. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 10:47, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Non-English words need lang tags: Musée du Louvre (use |italic=no if you want), Deipnosophistae.
Phryne was largely ignored during the Renaissance: I wonder if this could be a bit more nuanced than "ignored": we're talking about specific people who might have been expected to depict her but didn't.
- We could, but there's not much more to say here that I can find. Both Cavallini and Funke use the word (Cavallini: "almost ignored"; Funke: "mostly ignored") but neither mentions any specific examples of people who failed to depict her. Frustratingly Funke says that she "will discuss" the only three seventeenth-century paintings of Phryne and then proceeds to mention only one! I've added a mention of Funke's only three paintings, however. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 10:47, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Is the seventeenth century generally considered the Renaissance? Most people would draw the end of that period somewhere before 1600, I think, and sometimes before 1500. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:16, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As far as Italian art is concerned, most would say that the Late Renaissance is followed around 1590 (Carracci and then Caravaggio) by the Baroque. In art, I think no-one would end the Renaissance before 1527, the Sack of Rome terminating the High Renaissance, the start of which is usually taken to be David (Michelangelo), 1501-04. Before that is Early Renaissance. Johnbod (talk) 15:24, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of England, where it's unusual (though not unheard of) to describe Henry VIII (r. 1509–1547) as "Renaissance" rather than "Early Modern". But yes, the correction in this context is well taken. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:23, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm entirely happy terminating the English Renaissance somewhere under James I, which I think is still typical in the study of the arts. Early Modern isn't a useful concept in art history, even if the start and stop dates could be agreed, which seems a long way off. Johnbod (talk) 21:20, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Well it sounds as though consensus is that the seventeenth century is mostly not renaissance, so I've jiggled the text around to reflect that. (On the renaissance/early modern thing, my impression is that they significantly overlap; renaissance is just more commonly used when discussing art history and intellectual history and early modern when discussing other kinds of history) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 10:35, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As well as her depiction in visual arts, since the nineteenth century she has also appeared: the grammar of this introductory clause is a bit wonky: suggest "as well as being depicted..."
the artists Apelles and Praxiteles: the Aphrodite of Knidos was said to have been based on her.: "the latter's"?
in literature, theatre, and on film.: as we change the preposition, I would do in theatre.
As with other ancient Greek women, scholarship about Phryne is hindered by the fragmentary nature of the surviving sources: this is true for all ancient Greek people, so it's odd to single out "women" here while not giving anything that specifically applies to women. I think it would be true to say that women in general are even more poorly reflected in the evidential record than men, but we would need to actually find a way of saying and sourcing that.
- Hmm, McClure is specifically talking about the difficulty of writing about ancient women. I've had a go at recasting this so as not to imply that we have more plentiful sourcing about Greek men than we actually do – is this any better? Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 10:52, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, I like it. I might be tempted to point out that women in classical Athens still have it much better, evidentially speaking, than women from just about anywhere else, because at least the sources exist -- but the double edge of that sword is that they're practically all from male perspectives. But of course you'd need a source that explicitly says as much. I suspect something like Pomeroy's Goddesses, Whores, Wives and Slaves will have something to that effect? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:33, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The most substantial contemporary source about Phryne's life was Hypereides' defence speech from her trial.: I know the date's only roughly known, but I would put one on it here: we're saying "contemporary" but don't actually clarify when we're talking about for several sections.
The most important of these is Athenaeus, who was from Roman Egypt in the second century AD.: not sure of the grammar here. "Born in Roman Egypt in..."; "lived in Roman Egypt in..." etc all work fine, but I'm not sure you can say someone was from somewhere in a time period.
Athenian comic playwrights had moved away from the mythological subjects popular in earlier periods, and more often satirised real people: I know it's sourced, but this doesn't pass the sniff test. We don't have a single Aristophanic comedy, as far as I know at least, that's primarily mythological in subject -- and plenty of them satirise real people (Cleon, Socrates, Euripides, Aeschylus, Cleisthenes...). His very earliest known play is the Acharnians of 425, and that's set in contemporary Athens and mocks real people (and it's a pretty safe bet that The Babylonians, his second, did at least the latter) -- so what's the presumed older comedy that Funke is talking about here? I would be able to wear the point for tragedy, but someone (Funke, perhaps) has gotten muddled up here.
- Okay, I've followed up on Funke's source (McClure, Courtesans at Table) and I think the point that they're trying to make here is to contrast Middle Comedy pre-Phryne (which is what they are claiming was largely mythological burlesque) with Middle Comedy at the time of Phryne (featuring real hetairai). As you say Aristophanes is definitely satirising real people in many plays and other than in Frogs (which also satirises real people!) doesn't do much in the way of mythological comedy! (McClure's position on Old Comedy seems to be that while they did satirise real people frequently, it wasn't hetairai who were particularly targets). I'll have a go at making the point here clearer. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 11:16, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
McClure's position on Old Comedy seems to be that while they did satirise real people frequently, it wasn't hetairai who were particularly targets: that bit's very fair, at least, though of course there are plenty of jokes at women being hypersexual (see Lysistrata, the Ecclesiazusae...) UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:02, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Several anecdotes from the Deipnosophistae relate Phryne's witticisms, though the meaning of many of them is unclear: the anecdotes or the witticisms? It might be a nice touch to quote one or two in a quote box, if you feel we have room: that would be the closest we can get to hearing Phryne's actual voice (though obviously there's massive caveats on that).
In one anecdote: I would quite like to know the source of this, even if only in a footnote.
probably between 350 BC and 340 BC.: can cut the first BC here.
The charge of introducing a new god had previously been used in the trial of Socrates;: being a bit pedantic, Socrates was accused of doing it in the plural (that is, introducing new divinities: ὡς ... ἕτερα δὲ καινὰ δαιμόνια εἰσφέροι, in Xenophon's phrasing).
I would put dates on the trials of Socrates and Ninios, and briefly say who they were. It's a bit surprising, for example, that the same charge used against two people obviously engaged in the religious/philosophical sphere would be turned against a woman who spent her time being paid to have dinner (etc) with men.
According to Harpocration: who's he and how should he know?
Note g needs a full stop and a citation.
Christine Mitchell Havelock notes that there is separate evidence for women being brought into the courtroom to arouse the sympathy of the jury: this is true, but a bit misleading: we're talking about bringing in the family of an accused man. I think the difference needs to be noted here as well as the similarity.
in ancient Greece baring the breasts was a gesture intended to arouse compassion: are we talking about e.g. Hecuba in the Iliad here? If so, the difference is again important: that's quite specifically a mother baring her breasts to her son, to remind him that she suckled him at them. Ziogas's parallels below are different in the same important way: Clytemnestra's gesture is clearly maternal while Menelaus's is clearly erotic (as Ziogas points out): it's not sympathy she's arousing here. Finally, at the risk of stating the blindingly obvious, not without parallel in Greek practice: we are surely not saying that the playscript of the Oresteia or the text of the Little Iliad definitely reflect what actual people actually did?
his comedy Ephesian Woman: no the?
- There's absolutely no consistency in how this title is given in English among my sources; having done a quick survey it seems as though the most commonly-used solution is simply to transliterate it as Ephesia. I have no personal investment in any of them (and indeed I notice that the article currently uses both Ephesian Woman and The Ephesian Girl). I've just made them all The Ephesian Woman so we can at least be internally consistent, but I'm not especially wedded to that particular rendering of the title. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:33, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We never actually say which court Phryne was tried in. The paintings all say the Areopagus, but in that case "jury" isn't quite the right term, and we should probably explain what it was.
- Yes, the paintings are all wrong. There's no evidence in the ancient sources that it was the Areopagus, and good reason to believe that it wasn't. Several ancient sources have Phryne tried by jurors; Posidippus has the trial at the Heliaia; David Phillips' The Law of Ancient Athens says that the only impiety trials which took place before the Areopagus were those related to the desecration of sacred olive trees. (And though he doesn't believe that Phryne was prosecuted by a graphe asebias, he still thinks that she would have been tried by a jury, not the Areopagus). People writing about Phryne's trial unhelpfully don't seem to discuss this in any way, but Cavallini on Phryne's reception does explicitly note that Gérôme's Areopagus is wrong, so I've added a footnote where we discuss the painting making this observation. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:33, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - Should we say this business about which court it was when we introduce the trial itself? As you probably know, the Athenians had the frustrating habit of talking about the "Heliaia" when we would probably say a "dikasterion". I think that by our period, being tried in front of the whole Heliaia (which in theory could consist of the entire citizen body) was pretty rare, but I'm well out of my depth on that. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 18:31, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, legal procedure is very much not my area of interest, but my understanding is that at this point "heliaia" can refer to basically any jury trial, not specifically to trials in the specific building/in front of the entire citizenry. I haven't yet found any sources which really talk about what the specific procedures of Phryne's trial are likely to have been, though, which is why I've avoided dealing with it in the section on the trial itself. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:10, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
one of three known from the fourth century in which a metic woman was accused of a religious crime: what's a metic?
Due to her wealth and connections, hers was the only one in which the accused was acquitted: do we know this causation for sure?
Praxiteles' Aphrodite of Knidos, the first three-dimensional and monumentally sized female nude in ancient Greek art: if we're going to say first, we should also say when.
it is the only known statue of a woman alone to be dedicated before the Roman period: again, a date would help here.
I would explain who Eros was: it becomes important on the second mention.
Part of me likes that Campaspe gets a wikilink while Alexander the Great doesn't, but I think we should probably correct the imbalance.
- I hadn't linked it not to make a point (though I do enjoy the point I wasn't making) but because Alexander is linked in the body above; it's sufficiently far away that the extra link in the footnote is probably worthwhile, though, so I've added it Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:03, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
on the Greek island of Kos before being taken to Rome by the emperor Augustus;: beating an old drum, but how about a {{reigned}} template?

More to follow. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:33, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure we actually say why bearing her breasts (allegedly) helped Phryne's case. Ziogas puts it nicely: This ysterious source of desire for the female body is ultimately traced in the sphere of the divine. This is a crucial aspect for understanding the judgment of Helen and the trial of Phryne. Menelaus’ wife cannot be tried and put to death because her goddesslike figure sets her above human law. Hyperides’ evocation of Helen’s special status aims at establishing a similar state of exception for Phryne ... According to Athenaeus, Phryne's disrobing and Hyperides' subsequent lament "caused the jurors to feel a superstitious fear of this priestess and temple-attendant of Aphrodite, and to give in to pity rather than put her to death." Thesource of the jurors’ fear of gods, dismissed as superstitious, is Phryne’s religious devotion to the cult of Aphrodite.
Angelica Kauffmann's Praxiteles Giving Phryne his Statue of Cupid (1794): worth footnoting that Cupid = Eros, as we've called him in the text?
in one story, she asked a prospective client for one mina to sleep with her: I like this anecdote: it would be good to give some idea of how much a mina was worth. I can probably dig something out if you like.
In ancient literature, hetairai were often said to have modelled for famous artists: for instance Aristides of Thebes was said to have painted Leontion.: Leontion's article seems decidedly unsure about whether she was a hetaira, though I haven't checked this in better sources.
- It's quite possibly disputed – she wouldn't be the only ancient woman whose status as a hetaira is in doubt! – but even if it is I'm not sure it really affects the point being made here if she was considered a hetaira in antiquity. McClure gives several other examples, though, so we can certainly change it – Glycera with Pausias, Campaspe and Lais (frustratingly neither McClure nor Kapparis, who both mention this story, are very clear which of the various courtesans who used the name Lais this refers to!) with Apelles. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking of modifying it to be clearer on whose word we're taking where: something like "the fourth-century Roman philosopher Fatuous Maximus related that Leontion, whom he categorised as a hetaira, was once painted by Aristides of Thebes". UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:19, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This may have been the first female portrait ever dedicated at Delphi: of a mortal woman, I assume?
- I would presume so. Keesling does not say so explicitly, but I assume that by "portrait statue" she is specifically referring to statues of real mortal women as opposed to legendary/mythical/divine women. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:03, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I would add -- there are certainly earlier female statues than this, though admittedly you could quibble whether they count as portraits. See for instance the caryatids from the C6th Treasury of the Siphnians, or this Archaic ?Nike, or even this little head from the Treasury of the Athenians. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 06:47, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Early depictions of her by Angelica Kauffmann and J. M. W. Turner avoid eroticising her: this is a little bit of a cheat, as neither Kaufmann nor Turner ever really eroticised anything. Turner in particular painted scenes and landscapes rather than people, and hence it's very difficult to find Phryne at all in his painting. Salvator Rosa might be a better comparandum, but again I can't find any painting by him that I would really describe as erotic in any meaningful way.
engravings by Léopold Flameng, a sculpture by Alexandre Falguière, and a drawing by Paul Cézanne all modelled after Gérôme's Phryne: do we have images of those?
The way we present Gérôme's image is a bit unfortunate: it's the iconic image of the trial, but we really want it in a multi-image with Leroux and A Roman Slave Market, down in the Reception section, to illustrate the controversy over the pose. I'm chewing over suggesting swapping in e.g. Deshays or David to the trial section, but I don't think either would be as good, or suggesting moving the two relevant pictures out of the gallery into this section, but then it would all become very crowded indeed. Probably best to leave it as we have it.
In nineteenth century literature: hyphen.
Frederic Leighton and Edward Burne-Jones both painted works on this theme in the 1880s: again, anything for the gallery here?
Alessandro Blasetti's "Il processo di Frine" ("The Trial of Phryne") adapted the story of Phryne's trial with a contemporary setting: it might be worth saying that the story in Blasetti/Scarfoglio is really quite different: the defendant is accused of poisoning her husband, and is convicted (but avoids the death penalty and gets a paltry prison term instead) because her lawyer argues that her beauty shows that "her appetites are those of idiots and fools ... she is mentally ill ... as beautiful on the outside as she is empty on the inside" (gli appetiti suoi son quelli appunto dei cretini e degl'idioti ... [lei] è ammalata di mente ... è tanto bella di fuori quanto è vuota dentro). At the end, he laughs and reveals that his whole impassioned speech was a sham.
Both films depict Phryne's disrobing at her trial with an iconography influenced by Gérôme's painting.: this doesn't quite happen in "Il processo di Frine" (which you can see on YouTube: watch from 1:55:00). In the film (but not the story), the defence lawyer covers her (already fully clothed) with his own gown, then theatrically pulls the gown away: this is clearly a nod to the story behind the Gérôme painting, but she is never actually disrobed.
pheidomai, "to be thrifty": you won't need me to spell it out, but for those playing along at home: you've used the first person singular here, so should translate as such, or alternatively quote the infinitive. The joke works just as "well" with either -- you might want to add to the footnote that the pun is on Phidias's name ("Phid-" and "Pheid-" would be pronounced almost identically in most Greek dialects).
A Hellenistic biographer, Hermippus of Smyrna, reports that after Phryne's acquittal, Euthias was so furious that he never spoke publicly again: cited entirely to primary sources. Not a huge problem as the phrasing entirely meets WP:PRIMARY, but has this been mentioned in a secondary source, to appease WP:DUEWEIGHT?
There's a lot of Funke and McClure in the citations. The bibliography is also entirely Anglophone. Again, I'm not convinced this is a huge problem, as ancient women aren't generally massively well studied, but a few JSTOR articles which might be of use:
- Conyers, Claude (2003), Courtesans in Dance History: Les Belles de la Belle Époque, JSTOR 1568125 (p. 229 mentions a ballet on Phryne).
- Corso, Antonio (1998), Love as Suffering: The Eros of Thespiae of Praxiteles, JSTOR 43636541 (pp. 66ff have good material on Praxitiles and Phryne not mentioned in the article).
- Griffin, Jasper (1977), Propertius and Antony, JSTOR 299915 (p. 20 for Phyrne's place in the tradition of literature on hetairai).
- Mahaffey, Kathleen (1970), Pope's 'Artimesia' and 'Phryne' as Personal Satire, JSTOR 513634 (Pope's satire probably deserves a name-drop).
- Gutzwiller, Kathryn (2004), Gender and Inscribed Epigram: Herennia Procula and the Thespian Eros, JSTOR 20054113 (p. 385 on "scopic economy", citing Davidson as mentioned in the article; this idea probably needs some discussion).
- Schiller, Noel (2010), Desire and dissimulation: laughter as an expressive behavior in Karel van Mander's "Den grondt der edel vry schilder-const" (1604), JSTOR 43885158 (Phryne gets quite a lot of airtime here, though it's difficult to point to individual sentences that 100% need to be in this article: some of it might be useful).
- Gaillard, Francoise; Windish, Colette (2012), Naked, but Hairy: Women and Misogyny in Fin de Siècle Representations, JSTOR 41679414 (Has a wonderful Zola quote about Gérôme's Phryne, though maybe more at home in the article on the painting).
- House, John (2008), History without Values? Gérôme's History Paintings, JSTOR 20462785 (pp. 267ff on the negative reaction to Gérôme's painting, which casts it somewhat differently to how we have here).
- Corpataux, Jean-François (2009), Phryné, Vénus et Galatée dans I'atelier de Jean-Léon Gérôme, JSTOR 40343670 (mostly, and at length, on Gérôme, but does have photos of Falguiere's statues on p. 147, so might be worth citing for that alone -- and see note 16 for possibly useful bibliography).
- Roworth, Wendy Wassyng (1983), The Gentle Art of Persuasion: Angelica Kauffman's Praxiteles and Phryne, JSTOR 3050350 (comments at length on the unusualness of the two Kaufmann Phryne episodes -- Xenocrates and Praxiteles -- in art to Kaufmann's time, and some thoughts on what she was trying to do with them).
- Cavallini, Eleonara (2014), Esibizionismo o propaganda politica? Frine tra storia e aneddotica (in Italian) (lots here: e.g. p. 129f very good on methodological difficulties; p. 132 gives an explanation for the capers thing; pp. 136ff talk about the likely impact of the Knidia on Phryne's life, though admittedly though conjecture)
- John Frederick Nims seems to have written a poem called "Phryne", but I can find very little on it online.
  - To make my position clear to the co-ordinators: I'm not too far from a support, but I do think at least some of the material above needs to be added, and the factual quibbles above are sticking points (at least without a good explanation). The stylistic ones are not. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:17, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

How does the image gallery align with WP:GALLERY?
- While Phryne is not inherently an article about the visual arts, the story of her reception in the last 400 years is dominated by the visual arts – by contrast with comparable ancient figures like Aspasia for whom the literary reception is much more important. The images in the gallery are either explicitly mentioned in the text (the Turner and Gerome paintings, the Puck cartoon) or alluded to (Kauffman painted several images of Phryne and our discussion doesn't currently refer to any specific one; we don't explicitly mention David's drawing as an early example of the 19th century French treatment of Phryne discussed in the text; Saint-Saens' opera is mentioned but not the poster design specifically). I'd be happy to tweak exactly which images are illustrated in the gallery if people think the current ones aren't the best possible, but given the importance of the visual receptions of Phryne I do think a gallery is justified. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 15:18, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
File:Phryne_seduces_the_philosopher_Xenocrates,_Angelica_Kauffmann_1794.jpg: source link is dead
File:Jean-Léon_Gérôme_-_A_Roman_Slave_Market_-_Walters_37885.jpg: the original work needs a US tag
File:Phryné_-_opéra-comique_en_2_actes_...,_musique_de_C._Saint-Saëns._-_affiche_-_F._Marcotte_-_btv1b53187307n.jpg: what is the author's date of death? Nikkimaria (talk) 05:00, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

"the source of the vast majority of extant ancient writings about Phryne" → "the source of most extant ancient writings about Phryne"
- More idiomatic?
  - I don't see a difference in how idiomatic they are; the difference is how much each emphasises the importance of Athenaeus to the transmission of texts about Phryne. "Most" is significantly weaker. I'm not especially tied to "vast majority" but nor do I see a compelling reason to change it. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"source about Phryne's life" → "source for Phryne’s life"
- Why? To the extent I see a difference in meaning here I think "about" is marginally better (I would tend to use "source for" in reference to a specific claim, as in "source for the connection [between Phryne and the Aphrodite of Knidos]" further down the article) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Phryne featured in several of these plays. In Timocles' Orestautokleides and Anaxilas' Neottis she is named in lists of hetairai, Timocles' Neaira makes a joke about her early life, and Posidippus' The Ephesian Girl describes her trial.
- Could these sentence be rephrased since it strings together three points with commas, making it hard to parse?

MSincccc (talk) 12:49, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Life

You could link to Helen Morales.
according to Plutarch her fame meant
- You could insert a comma after "Plutarch".
"they rarely describe specifics of her appearance" → "they rarely described specifics of her appearance"
- We have ancient sources in the present tense throughout the article (e.g. "comic plays from Phryne's lifetime often refer to hetairai", "Several anecdotes from the Deipnosophistae relate Phryne's witticisms", "Harpocration describes him as being foreign"). My understanding of MOS:TENSE is that this is correct, and it certainly seems to be how it's done in other ancient history FAs) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 21:59, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As we're talking about the writers, rather than their works, we should probably go for the past tense, as in the previous clause: Though ancient authors writing about Phryne were deeply concerned with her beauty, they rarely describe. At the very least, the two should go the same way. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:09, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I missed that. Changed. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:21, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 17:10, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Life (Trial)

lists three specific accusations against her –
- How about a colon after "her"?
You could include a Wikitionary link to "licentiousness".
- I see MOS:INTERWIKI permits this, but the only guidance on when to do so is the unhelpfully vague "to an unusual word". I don't know that I think "licentiousness" is sufficiently unusual to justify this – I'll leave it for now but if others think it's too difficult to understand this sentence, in the spirit of MOS:NOFORCELINK I think we'd be better off rewriting it, frankly. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 12:04, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Life (Model)

"In ancient literature" → "In Ancient Greek literature"
You could link to Kos.
"and reputedly the model for both him and the painter Apelles" → "and was reputedly the model for both him and the painter Apelles"
"The only source for the connection is Athenaeus." → "Athenaeus is the only source for this connection."
- More natural word order? I leave it to you.
Well, it reads more natural to me in the latter manner; but after all, it's your article. MSincccc (talk) 08:13, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 07:33, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line

Looks pretty good, & UC can be relied on to cover classical points, so not much to say.
I think a bit of explanation of the hetaira is justified.
There is a lot of mention of anecdotes, but only one or two of them are given. Is a section just listing some possible? With health warnings as necessary.
- I think most of the relevant ones are worked into the article in various places (I've added one, and more detail on another, since your review), and think the current structure including them in the article, rather than just randomly listing them, is the most sensible way of doing things. (There's one more well-known one, about her charging a client a mina to sleep with her, which I'm probably also going to work in to the text in the near future in response to some of UC's comments above, so watch this space...) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:36, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think the gallery is entirely justified, and could perhaps be larger. Unfortunately the Neoclassical works are rather insipid. The wonderful MET drawing perhaps, and even File:Tableau vivant de l'Académie Julian caricaturant la Phryné de Gérôme photo de monfreid.jpg
- Yes, there's only so many neoclassical history paintings we can expect the reader to stomach! I love the Met drawing, but while it's clearly out of copyright I think technically we have to be able to demonstrate that it was first published before 1931 (or before 1977 without copyright notice/renewal). It was certainly illustrated in the Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin without any copyright notice when the Met acquired the drawing in 1962, and I can't find any reason to think it was ever published in the US with a copyright notice before that, so I would assume that either (1) it was exhibited in the eighteenth century and thus out of copyright or (2) it was "first published" when the Met announced their acquisition and thus is out of copyright – but I can't actually prove either of those are the case. Could a FAC copyright expert weigh in? (shamelessly @Nikkimaria:) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Could you clarify which Met drawing you're asking about? Nikkimaria (talk) 23:35, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria, This one (there are other versions on Commons). As an 18th-century drawing, with the file donated to Commons by the MET I can't see a problem myself. Johnbod (talk) 02:54, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. The Met says it's CC0 and we've generally accepted that. Nikkimaria (talk) 03:16, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Well with that stamp of approval I've gone ahead and added it. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:39, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can't a better image of the Tate's Turner be uploaded?
More dates in the text on later works would be good.
- My worry with adding too many dates is that they are more distracting than helpful; I've had a re-read of this section and though it doesn't give many specific dates, I think it does a generally good job of chronologically locating works (and anyone who wants to know the specific year of any of the artworks will find it in the image captions, at least). Are there any particular dates you think should be included? Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 20:30, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The "Angelica Kauffman, Phryne Seduces the Philosopher Xenocrates 1794" in the gallery would fill the imageless "Life" section, but shouldn't the title be "attempts to...". Do we know where it is btw?
- Logically it should be, but Funke has "Seduces" and McClure "Seducing". The catalogue for the Dusseldorf/Munich/Chur 1998 Kauffmann retrospective has it as "Phryne verführt den Philosophen Xenokrat" – German is not a language I speak but this also appears to mean "seduces".
  To answer your second question: sold at Christies London in 2002, I presume to a private buyer ([32]). McClure 2024 says it's in a private collection. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
On the other hand, there are 3 17th century paintings, all much better works, in Category:Phryne_and_Xenocrates_in_paintings on Commons, which rather gives the lie to the narrative that only Neoclassicism started depictions.... Or this is very fine.
- Hmm, I've added the Salvator Rosa painting (and since you made this comment, added a little text acknowledging that there were some seventeenth-century depictions). Willing to consider more images if you think it's really valuable – I like the Russ etching. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The dimensions of the Russian giant are Width 763.5 cm, Height 390 cm, which really should be given.
- The enormous size of this is certainly notable, but is it notable enough to include in this article? As a reader as soon as I see dimensions in a caption I glaze over entirely, and this is an article about Phryne – not about the painting. I'm willing to be convinced on this point but personally I'm not sure how important the dimensions would be in this caption... (And if we add dimensions to this, should we do so for the other paintings for consistency?) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:36, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've been very slow on this, so I'd better start picking them off as I can. We all have some kind of unthinking mechanism for judging the actual size of a work of art from a tiny photo. In cases where this is likely to give a drastically wrong result, I think an indication of the actual size should be given. "Nearly 8 metres wide" would do (or 25 feet, 8 yards). No there is no need to do it for all the works. The same would apply if it were 15 cm wide. Johnbod (talk) 02:58, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Better explain the Puck cartoon in the caption; there's room.
More later Johnbod (talk) 02:11, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Picking up: "this was the first three-dimensional and monumentally sized female nude in ancient Greek art.[75]" - we surely don't know this. Qualify.
- The sources state this as a fact. Funke: "the first monumental female nude sculpture in the ancient Greek world". McClure: "the first life-size female nude in the Western artistic tradition". Havelock: "Praxiteles created the first female nude in monumental and three-dimensional form". Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The para giving the comments, or lack of them, on the modelling could do with more dates - most are from many centuries later, even if we assume they reflect other lost sources in between.
"only known statue of a woman alone" - reads a bit oddly. "only known single statue of a woman" perhaps
- "only known single statue of a woman" reads more oddly to me. I wouldn't be sure what "single statue of a woman" even means; I'm not convinced it has the same meaning. How do you feel about "... woman by herself"? Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
link Asclepius
"Hypereides's defence speech was translated into Latin ..." but is now lost, yes?
"Phryne was largely ignored during the Renaissance in favour of women such as Lucretia and Cleopatra, who were seen as heroic". I don't like this sentence at all. The big ancient Greek mistress/prostitute story as far as the later Middle Ages and Renaissance were concerned, at least as reflected in art, was Phyllis and Aristotle (completely a medieval fantasy, but they probably didn't know that). Like Lucretia, Phyllis was a regular part of the Power of Women trope. It is true that both Lucretia and Cleopatra are among the 106 female biographies in Boccaccio's De Mulieribus Claris, and Phryne is not. But this hefty piece of German scholarship on the many versions of the "Nine Female Worthies" mentions Lucretia 6 times and neither Cleopatra nor Phryne once, which rather confirms my expectations. You perhaps need to explain how the Renaissance would have been aware of Phryne to ignore her, which the article doesn't currently cover.
More later. Johnbod (talk) 03:28, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
No, I think that's it. Johnbod (talk) 00:34, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closer: I'm in a similar position to UC above, and Choliam below. I notice the nominator last edited the page on the 14th, no doubt for good reasons. Johnbod (talk) 02:32, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I enjoyed an earlier incarnation of this article and it's even better now. I do have a few nits to pick, chiefly about the way in which Athenaeus is cited and credited in the text and notes. The "Sources" section does a good job of summarizing where our information comes from, and makes it clear that most of what Athenaeus says about Phryne was collected from earlier sources. But when it comes to citing these individual bits of information, the approach is inconsistent. Some are attributed to their original authors with a nod to Athenaeus as the proximate source (passages 8 and 9 below); others are attributed to their original authors with no indication that they are preserved in Athenaeus (passage 3 below); and still others are credited only to Athenaeus without any acknowledgement of the original source (passages 1, 2, and 4 below). To be fair, sometimes Athenaeus doesn't name a specific source, and in such cases phrasing like "Athenaeus says" or "according to Athenaeus" is appropriate (passages 7, 10, 11, and 12 below). But when he does say that a particular detail comes from source X or source Y, it seems to me misleading to attribute it to Athenaeus himself. I'd like to see the original source credited as well, if only because most of these sources are several centuries earlier than Athenaeus, and readers shouldn't automatically dismiss them as "late" or "Roman". (Whether they are accurate is a different question, of course.) Many readers, especially those who already have some familiarity with classical antiquity, would probably appreciate being told what the actual source is, rather than having to dig through the secondary sources or through Athenaeus to try to find the passage in question.

Out of curiosity I decided to check every point in the article where Athenaeus is cited as a source, or where some other ancient author is cited as the source but the passage in question is preserved in Athenaeus. I may have overlooked some, but here's what I found:

(1) Both Plutarch and Athenaeus say that her real name was Mnesarete. This is Athenaeus 13.591e, but he doesn't make this claim on his own authority; he reports that Aristogeiton, in his speech Against Phryne, said that her real name was Mnesarete. (I didn't check Plutarch, but the odds are good that Aristogeiton was his source as well.)

Editing to add that I overlooked the fact that Aristogeiton is mentioned in the footnote on this sentence. Which is all the more embarrassing because I made the same point on the article talk page back in 2024, and apparently I was the one who added Aristogeiton's name to the note in the first place (in this edit, of which I have no memory whatsoever). Oy! Choliamb (talk) 11:40, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

(2) Explanatory note c: According to Athenaeus, there were two Phrynes: one was nicknamed Saperdion ("little fish"); the other Clausigelos ("teary laughter"). In Athen. 13.591c these nicknames are attributed to the Περὶ ἑταιρῶν of Apollodorus. (This is Apollodorus of Athens in WP, although the article doesn't mention his treatise on prostitutes.)

(3) According to Callistratus, after Alexander razed Thebes in 335, Phryne offered to pay to rebuild the walls. Although not mentioned here, this is Athen. 13.591d, taken from the Περὶ ἑταιρῶν of Callistratus (called Callistratus (grammarian) in WP, not to be confused with the ecphrasist). The sentence stops here and omits the funny part of the story, which is that Phryne agreed to pay to rebuild the walls, but only if the Thebans set up an inscription saying "Alexander knocked them down, but Phryne the hetaira stood them up". This is alluded to later in the article, in the section on the trial, but perhaps it would be better to tell the story just once and more completely at its first mention? Wherever it is told, it's a shame not to quote the inscription in full, since part of the fun is her cheeky comparison of herself with Alexander, as well as the possible double entendre in her choice of verb (ἀνέστησεν = "lifted them into an upright position", "erected them"), which is reflected in Olson's Loeb translation.

(4) The prosecution speech delivered by Euthias – which, according to Athenaeus, was composed by Anaximenes of Lampsacus on his behalf. This statement appears in Athen. 13.591e, where it is attributed to Diodorus the periegete (FGrH 372; Diodorus 11 in BNP; no WP article). The wording a little later in the article (Athenaeus's claim that Anaximenes wrote the speech) is misleading, because Athenaeus (or rather Myrtilus, a character in Athenaeus's fictional dinner party) says only that he is aware of the claim, not that he endorses it or knows whether it was true or false. The text here may be an accurate report of what McClure and Eidinow say, but it is not, in my opinion, an accurate report of what Athenaeus says.

(5) According to Athenaeus, Euthias's case against Phryne was motivated by a personal quarrel rather than Phryne's alleged impiety. I couldn't find this in Athenaeus at all. Looking at the modern source cited for this sentence (O'Connell), I think there may be some confusion, since the two ancient sources adduced by O'Connell on the pages cited are both letters by Alciphron. Cf. Cooper, p. 310. Did I miss something here?

(6) He observes that Aristogeiton, to whom Athenaeus attributes a speech against Phryne. Yes, see number 1 above.

(7) while in Athenaeus' version Hypereides exposes Phryne as the climax of his speech. This is Athen. 13.590e, and since he doesn't name a source for this part of his account of the trial, I have no objection to calling it "Athenaeus' version".

(8) It was not mentioned in Posidippus's version of the trial in his comedy Ephesian Woman, quoted by Athenaeus. This is Athen. 13.591e–f. This and number 9 seem to be the only cases where the article acknowledges both Athenaeus and the original source.

(9) A Hellenistic biographer, Hermippus of Smyrna, reports that after Phryne's acquittal, Euthias was so furious that he never spoke publicly again. This is Athen. 13.590d, as reported in the footnote.

(10) The only source for the connection [between Phryne and the Knidian Aphrodite] is Athenaeus. This is Athen. 13.591a. He doesn't explicitly name his source here, so again I have no quarrel with the phrasing.

(11) Praxiteles also produced a golden or gilt statue of Phryne which was displayed – according to Pausanias dedicated by Phryne; according to Athenaeus by the Thespians. This is Athen. 13.591b, and here too he names no source for the statement that the statue was dedicated by the Thespians, so "according to Athenaeus" seems fine. Ironically, a couple of sentences later Athenaeus cites a different source which, if anything, supports Pausanias's version of the story, according to which Phryne herself dedicated the statue. He quotes the inscription on the statue base at Delphi as recorded in On the Dedications at Delphi by an otherwise unknown Alcetas (FGrH 405; RE Alketas 7, which cites only this passage). The inscription gives Phryne's name in the nominative, and if it followed the usual form of dedicatory inscriptions in Greek sanctuaries, this implies (though of course does not prove) that she herself was the dedicator. (The statue was already mentioned above in the section on "Life". No harm in repetition, I guess.)

(12) According to Athenaeus, he [Apelles] was inspired by the sight of Phryne walking naked into the sea at Eleusis. This is Athen. 13.590f–591a. Again no explicit source cited, so no objection to attributing this to Athenaeus alone.

Interesting to see where the information comes from. Only Posidippus (number 8) is a writer of comedy; the other passages in which specific authors are named (numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 11) are from works of different kinds: speeches, periegetic works, monographs about prostitutes, etc. This suggests that it may be a bit misleading to state, as the "Sources" section does, that Athenaeus' main source was fourth-century comic drama. Perhaps that's true for his discussion of prostitutes in general, but is it true for Phryne? Not on the evidence of the sources cited in this article.

A couple of other related points involving ancient sources:

She was also said to have dedicated a statue of herself at Delphi, and a statue of Eros to Thespiae. On the statue at Delphi, see passage 11 above. But Kapparis (the modern source cited for this sentence) is simply wrong when he says on p. 323 that she dedicated the statue of Eros "to Thespiae". Athenaeus 13.591b, which Kapparis cites as his source in a footnote on that page, states clearly that she dedicated it not to but in Thespiae (ἐν Θεσπιαῖς). The recipient of the dedication (Eros? some other deity?) is not mentioned.
When their makeup was removed Phryne was revealed to be the only one who is naturally beautiful rather than relying on cosmetics. This story seems to be preserved only in the fragmentary Protrepticus by Galen. Any reason not to give him credit?
Another story connected to Phryne's beauty concerns her inability to seduce the philosopher Xenocrates, emphasising his self-restraint. This story is recorded by Diogenes Laertius (4.7) and Valerius Maximus (4.3.ext.3a). Again, any reason not to say so?

And one more comment on a totally different topic:

Phryne was largely ignored during the Renaissance . The article says this twice, once in the lead and again in the section on reception; from the latter it is clear that the focus is on Renaissance artists. But what about Renaissance writers? Poliziano, one of towering figures of the Italian Renaissance, apparently included a chapter about Phryne in his Miscellaneorum Centuria Secunda (ca. 1483), the manuscript of which was rediscovered in the 20th century and first published in 1972 (review here). I haven't read it, but she apparently attracted the attention of at least one other Renaissance Florentine as well: see P. Godman, From Poliziano to Machiavelli (Princeton 2019), pp. 203–205, regarding her use as a moral exemplum by Marcello Virgilio Adriani [it], a student of Poliziano and patron of Machiavelli. (These pages show up for me in the Google Books preview; your mileage may vary.) Godman's prose leans purple but it's still an interesting example of how Phryne was treated by an educated writer of the early 16th century. I'm not suggesting that this necessarily belongs in the article, only that the sweeping statement that she was ignored during the Renaissance may be an overstatement (although the qualifier "largely" provides some wiggle room). I have not seen either Funke or McClure; does either of them have anything to say about the appearance of Phryne in these or other Renaissance literary sources?

That's it for me. None of this carping over small points of citation etiquette should be interpreted as criticism of the article as a whole, which I think is excellent. Cheers, Choliamb (talk) 19:31, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks as ever for your very thoughtful comments. I think you are right that it is useful to show the chain of transmission of ancient sources (and UC above also pulls me up on giving away nothing about the source of the Galen anecdote!) Thanks for doing the work of pulling together what comes from where; I shall have to sit down and work all of these into the article.
As for Renaissance literary sources: no, neither McClure nor Funke mention either Poliziano or Adriani – nor, so far as I can tell, do they mention any other Renaissance literary reception of Phryne. Cavallini says in a footnote that "a (not very significant) reference to Phryne" is made by Ortensio Lando. I think given the lack of attention paid to renaissance literary allusions to Phryne in the sources about her, it's hard to justify including them in this article – but I'll keep my eyes open for more sources and if I can pull something together on literary representations specifically I'll add it. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:47, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- (And thanks for pointing out Kapparis' mix-up re. the statue of Eros at Thespiae: I've now fixed this. McClure and Funke both seem to think that the statue was specifically installed in the sanctuary of Eros, so I would presume that it would have been dedicated to him?) Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 17:38, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  Yes, Pausanias 9.27.3–4 makes it pretty clear, without saying so explicitly, that the statue was in the sanctuary of Eros (and so almost certainly dedicated to him). Apparently by Pausanias's time Praxiteles's statue had been replaced by a copy produced by the Athenian sculptor Menodoros. The original had been taken to Rome by Caligula, returned by Claudius, and then carried off again by Nero. Pausanias says it was destroyed in a fire, presumably the great fire of A.D. 64. Choliamb (talk) 19:45, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In response to the coordinator comment below, I'm going to go ahead and support here. I still think that the ancient sources for some of the information given should be stated more explicitly, but that is easily done, and I'm sure the nominator will get around to it. (I'd do it myself, but I'm not sure about FAC etiquette and I don't want to step on anyone's toes.) Having read through the other remarks above, I will add that I think UC's comments are excellent, and I'd rather see some of their remaining misgivings about content addressed first; fussing about the citation of ancient sources is considerably less important. Choliamb (talk) 23:36, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Maculosae tegmine lyncis

[edit]

I'm totally baffled by the standards applied here relative to those on display at this recent FA candidacy; for example, the question raised above "what about Renaissance writers?" The comparandum made zero attempt to cover such and much other material, not a murmur on that score from its reviewers, not even the question asked; why so exacting here when even the classical coverage was so defective there? Some kind of clique? Making up in stringency here for laxness there? What's going on? Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 06:35, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support, based on comparative merit, relative comprehensiveness of coverage and analytical depth, much clearer statement of significance, et cetera, et cetera, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 06:35, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well I for one just didn't see that one, & I don't think I can be accused of being in any classical clique, though the thought is mildly flattering... You might bold your "support". Johnbod (talk) 14:41, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Emboldened, Maculosae tegmine lyncis (talk) 17:58, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just to update on where I am with this – I have been busier than expected recently. I hope to address a significant chunk of UC's and Johnbod's outstanding comments this weekend, but after that I'm going to be abroad without access to a computer from 29 April for a week. I'll leave it up to the coords whether they are happy to keep this open at that rate of progress, or they would rather close it and I renominate later once I have addressed these outstanding comments. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 08:27, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Ippantekina (talk) 11:20, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a minor Taylor Swift song. A personal favourite from her album Midnights, this song seems to have been forgotten even by her fans somehow. I believe the article is comprehensive, well-written, and well-sourced. Thanks to everyone who will take their time to review this candidature, Ippantekina (talk) 11:20, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

―Howard • 🌽³³ 15:17, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the media review! Ippantekina (talk) 17:39, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Background and release

"after via social media" → "after on social media"
as a result of the two experimenting with music while their partners were both shooting for a film in Panama
- Could the meaning of the sentence be made clearer?
"where each video contained the title of one track at a time" → "with each video revealing one track title" or similar versions?
peaked in the top 10 of charts in Canada, the Philippines, Singapore,
- You could drop "charts in".

Music and lyrics

Swift wrote and produced "Question...?" with Jack Antonoff.
- Isn't this already covered in the previous section?
"Antonoff's sister" → "his sister"

MSincccc (talk) 18:01, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Critical reception

You could link to lyricism.
"mostly focused on its lyricism" → "focused on its lyricism"
particularly the moment when the
- You could drop "the moment".

Bottom line

I do have a clarification question about "Out of the Woods". Both the lead and the article refer to it as either a track or a song. Would it be beneficial to clarify that this was a single? I think that it could make a slight difference, as I feel like an artist sampling one of their singles is a bit different than when they sample an album track or a deep cut. I was not sure if this was done because "Out of the Woods" was released as a single in 2016, so you opted to go with when the song was originally released as a part of 1989 to avoid any potential confusion with that. I could very well be overthinking this (as I tend to do), but this is something that caught my attention, so I wanted to ask you about it.

Yes, you are right that I wrote it out as a 2014 track instead of a 2016 single is due to the fact that I want to highlight it as a 1989 track rather than a standalone single. I hope it is a sound justification. Ippantekina (talk) 11:59, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have a similar question about a sentence from the "Music and lyrics" section: Several reviews thought that the sound of "Question...?" evoked the styles of tracks from 1989 such as "Out of the Woods" and "Blank Space". These are both singles from 1989, so I would think that it would be beneficial to clarify that in the prose, because again, I think that it is different when an artist is evoking or referencing a single rather than a deep cut from an album. I think that this phrase makes more sense in the following context, in the 1989 songs "Style", "All You Had to Do Was Stay", and "How You Get the Girl", as a majority of the songs being listed are album tracks.
Apologies in advance, as this could be another case of me overthinking things, but I got caught on this phrasing, released for limited-time download. I have not seen that phrasing before, and I would think that "released as a limited-time download" would read more naturally to me, but feel free to disagree, as there is nothing grammatically incorrect about the current phrasing. It is just something that caught my attention. The citation to support this information refers to a digital copy of the song, so it may be better to use that wording, and the corresponding wikilink, rather than limited-time download anyway, as some readers may be unfamiliar with the concept.
Shouldn't there be a descriptive phrase in front of the first instance of Taylor Swift in the article? I have noticed that this has been done in your previous Taylor Swift FAs, such as the recently-promoted "Karma" (Taylor Swift song). Was this removed for this article for any particular reason?
I do think that there is a fair amount of repetition in the second paragraph of the "Background and release" section, specifically with the repetition of "released" (twice in the first sentence and then a third time in the second sentence). I would recommend finding a way to avoid this if possible, as it does make the prose less engaging to read.
I have a comment for this part, According to the English-language scholar Maggie Laurel Boyd. English-language does not really make sense in this context. I have looked Boyd up, and she has a PhD in English Literature, so the descriptive phrase should be, the English literature scholar instead. English-language is not the same thing.
There should be a descriptive phrase for Annie Zaleski.
I am uncertain about the usage of the quote in this part, wrote that while it "doesn't fully congeal, [... it] boasts some fascinating tidbits to pore over". Ellipsis are usually used to indicate something was omitted from a quote, however that is not really the case here. There is a substitution of "it" for "the song", but I would remove the ellipsis, as it does not make sense in this context. Just as a suggestion, I think that you could use the quote directly without any substitution, like with the following: Jason Lipshutz of Billboard wrote that while it "doesn't fully congeal, the song boasts some fascinating tidbits to pore over".
A majority of the "Credits and personnel" section is not represented in the prose. I believe that this information would need to be represented in the prose as well, like with how the chart placement, the certifications, and the release history are represented in both the prose and the tables.
- I don't think it is absolutely necessary because the song's writers and producers are the most important personnel (also reflected in the infobox). If I include all musicians and technicians, it reads kinda like a listicle... and the charts and certifications are selected for prose (top 10 etc.), which does not list every chart in the table. I hope this makes sense! Ippantekina (talk) 15:40, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - That is fair. That does makes sense to me. I could see how this kind of information would get quite repetitive and quite dense really easily and could be more off-putting and less engaging for readers, particularly those who are not as familiar with music jargon and the process behind making a song. This was not an issue in your recent FA promotion for "Karma" (Taylor Swift song). I did not even notice this when doing my review, so I think that proves this would be unnecessary. Thank you for taking the time to explain this for me. Aoba47 (talk) 01:08, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wonderful work as always. I hope that this review is helpful. I have only looked at the prose, so my review is limited to that area of the article. It is interesting when a track really resonates with you, but it does not really get any attention from fans or even the artist themselves. I have been there before. I enjoyed reading through this article. Please let me know if you have any questions, and I hope that you are having a wonderful start to your April. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 15:29, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review as always. I have addressed all of your comments :) Ippantekina (talk) 15:40, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that I could help! Everything looks good to me. Great work as always. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. I hope that you have a wonderful end to your week! Aoba47 (talk) 01:08, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your review! :) Ippantekina (talk) 10:07, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here'll be a source review from me! Red Shell Momentum 01:40, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This table lists 3 random passages from throughout the article (4.9% of 61 total passages). These passages contain 4 inline citations (4.3% of 93 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. Red Shell Momentum 01:40, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Ippantekina: Source spot-check is all good, support. Red Shell Momentum 17:40, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the review. Ippantekina (talk) 15:41, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
In the bridge, Swift's vocals are processed with a harmonizer and a vocoder.
13	d	Somville & Benoit 2025, p. 411.		✅
There were comparisons of the track's production and theme to those of Swift's past songs. Several reviews thought that the sound of "Question...?" evoked the styles of tracks from 1989 such as "Out of the Woods"
15	c	i-d.co	web.archive.org	✅
On the Digital Songs chart, it became Swift's record-extending 24th number-one song, propelled by the limited-time downloads.
42		guinnessworldrecords.com	web.archive.org	✅	This archive indeed confirms it.
43		billboard.com	web.archive.org	✅

Nominator(s): Erick (talk) 04:33, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My third nomination for this album, maybe three times the charm? Anyways, this is article is about the 2nd best-selling album of all-time in Spain and won Album of the Year at the 2nd Latin Grammy Awards. This is part of my personal project where I work on Latin pop/tropical album/songs that either reached #1 or won a Grammy/Latin Grammy in the Latin pop/tropical fields. Erick (talk) 04:33, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

―Howard • 🌽³³ 11:48, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, a very nice article, though I have some comments.

There are some MOS:LQ violations (e.g. the last sentence in "Legacy")
Mentions of El Alma al Aire or Más (or possibly other albums) in reference titles should be italicized. Quotation marks only around the titles should be replaced with italics too. (WP:CONFORM)
Capitalization of reference titles should be consistent, most usually only title case or sentence case.
"Recording took place at the Hit Factory in Miami, Florida, with Emanuele Ruffinengo in charge of the album's production;" → "Recording took place at the Hit Factory in Miami, with Emanuele Ruffinengo in charge of the album's production;" Could also wikilink The Hit Factory considering that it is only linked in the infobox.
he changed both his composing manner and his favorite accompanying musicians. – Looking at the source for this, it says "the musicians who accompany him have also enjoyed playing a lot." (using machine translation), not that he changed/swapped them.
while José Miguel Carmona of Ketama fame collaborated on the record as well. – Rephrase "fame collaborated"
Rating it three out of four stars, Shumski praised – Might also want to mention that this is for Chicago Sun-Times.
"'El Alma al Aire' reveals its immense magnetism" → "El Alma al Aire reveals its immense magnetism"
opining that while it was not one of best albums like Más – Rewrite "it was not one of best albums like Más" (word salad-like)
"remarked that El Alma al Aire was a turning point for the artist's career stating he" → "remarked that El Alma al Aire was a turning point for the artist's career, stating he"
Italicize "El Alma Al Aire: 20 Aniversario" in "Track listing"

- Dents (talk2me 🖂) he/him btw!!! 01:56, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Dentsinhere43 Thank you very much for the comments and sorry for not commenting earlier. For some reason, I didn't realize comments were already made on my watchlist. Anyways, I believe just about everything you mentioned. I'm not too familiar with how with MOS:LQ works so I did the last sentence that I believed I fix. For the capitalization of titles in references, I followed the capitalization rules for both English and Spanish, respectively, depending on the language of the article. I did fix some inconsistencies that I found. I removed the sentence about him saying changing his style because the article doesn't explain how he did that. For the rewrite on AllMusic's review, I just quoted the section instead if that's alright. Erick (talk) 01:09, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. The sentence about the AllMusic review seems alright. Though, there are still mentions of El Alma al Aire that are not italicized in the sources of Diario Mendoza, Reforma, Tango Diario, Swisscharts, Asociación Mexicana de Productores de Fonogramas y Videogramas, and Recording Industry Association of America. For MOS:LQ, the fourth sentence in "Composition" and the first sentence in "Commercial performance" should have their periods and ending quotation marks swapped. - Dents (talk2me 🖂) he/him btw!!! 02:43, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Dentsinhere43 Thank you again! I couldn't find the Reforma source that is missing the italics for the album name, unless you were referring to ref 22, which then the source is talking about the song of the same name, as opposed to the album. Let me know if there's anything I need to address. Again, I greatly appreciate the comments! Erick (talk) 05:49, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Dents (talk2me 🖂) he/him btw!!! 09:29, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I left comments at the last nomination, but didn't see this had opened again. I'll read through the article again and leave some comments.

Background

To promote Más, he embarked on a tour of the United States, Latin America, and Spain in 1998.[4] In 1999, Sanz announced he was taking a hiatus from the music scene for a year to focus on his private life. - this could maybe flow better as one sentence, or you could cut the part about the tour entirely if it's not specifically relevant to El Alma al Aire.
Would you not want the parts about recording/production together? (currently its split between the last sentence of the first paragraph and the entirety of the third paragraph)
while José Miguel Carmona from the band Ketama, collaborated on the record as well - comma can be removed

Composition

portraying pain as a form of internal punishment - I can't access the sources so I don't know if this can be better clarified, but what does 'internal punishment' mean?
Other ballads in the album include "Para Que Me Quieras", "Llega, Llegó Soledad", "Silencio", and "Me Iré"; the last of which was described as "nostalgic" by El Diario La Prensa editor Ricardo Leon Pena-Villa. - personal opinion, but I think changing to 'Other ballads in the album include "Para Que Me Quieras", "Llega, Llegó Soledad", and "Silencio". Another ballad, "Me Iré"; the last of which was described as "nostalgic" [...]" would flow better
is dedicated to Buenos Aires, Argentina, and contains influences of swing music - I think Buenos Aires, Argentina ought to be wikilinked

Release and promotion

a Spanish-language version of "One Night" ("Una Noche") also with the Corrs - am I supposed to know what song "One Night" is?
"The Hardest Day" marks the first song that Sanz recorded in English, - the title 'The Hardest Day' comes out of nowhere. I understand that it's the translated title for "Me Iré", but currently that is only clarified much later in the article.
The album's tour included nine shows at the National Auditorium - wikilink the caption and clarify the country
various locations in Madrid, Spain, Sanz is seen kissing and fighting with various women in a boxing ring in several scenes - repeated use of 'various'. You could say "throughout Madrid, Spain"
different women belonging to another - do you just mean taken women?
demos of "Cuando Nadie Me Ve" and "El Alma al Aire" as well as a DVD with the music videos - a comma would be appreciated before 'as well'

Critical reception

A few reviewers however felt that the album did not exceed the quality of Más. - could work better placing 'however' at the start of the sentence
At the 2nd Annual Latin Grammy Awards also in 2001, - comma before 'also'
The legacy section is just a collection of quotes that discuss the album in retrospect, and some of these don't tell much about its legacy (follows his previous works but with a modern sound for example, is more relevant to the Composition section). The other quotes all examine the album in the context of the artist's commerciality, so they would fit better in Commercial performance (which could benefit from some journalistic analysis since its just charts and numbers currently).

Commercial performance

Nielsen SoundScan reported the record sold over 125,000 units in the country - I would change 'the country' to directly say U.S. since the location is only mentioned in the sentence prior as part of the RIAA's name.

Etc.

Is it possible to work in translated titles for "Silencio" and "Desde Mis Centros"?
Are there any websites that legally host the album for listening that could be added as external links? My preference is usually YouTube but it doesn't seem to be available there.

That's all for me; mostly small fixes that should hopefully be easy to make. IanTEB (talk) 20:28, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@IanTEB Thanks for the review and sorry about the delay. I don't usually do usually heavy editing on my days and Sundays are my rest days from work lol. Anyways, I think I got most of everything. For "Cuando Nadie Me Ve", the source actually says it's a form of subtle punishment, but I just removed it to just say "punishment". For "One Night", I changed it to mention that it's the Corrs's song it was originally by them. I also clarified that "The Hardest Day" is the English version of "Me Ire" earlier in the paragraph. I removed the legacy section altogether since I can't find a good legacy article from an online search and moved a sentence to where it belongs (The critical analysis of the album's sales). Please let me know if there's anything else that needs to be addressed or I missed anything. Erick (talk) 22:13, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I made some minor edits (mostly rearranging a few quotations in the Composition section), and am happy to support on prose. IanTEB (talk) 19:16, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I strongly suggest removing "the artist" per WP:ELEVAR since there is no harm in using "Sanz", "he" or "him"; plus it is confusing because he is described as either "singer-songwriter" or "artist"
"It is a pop album" does this refer to this album or Mas?
"featuring more ballads than its predecessor alongside uptempo numbers." I honestly don't really understand what this means
"including a duet with the Corrs and Armando Manzanero, respectively" does this mean a duet with both of them, or two duets with each featuring one of them?
"Retrospectively, El Alma al Aire has been regarded as one of Sanz's important works by music journalists for its experimental sounds." interesting-- did critics not consider it experimental upon release?
"Around the making of the album" 'about'?
Links to instruments like brass, strings, percussion could be helpful
What is "Spanish guitar"?
"In comparison to his previous album, which mixed pop and flamenco, El Alma al Aire leans more towards ballads" this is worth noting in the lead which can clear up the confusion that I raised earlier
What is La Coope as a source? Is it a newspaper?
Try to avoid the verb "note" per MOS:SAID

More to follow - Ippantekina (talk) 18:16, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback! I will get to work on this next Sunday or Monday. Erick (talk) 20:33, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

an English and bilingual version of "Me Iré" so... two versions?
"also performed with band" the band
Link Tenerife
Be consistent with either "Auditorio Nacional" or "National Auditorium" in Mexico City
I would link Madrid and Mexico City
"A music video was also made" filmed?
"A ~~commemorative~~ 20th anniversary edition"
The critical reception section seems to consist of mostly English sources. Are there not further Spanish-language sources to develop this section?
It was certified 13× platinum by PROMUSICAE for shipping over 1.3 million copies,[72] making it the best-selling album of the year in the country and was it certified 13-times platinum in that year? And what was that year?
as of 2023, Spain's second best-selling album overall but the source is dated 2000?
What is La Fonoteca? Is it reliable?
It has around thirteen platinum records and is among the four best-selling albums in Spanish history this quote just repeats what has been written before
"ultimately selling over 900,000 units in the region" as of when?
ditto US sales

Does Billboard really need an ISSN? It's also inconsistently applied to the various Billboard references. What makes https://www.lacoope.net/la-coope/a-21-anos-alma-aire-n10244 a reliable source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:24, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): GGOTCC 15:12, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the first American warship named Missouri. While the most obscure USS Missouri, this frigate brought the Navy kicking and screaming into steam era, and both established and legitimized the roles of engineers throughout the fleet...before one of them dropped a wrench, destroyed the ship, and nearly got everyone killed. Regardless, Missouri and her sister are officially considered to be among the most impressive early engineering feats in US naval history, at least according to the Navy in 1937 and a mosaic which depicts the six ship classes that hold the title. I was also motivated to write this article after meeting the US Navy's Curator of Models. We worked together to identify a bunch of old ship models, and we had to rely on Wikipedia to identify some of the most difficult. Since the US is shockingly underrepresented in the list of FA/GAs on Wikipedia, I wanted to change that and improve the copy+pasted entries from the US Navy's website with legitimate articles. Additionally, this ship holds a special place in the lore of US Navy engineers. Now that I am finally in college, this article feels appropriate for my first FAC and second A-class.

GGOTCC 15:12, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Paddlewheel_frigate_USS_Mississipi_abeam.tiff is missing a publication date

File:Caleb_Cushing.jpg: what is the author's date of death?

@Nikkimaria Thank you for the review! I added the publication date (1853), author's death (1896), and rescued the link. GGOTCC 04:53, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

TIFF files are not to be used for display in wikipedia articles, please see c:COM:TIFF. Consider converting the file to a png or jpg. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 18:24, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@GGOTCC: given that you have not uploaded a PNG conversion, I have done it myself at File:Paddlewheel frigate USS Mississipi abeam.png. Please replace the TIFF with the PNG version. ―Howard • 🌽³³ 18:18, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Howardcorn33 Hello, thank you! I was looking into ways to convert the image without having to redownload it and upload it again, but this would do! GGOTCC 18:32, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can you specify which Congress ordered it? I'm pretty sure it would've been the 25th United States Congress
- I am not sure if any of my sources specify, but I will check
Under "Development and design", [Secretary of the Navy] [James Paulding] is an MOS:SOB violation
"Brooklyn" -> "Brooklyn, New York" for consistency
"Washington D.C." -> "Washington, D.C."
"Norfolk to Fayal in the Azores" where are these places?
- Specified Norfolk Virginia and Fayal Island
Under "Service history", [ship of the line] [HMS Malabar] is an MOS:SOB violation

That's what I found ping me when done Olliefant (she/her) 20:25, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review, @Olliefant:! GGOTCC 20:40, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Olliefant (she/her) 21:23, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, a great article. I enjoyed it as it is also related with the societal resistance to new technologies.

Prose

Three steamship were → Three steamships were
officers that outlined → officer who outlined
main difference between the ships were change "were" → was
an audit lead by change "lead" → led
axillary power and → auxiliary power, and
which was already add comma before "which"
A boat from Gibraltar crewed by convicts and → A boat from Gibraltar, crewed by convicts, and (add commas)
US Navy Charles Copeland, and were built → US Navy, Charles Copeland. They were built
- Thank you! I made these changes or redid the prose to flow better.

Other

568,806 is this today's money? If not wouldn't be useful to have a note to the corresponding value of today's money? see example
- Good point! I added the inflation template in the prose.
routine maintenance.[17] is the citation needed here since it also at the end of the paragraph
- The two sentences ("Captain John T. Newton... routine maintenance") are cited to ref 17, while last sentence ("Her arrival marked...when she arrived") is cited to ref 17 and 15. I did not want to overcite as ref 15 is only for one part of the last sentence.
Her chief engineer Her? not clear
- I swapped it to mention the ship's name
Range 20 days of coal Range typically means distance, I do not know what 20 days means in terms of distance. I found it a bit confusing. A.Cython (talk) 03:04, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- I am open to changing this, but none of the sources provide a range, as the frigate was never intended to have a maximum distance like later warships. Instead, everything focused on the number of days the engine could be kept running.
- Thank you for the feedback, @A.Cython:, it is much appreciated! How does everything look now? GGOTCC 04:16, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  Support: Thank you for the making the changes and providing a clarification about the range. I am not an expert on ships, so I do not have strong feelings about it. Happy editing! A.Cython (talk) 14:48, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed at GAN and did a source review at ACR so I might not have much too add, but I will take a look. Hog Farm _Talk 16:09, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

" disrupted the traditional conservative zeitgeist throughout the Navy" - this is a bit nit-picky, but I'm of the view that it's generally bad for readability to be including obscure words that we have to link (here zeitgeist) when there are plenty of other, more plain speech, words that can be used which will actually be more understandable to the majority of readers
- I am a bit surprised to see "zeitgeist" considered obscure, but I see your point. I swapped it with mindset.
"named after the Missouri river. " - shouldn't "river" be capitalized? "Missouri River" as the name of the place is a proper noun, and using Missouri as an adjective here doesn't really make sense because a lot of the river isn't in Missouri
I believe the correct form is "Paixhans" not "Paixhan"; this isn't a plural, rather the designer's last name included the trailing s
"and cost US$568,806 equivalent to $17,752,252 in 2025." - I'd put the inflationary conversion into parentheses to improve reading clarity
- Done. I forgot I can do that outside of the template
" known as the "Dark Ages"" - known as this by whom?
- Several of my books use the term, but I removed it and reworded the sentence.

This is my third time reviewing the article, so I'm not surprised that I don't have much to add here. Hog Farm _Talk 00:14, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 00:22, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bitchin'

If you know anything about Netflix's hit show Stranger Things, you probably know that—until a certain review bombing a few months back for the penultimate episode—"The Lost Sister" is considered the worst episode of the entire run. A standalone episode with random new characters coming in right after several major cliffhangers was obviously not well received by audiences, but I was still quite interested in creating an article based on the episode. I wrote it up pretty quickly (created draft in late January but actually started in mid February before it was ready for the main space right as March started), and got it to GA status a little while after. It’s been a few weeks since then, and I’ve spent my time slowly chipping away on making sure it is both as comprehensive as possible and as accessible as possible. With a lead that summarizes all key points, a Background section for those unfamiliar with the general gist of the series so they understand the article, a tight Plot section, a whole lot of Production facts, a nice Themes and analysis section, and a comprehensive Reception section that covers critic and fan opinions, I think it’s more than ready for FAC

Also, for those wondering, yes I love this episode, I’ve never subscribed to the assertion that it’s pointless, even before Kali was brought back, and also, yes, writing this article is my way of coping with the series ending. Alright, personal stuff out of the way, I hope to give ST it’s first FA. Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 00:22, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Olliefant: Pinging the GAN reviewer in case they want to leave any comments, but obviously no issue if you don’t have the time Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 00:25, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thank you Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 12:39, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support from GGOTCC

[edit]

This is an excellent article, well done! I have watched little of my show, but many of my friends are fans. I think I would be a good person to review the plot section to ensure it makes sense to someone unfamiliar with the topic. It took me two full reads to find something to mention here. While not an outright issue, some of your multi-clause sentences get tangled which make it difficult to read on the first pass.

"electrically shocked" is linked to shockwave. I am not sure what you intended

Good catch, I meant to link it to "electrical injury", which has now been fixed

"who was told by the doctors who assisted with Eleven's birth that she had died during it." This is unclear who "she" refers to. I think the wording of "Terry lives" is also confusing if Terry is unconscious in Becky's house.

Clarified that it was Eleven who was presumed dead

"Terry in a comatose-like state, and, by going into her mind and going through her memories, realizes that Dr. Brenner stole her away from Terry," I am also unsure which "her" is referred to if not Terry. Eleven?

Yes, it is referring to Eleven

"Terry has been trying to show her". If I understand, adding "subconsciously" would make more sense if Terry is unconscious

Added

"Wolfhard later stated that he has not told" Do you mean "was not"?

Changed

In the lead section, it would make sense to mention how the episode builds the overall plot of Eleven mastering her skills.

Added

"The main criticisms from fans were the placement of the "divisive" episode in the season's timeline". While this is a correct use of "divisive", referring to fans make it seem that the criticism is divisive, rather then the placement of the episode. Perhaps "disjointed", "disruptive", "disconnected", or "incongruous". It is up to you if you want to change anything.

Changed to disjointed

GGOTCC 17:21, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the review and the support! I have implemented all of your changes, which I believe have strengethed the article a lot :) Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 18:16, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article would pass with flying colors! GGOTCC 18:24, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems thorough but I think it struggles with long, run-on sentences or other grammatical issues. Some examples just from the lead:

Created by the twin Duffer Brothers, the series, set in the 1980s, follows the fictional town of Hawkins, Indiana, and the supernatural happenings that occur within it. I don't think the fact that the Duffer brothers are twins belongs in the article. (And I believe it's uncited). Also, in that same sentence, I would insert Stranger Things in place of "the series" and consider breaking it up into smaller chunks.

Removed the "twins" part, and condensed the sentence a bit to remove the amount of commas

The episode was written both out of the Duffers' admiration for Brown's acting in the first season, and for them wanting to further explore Eleven's childhood in a way that would ultimately benefit her arc in the season, helping to build Eleven's arc of mastering her powers. Avoid using "arc" twice and consider breaking it up into two sentences.

Split into two sentences and removed both uses of arc, as in retrospect I feel they don’t fit the sentence well

Despite housing an ensemble cast, the main protagonists of Stranger Things starting from season one are Dustin (Gaten Matarazzo), Lucas (Caleb McLaughlin), Mike (Finn Wolfhard), Will (Noah Schnapp), and Eleven (Millie Bobby Brown), several children. The structure of this sentence could be clearer (and is "housing" the right term to use here?).

Cleaned up

Upon release, the episode received generally mixed reviews from both critics and fans, with most agreeing that it was the worst episode of both the season, and the series up to that point, particularly for disrupting the flow of the narrative. Consider breaking it up into two sentences.

Done

I have more comments but would like your opinion on the above items first. Ruby2010 (talk) 22:40, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruby2010: Thank you for your comments, I agree that those sentences aren’t quite FA-quality, so I cleaned them up per your comments and changed some around in other ways that I feel would benefit them. Let me know what you think, and I look forward to your other comments Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 01:27, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, @Ruby2010: Just another ping to see if you have more comments, apologies if I’m being annoying Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 17:33, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

More from Ruby2010

To improve readability, I recommend breaking up the long paragraphs in the "Directing and costume design" and "Themes and analysis" sections.

Done; split Directing and costume design into 3 paragraphs instead of 2, and moved around parts of the last two paragraphs of Themes and analysis so it has 4 shorter paragraphs in total

I recommend combing through the article again to check for phrasing and typos. Some examples that read clunky or confusing to me and don't seem worthy of FA-quality prose (so I advise rewriting them):
- In the Background section, "housing" is used again and would benefit from another word.

I could not find this use of “housing”. I think I may have previously fixed it if you are reviewing an older version

- "In October 2016, Berthelsen watched Stranger Things with her boyfriend, and got the audition "literally" two days later, according to her in an interview with Entertainment Weekly." Rewrite this.

Done

- "Her audition was for a character not yet brainstormed, that was to be created upon the casting's finalization". Rewrite this.

Done

- "Early on, the episode was also titled, "The Lost Brother", and Eleven's sibling was meant to be a 30-year-old male who grew up homeless, with the part being cast with a gender neutral actor in mind". Why use "also" here? And was the character meant to be male or gender neutral?

Removed “also”. The character is male, but was to be played by a gender neutral actor, which is explained in the prose

Why isn't Electrick Children wikilinked? And in the prose around it, you re-use "direct" a lot, which is jarring.

Linked and removed two uses

What is the Kim Wilcox quote box referring to? What is "it"? It's out of context.

“It” is the outfit, which I have clarified

Are there wikilinks you can provide for punk clothing and/or blazers? Not everyone knows what those are.

Done

@Crystal Drawers: These examples are not exhaustive, just items to point you in the right direction of improving the prose. Ruby2010 (talk) 15:36, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Ruby2010: Thank you for going through the article again, I’ve addressed all points, let me know if you take issue with any of my changes or if you have more comments. Thank you, Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 18:10, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

~~Recusing to review. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 17:36, 19 April 2026 (UTC)~~[reply]

I don't think File:The Lost Sister.png really has a strong enough NFCC rationale. As far as I'm aware, episode-specific posters were never a major part of Stranger Things marketing, and the art doesn't appear anywhere in promoting or identifying the show on the streaming channels, so its utility as visual identification is minimal.

Every episode of the series with an article has a poster and has had one for a while, and I don’t see how it doesn’t work as a good illustration of the work, showcasing both the primary characters of the episode while utilizing an officially licensed poster distributed by Netflix, both in promotion on social media accounts and on merchandising. I really don’t see an issue with this one

I’m a little less concerned about this image, so I’ve replaced it with a free use image of Luke’s actor and a Yoda costume, which I feel gets a similar sentiment across

If I'm reading the article as someone with relatively little Stranger Things knowledge, the background section feels waaaay too involved. Most of the characters mentioned there are not relevant in this episode and are never mentioned again outside of the background. This can all be drastically cut down and it will make it more intelligible.

Removed all parts about the other kids and their plots in season 1, making it all about Eleven, her powers, the reason she’s in this situation, and the stuff about it taking place concurrently with the other plots, an important detail that is a main point of criticism for the Reception section

I will echo the other reviews above that the prose throughout is rough. In the plot section, the sentences are all pretty long, they're all stacked clauses with commas. It's not a breezy read. Some other stray notes:
- "Series creators Matt and Ross Duffer were pleased with Brown's acting in season one, and wanted to give her a storyline set entirely around her, which tested the range of her acting, something that Ross considered to be "great"." This sentence repeats itself (we get them saying they liked her acting at the beginning and end.)
- "The episode's tone was distinct for the series, something that could not be done for an episode set in Hawkins, " This doesn't actually tell me what the tone was.
  - Explained and cut sentence int two
- "Berthelsen was given an audition for the series "literally" two days after watching Stranger Things for the first time with her boyfriend" Who said 'literally'? And given that it can mean both literally and figuratively, how is this useful info?
  - Removed "literally"
    - Likewise there's a lot of themes which is phrased as fact and unattributed quotes rather than contextualizing who is saying what.
      - I went through and explained who analyzed which themes
- The wikilinks and referencing to the backdoor pilot are a bit redundant.
  - Removed the second link and condensed the second explanation significantly
- Why are specific jokes from an SNL episode relevant to include?
  - SNL is a pretty famous show, a whole sketch mocking the episode feels like significant coverage to show how disliked it was overall. I don’t feel strongly about keeping these, so let me know if you still feel it should be removed and I’ll get rid of it

Overall the article is a strong start but I think it needs a more thorough rewrite than should take place within a featured article review, and I'm going to oppose. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 16:11, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, David, I’ll work through some of these today but I’ll be busy tonight and tomorrow so I’ll likely finish them over the weekend Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 18:35, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@David Fuchs: Hello, David, hope your weekend is good so far. I have addressed all comments in your initial review, and have gone back through the article to ensure any absurdly long sentences have been shortened and condensed the admittedly large amount of semi-colons to barely any. Let me know if it looks better, and if you have any more comments, but I understand if your oppose will still stand Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 17:41, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:53, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the robbery and murder of a young woman by a man deep in debt. While that one-line summary may sound like every crime drama ever written, the response is far from it: Lianying's murder became a cultural phenomenon in Republican Shanghai, with readers enthralled by the crime and the search for the perpetrator. Songs, stageplays, and two movies (with another drawing from the case almost a century later)... This article provides the most comprehensive history of the murder and its aftermath available, and I think it well deserves the star. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:53, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

After some days gaining her trust,
- How about rephrasing it? "Several" would be more idiomatic.
after which she was strangled and her body dumped in an isolated location
- How about "isolated spot"?
"Newspaper coverage was extensive, lasting for months" → "Newspaper coverage was extensive and lasted for months"
"finding great commercial success" → "which found great commercial success"

Background

You could link to Shanghai on first mention in the article body.
You could link to modernity and cosmopolitanism.
"western and eastern cultures" → "Western and Eastern cultures"
"through the 1890s and 1900s" → "during the 1890s and 1900s"
"Becoming known by the 1900s as the "Brothel of Asia"" → "By the 1900s, it had become known as the ‘Brothel of Asia’"
tabloids regularly discussed the intricacies of the business

Also, congratulations on the promotion of The Great Mecca Feast. More to follow. MSincccc (talk) 06:12, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Biographies

"Her father died in her childhood" → "Her father died during her childhood"
- More idiomatic? I leave it to you.
"gaining a reputation for her singing voice and her beauty" → "gaining a reputation for her singing and beauty"
- Avoids repetition of "her".
"She at first took residence with a popular courtesan" → "She initially took up residence with a popular courtesan"
including the prominent madame Xu Di.
- Do the sources say "prominent"?
- The source says, "Elected Premier of Flower Affairs (huawu zongit) in the winter 1917 courtesan elections (see discussion later in this chapter), in the autumn of 1918 [Lianying] began to work together with Xu Di, a courtesan who had also won an official title". Official recognition in one of these flower elections feels like sufficient justification for "prominent". Herschatter also uses the word prominent on page 439, "Jewelry and suicide were also entangled in a 1920 case when Xu Di, a prominent Shanghai courtesan, was robbed of her diamonds and other jewelry in Hankou. Reports appeared in every newspaper that she had committed suicide, but several days later she was spotted by one of her customers at a Shanghai tailor shop. Xu Di explained to the customer that she had fainted, not died." — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:28, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"Finishing four years later, he spent time in Beijing and Hong Kong" → "After completing his studies four years later"
being known to frequent the cinemas,

MSincccc (talk) 13:09, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Murder

Facing pressure to return the ring, he chose to rob a courtesan. As his target, he chose Lianying.
- You could avoid repeating "chose".
"Wu brought with a third man"

→ "Wu brought a third man with him"

"adorned in numerous pieces of jewellery"

→ "adorned with numerous pieces of jewellery"

→ "As the night wore on"

"carried in such newspapers as"

→ "carried in newspapers such as"

MSincccc (talk) 14:07, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural impact (Press)

Yan worked variously as a translator for the Franco-Chinese Mining Company and as a clerk for the French Tramway Company, both in Shanghai.- Here, Yang is introduced as a clerk who is later unemployed.

The killing of a famous courtesan by an educated businessman immediately "scandalized and mesmerized the city's chattering classes".- Yang is now called an "educated businessman". He was educated, but was he in any business as well apart from being a translator and clerk?

You could add a footnote about the Warlord Era, even though it's not necessary to do so.

, but rather that Zhu had provided his friend with a substitute.
- You could make the sentence clearer by mentioning "Zhu Zhija" since it might be mistaken for Baosan.
"baseless claims that she had fled a life of debt, that she was continuing her career" → "baseless claims that she had fled a life of debt and was continuing her career"
- So as to avoid repeating "that".

MSincccc (talk) 06:21, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cultural impact (Literature)

"recount of her life and career" → "account of her life and career"
"This fifty-eight page booklet" → "This fifty-eight-page booklet"
- Hyphenated since it is a compound modifier.

Cultural impact (Theatre)

"bring the murder to stage" → "bring the murder to the stage"
"with one act performed per day" → "with one act performed each day" – more idiomatic?
"selling out tickets for the two months of its run" → "selling out tickets throughout its two-month run"
"tickets were regularly sold out" → "tickets regularly sold out"
"finding popular acclaim in Hangzhou" → "finding acclaim in Hangzhou"
You could link to the article History of Shanghai.

Cultural impact (Music)

You could link to Dream sequence on first mention.
"phonographic recording" → "phonograph recording"
"acapella" → "a cappella"
recorded variously by Zhang Yijin and Wang Jifan
- Do we need "variously" here?

Cultural impact (Film)

"served as the inspiration for several films" → "served as inspiration for several films"
"but known in Chinese as ‘Yan Ruisheng’" → "but was known in Chinese as ‘Yan Ruisheng’"
"The case later served as an inspiration for Jiang Wen's" → "The case later served as inspiration for Jiang Wen's"
Viewer reviews were generally negative, with particular focus on its slow pacing and loose narrative
- Does the source also review the audience or is it only the critics? If it's the latter, how about dropping "viewer"?

Bottom line

"courtesan election" This is something the reader may puzzle at. Cannot a few words of explanation be spared here?

"amidst a wheat field" Can this not be phrased more simply?

"a sizeable expatriate community" would a term such as "Western" or "European" profitably be added here?

"Execution" (subsection heading) Is there really no alternative to this? It might be thought to refer to the killing, which it does but ... I would just call it something else.

where he was remanded to the Shanghai Mixed Court" Legalistically, this seems an odd phrasing. One can be remanded to jail, or one's case to a lower court, but a person to a court like this reads oddly to me as a lawyer. However, if it's what the source uses, that's fine. But what I'd prefer is something like his case was assigned to the Shanghai Mixed Court.

How is "for trial by the Shanghai Mixed Court"?

"Although the defence challenged the admissibility, both men confessed to the crimes;" Should be a period at the end, and I would add "of the statements" after "admissibility".

"with the remainder eliminated through 1925;[65] courtesan houses thus moved to the French Concession, where the practice remained permitted.[66]" Maybe "by [the end of] 1925" for "through 1925" (depending on what the source said and "allowed" for "permitted".

I think you may be linking to the wrong World Book.

" such that entertainers were often asked to give live" I might say "so much so" for "such".

"failing to promote the public morality" cut "the", I think.

"the drafting of censorship policies" cut "the drafting of"

Should refs such as 20 (referring to the North-China Herald) have italics?

That's all I have. Very interesting.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:02, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did a copyedit of the article, mostly to tighten up the language. Feel free to revert anything unhelpful. Overall, no concerns and happy to support. Z1720 (talk) 00:25, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you muchly, Z1720. I have restored three earlier wordings, as follows:

Shanghai in particular gained a reputation as a centre of sex work. - I have restored "in particular" to maintain emphasis on how it was an outlier compared to China's other major cities

I have changed to "with his case to be heard by the Shanghai Mixed Court in the International Settlement", mostly because I prefer references after punctuation. If there's a way to tighten phrasing further, I'm happy to work it in.

In 1938, the case was again adapted to film, this time by Kwan Man-ching - I've restored "the case was again adapted to film" as the source does not specify that it was a remake of the earlier film (remakes being attested in Republican Chinese cinema at least as early as the 1935 remake of Lonely Orchid [1926]), and thus I believe "again" makes this sentence less potentially ambiguous. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:33, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image and source review

[edit]

Do we know when File:Wang Lianying, 1920 or before.jpg, File:Lu Lanchun - Yan Ruisheng, Side A.mp3, File:Lu Lanchun - Yan Ruisheng, Side B.mp3 and File:Yan Ruisheng, 1920 or earlier.jpg were published? ALT text is OKish, image sectioning is fine. Is The Paper and The North-China Herald a reliable source? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:55, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wang Lianying, 1920 or before.jpg is the same photograph as on the cover of File:The Tragic History of Lianying, July 1920.jpg, meaning that it was first published at least as early as 1920. This information is already noted on the file page.
The source for File:Lu Lanchun - Yan Ruisheng, Side A.mp3 and File:Lu Lanchun - Yan Ruisheng, Side B.mp3 identifies the items as being published in 1921 ("1921 EMI Records, 2 Sides"). I have added EMI Records as the publisher.
File:Yan Ruisheng, 1920 or earlier.jpg is the same photograph as found in the Shen Bao in edition 167, June 1920; it was thus first published at least as early as 1920. This information is already noted on the file page.
The North-China Herald was the predecessor to the North China Daily News, and was the main English-language newspaper published in Shanghai between 1850 and 1942.
The Paper is a state-owned digital newspaper from Shanghai. Based on precedent at Wikipedia:RSNP, I have been treating it similarly to Xinhua News Network and China Daily by avoiding it for contemporary politics but treating it as a reliable popular media for facts (with academic sources preferred where available).

I hope that addresses any concerns. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:22, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I guess, pending any comments by C&C below. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:56, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm working on a deep source review and comments which I should be able to drop over the weekend. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 00:24, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Noleander (talk) 22:08, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Nile River – Longest river in the world, lifeblood of the Ancient Egyptian civilization, home to a thousand cultures. This is Level 3 Vital Article, and currently stands at 9,986 prose words. Thanks to all who assisted (in no particular order): MSincccc (peer review & copy-editing); Amitchell125 (GA review and map creation); Llewee (peer review); YuniToumei (WP:RX assistance). Noleander (talk) 22:08, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

First thing I noticed is that the lead image is grainy. Is there a better image to put in the lead? It's also not particularly representative - the one for Amazon River is a high-quality satellite image so something similar would be better in my opinion. HurricaneZeta^C 22:38, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look for a less grainy photo. I avoided satellite images in the InfoBox because the article body text already has lots of "birds eye view" images/maps and they were getting repetitive. There are 100's of images in Commons, I should be able to find a better one. Noleander (talk) 22:42, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I replaced the InfoBox image with this Commons image, which is 3k x 2k pixels. I tried a satellite image, but they all look really ugly in the InfoBox because the Nile satellite pics are generally very tall & skinny images (because the river runs N-S). The Amazon is different: the Amazon basin's rectangular outline is a nice 3x2 (wider than tall) so is great for an InfoBox. I could crop a Nile sat image to show only the delta, but the article already has plenty of images & text about Egypt (rightfully so) but I think the InfoBox is a good place to remind readers that the Nile goes way beyond Egypt and is green & lush in most of the southern half. Noleander (talk) 22:52, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The image certainly looks good! A nitpick tho: "The beauty of river nile, as you progress towards Murchison falls" for the image's description on Commons doesn't actually describe the image. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 14:08, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for pointing that out. I improved the image description in Commons so it now says "A view of Murchison Falls on the Nile River, looking east. This portion of the Nile in Uganda, between Lake Victoria and Lake Albert, is called the Victoria Nile". Also: Thanks for your great comments in the Peer Review, much appreciated. Noleander (talk) 14:53, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I rather disagree with this new choice of image; I think we should seek an image that better represents the Nile across its full course, and (as infobox photos are primarily for identification), fits with what people would expect the Nile to be. I searched through Commons and found some possible candidates:

I think this gets across the pure size of the river well, it's very well-composed, and it shows a fairly typical riverside environment

The 1st Cataract is one of the most important spots on the river, and this is a good wide view that shows both the size of the river and its importance to human settlement

Similar to the former, but with better resolution, albeit not at quite as important a location

I think any of these would be nice. (And again, thank you so much for your work on this article!) Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 05:58, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalissima - Thanks for the feedback on the InfoBox image. Those three images you found are okay, but the sky seems a bit overcast & hazy in all three. Unfortunately, Wiki Commons does not have many nice pictures of the Nile that are hi-res, and capture the essence of the Nile, and have good composition. I've put together this image gallery of about 11 images (including the 3 you provided, and the current image, and the one that was in the InfoBox before that). Can you glance at that gallery and see if any of the other ones are satisfactory? Noleander (talk) 15:15, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The_Nile_River_flows_into_the_Mediterranean_Sea_(iss071e405499).jpg, Nil 25.jpg would work well if we want to go for a satellite picture. I searched through Flickr, and was able to find one more that might be useable (though I think we'd want to crop to the left side of the picture for an infobox image); Commons:File:Nile 3rd Cataract Sudan pano.jpg Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 15:33, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I'm liking Commons:File:Nile 3rd Cataract Sudan pano.jpg ... I'll crop that and upload the cropped version to Commons (I have not yet found a way to perform cropping within the confines of the InfoBox parameters). I'll put it into the InfoBox soon. Noleander (talk) 15:44, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I made three cropped versions of the Flickr image ... left, middle, and right. I put them into User:Noleander/sandboxNile so you can see all three. I picked one at random and put it into the Nile InfoBox. Let me know which one you think is best. Noleander (talk) 16:22, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I really like File:The Nile River flows into the Mediterranean Sea (iss071e405499).jpg for a satellite image. I think the one in the infobox now is the best option for a ground view, though HurricaneZeta^C 17:57, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There's still room in the article for more images ... so both could be included. The satellite image might be tricky in the InfoBox because a lengthy caption might be required to distinguish the Nile from the Red Sea (for readers who are not savvy about geography) e.g. "The Nile river (the dark, narrow, horizontal, meandering line in the bottom portion of the image)" Noleander (talk) 18:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I put that satellite image into the article at Nile#Prehistory. Noleander (talk) 18:31, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Names and etymology

"The English name of the Blue Nile" → "The English name 'Blue Nile'"

Done. Although I used double quotes per MOS:WORDSASWORDS, because the article is using italics for foreign words; single quotes for English gloss of foreign words; double quotes for words-as-words. Noleander (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Noleander (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"as they carried sediment from upriver" → "as they carry sediment from upriver"

Done. Noleander (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

downstream from confluence of Blue Nile and White Nile - "the confluence"?

Done. Noleander (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 05:19, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Geography

"the course from there to Lake Albert" → "the stretch from there ..." More idiomatic in this context?

Done. Noleander (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"a tributary flowing from the west" → "a tributary from the west"

Done. Noleander (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"This confluence happens in Lake No." - How about "occurs" in place of "happens"?

Done. Noleander (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Where the White Nile merges with the Blue Nile they are noticeably distinct colors. - You could insert a comma before "they are".

Done. Not 100% sure it is better, but it is not worse. Noleander (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"second largest" → "second-largest"

Done. Noleander (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"which then follows a large S-shape curve" → "which then follows a large S-shaped curve"

Done. Noleander (talk) 17:08, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 14:59, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

The source of the Blue Nile tributary is near the town of Gish Abay, south of Lake Tana. - How about merging it into any of the previous paragraphs since it is only a single sentence?

That section identifies five distinct sources: one per paragraph. Merging two paragraphs would make it harder for readers to grasp the the sources are all separate. Noleander (talk) 17:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The distance was determined from satellite imagery, and was measured
- Could we avoid mentioning "was" twice?

Done. Noleander (talk) 17:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"than its inflowing rivers" → "than its tributaries"

Changed to ... than the rivers that flow into the lake. I just looked up the definition of "tributary", and you are correct, it can mean rivers flowing into a lake. But I've never seen it used that way before (I've only seen it used to mean a smaller river that flows into a larger river). So, I'm reluctant to employ that (apparently) rare usage. Google says "influent" would work, but that is a super rare word. Let me know if the new blue text is not satisfactory. Noleander (talk) 17:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 16:48, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrology

The waters of the Blue Nile are so substantial during the summer and autumn, that the White Nile backs-up during this time at the confluence. - Both British and American English would use "backs up". Also, you could drop after "autumn".

Done. Noleander (talk) 14:04, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ecology

industrial pollutants and sewage; ships contribute pollutants to the waters; - You could avoid repeating "pollutants" in close proximity.

Done. Noleander (talk) 14:04, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These arid conditions led to famines and social disruption, and also to increased environmental degradation. - You could drop "also to".

Done. Noleander (talk) 14:04, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"increase in frequency and severity of both dryness and drought" → "increase in the frequency and severity of droughts"

Done. Noleander (talk) 14:04, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 05:12, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Geography

The article uses both "Bahr al Ghazal" and "Bahr el Ghazal" - how about using only one?
"eventually producing the current river" → "eventually producing the current form of the river" - clearer?
"rivers in Ethiopian and Ugandan highlands" → "rivers in the Ethiopian and Ugandan highlands" -adds the missing article
where the modern Lake Albert and Lake Edwards are. - Isn't it "Lake Edward" or am I mistaken?
"the Sea completely evaporated" → "the sea completely evaporated"
After the Strait of Gibraltar reopened, the Sea refilled- same as the previous suggestion
"Lake Victoria roughly assumed its modern shape" → "Lake Victoria assumed roughly its modern shape"
"tilted northwards" → "tilted northward"

Done ... all of the above. Noleander (talk) 23:47, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 16:33, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Geological history

"and start forming Lake Victoria" → "and to start forming Lake Victoria"

Human history

"the Egyptian's need" → "the Egyptians' need"
"also were within its realm" → "were also within its realm"
"between 1613 to 1618" → "between 1613 and 1618"
“the furthermost source” → “the farthest source” - more idiomatic?

MSincccc (talk) 04:49, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Water politics in the modern era

"water projects to enhance the production of the cotton industry" → "water projects to enhance cotton production"
"an agreement between Egypt and Anglo-Egyptian Sudan was formed" → "an agreement between Egypt and Anglo-Egyptian Sudan was reached"

- more idiomatic?

"dialog" →"dialogue"
quality of life of their populace - How about using "population" in place of "populace"?
"kilowatt hours" → "kilowatt-hours"
Is there any way water politics could be linked in this section? No worries if not.

Did all of the above except one: Did not add a link to water politics. I searched and could not find a decent place to put it. The Nile#Water politics in the modern era section already begins with a "further" template that directs the reader to Water politics in the Nile Basin, which should satisfy the same goal. Noleander (talk) 17:44, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 16:59, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

General

Economy (Agriculture)

"primarily" → "mainly" - More common in American English.
Much of the irrigated land is within the Gezira Scheme, an extensive irrigation project initiated in the 1920s -How about "started" in place of "initiated" for simplicity?
The primary crops in Sudan are peanuts, cotton, sesame, sugarcane, and sorghum. -You could link to some of the crops.
and Khashm Al-Qirbah Dam- Is this the same as Khashm el-Girba Dam?

Economy (Fisheries)

"which is more than half of the total fresh water yield from the entire African continent" → "which is more than half of the total freshwater yield from all of Africa"- More idiomatic?
"Fish farming is performed at some places in the basin" → "Fish farming is carried out in some parts of the basin"- More idiomatic?

Did all of the preceding items except: Kept "primarily" (vs "mainly"); and kept "from ... the African continent" because that particular usage is emphasizing fish caught in freshwater lakes (inside the continent) and excludes ocean fishing. Noleander (talk) 14:19, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 09:14, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Economy (Hydropower)

"Nile River, but thereafter" → "Nile River, but thereafter,"

Economy (Transportation)

Economy (Tourism and recreation)

The Bandingilo National Park, near the White Nile, is in South Sudan.- This has already been mentioned in the previous sentence (South Sudan has the Boma National Park, Bandingilo National Park).

Did the items above. Noleander (talk) 17:32, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In culture (Art and literature)

In culture (Myth and religion)

Done. Noleander (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Isis was a major deity in the Egyptian religion who was strongly associated with the Nile River.- You could avoid "was" twice in the same sentence.

Done. Noleander (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

*"dated to first century BCE" → "dated to the first century BCE"

Thanks for doing that one. Noleander (talk) 18:01, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 04:57, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bottom line

That's all from me. Thank you again for the article.

MSincccc (talk) 14:11, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSincccc: - Thank-you very much for your assistance: it tremendously improved the article. Noleander (talk)

Thank you. Good luck with the nomination; I’ll keep an eye on it in case anything else comes up. I will support it. MSincccc (talk) 03:36, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Water politics in the modern era (Post-colonial era)

Egypt built the Aswan High Dam (completed 1970);...In 1960, Egypt started building the Aswan High Dam (completed in 1970) - Two consecutive paragraphs mention that the Dam was completed in 1970. You could drop it in one of the sentences. MSincccc (talk) 16:28, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Noleander (talk) 17:00, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

Done. Eliminated all links but one (plus the link inside the River Route map, which is an independent template). Noleander (talk) 17:16, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed eleven links to Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam (including footnotes); perhaps a few could be delinked per MOS:OL? MSincccc (talk) 15:09, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for pointing that out - I've removed 3 links from the body text (tho each was in a unique top-level section, which is permitted by MOS). I've left links that are in (a) footnotes; (b) tables; and (c) image captions - since readers sometimes read those in a "stand alone" manner and so links may be useful in those contexts. Noleander (talk) 16:44, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response.

I also noticed both ‘Ancient Egyptian’ and ‘ancient Egyptian’ in the article body. Would it be worth standardising, or is there a reason for the variation? MSincccc (talk) 16:29, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the article is capitalizing "ancient" correctly: "Ancient Egypt" is a proper noun that identifies a specific civilization, so the article capitalizes "... Ancient Egypt civilization". Lower case is used in other situations such as "ancient Egyptian art" or "ancient Egyptian boats", were "ancient" is an adjective specifying the age of the following (non-proper) noun. I'm not 100% it is correct grammatically, but at least it is consistent. Noleander (talk) 17:27, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Economy

along a narrow strip along the river banks

@Noleander Thoughts? MSincccc (talk) 17:05, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thanks for the nudge. Done: Changed to ... are concentrated in a narrow strip along riverbanks with ample transportation opportunities. Noleander (talk) 01:23, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence

@Noleander I look forward to your thoughts on this when you have a moment. MSincccc (talk) 13:22, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for suggesting the link to Northeast Africa. That Northeast Africa article is not great: (a) it is rather tiny; and (b) there is no link to Africa anywhere in the article. Also there is the question of how "northeast" is used: in "... river in northeast Africa .." the word "northeast" is being used as an adjective (specifying a portion of Africa), and not as a proper noun naming an official political/geographic region (which would be capitalized as Northeast Africa). But if you think the link should be changed, we can do that. Noleander (talk) 13:52, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A very quick one for now:

@UndercoverClassicist - Thanks for the feedback! I changed the article to In Egypt, its names use the Arabic word النيل (romanized as 'An Nil') in the forms Al-Nīl, Baḥr Al-Nīl or Nahr Al-Nīl. I got the Arabic spelling from the Badawi source. The Hurst source lists the three forms at the end of the sentence, which all start with "Al". So, there is a now a mixture of "Al" and "An". Is that a problem? Would it be simpler to remove the definite article from the Arabic? Noleander (talk) 15:32, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Out of my expertise, I'm afraid -- I think you'd be wise to consult someone who speaks Egyptian Arabic! From what I can tell, the "proper" transcription is always "al-Nil" etc, but Arabic speakers would assimilate the l to the n because n is a "sun letter". So it's pronounced "an-Nil" in all of these contexts, but may be written in Romanisation as "al-", (I would guess) particularly in proper nouns where the Romanisation may be more conservative. Compare El Alamein, which reflects the Egpytian pronounciation even though the article remains "Al" in "proper" transcription. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:27, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thanks for the insightful information. I'll figure out a sensible path forward. Noleander (talk) 16:31, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I changed it to follow the Harold Edwin Hurst source: I removed the Arabic spelling, and left the three romanized versions; thus avoiding the definite article issue altogether. Noleander (talk) 17:26, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image and accessibility review - pass

[edit]

Credit to the nominator for making/taking several of the images themselves.

The Nile River template doesn't appear to have an overall alt attribute -- on the other hand, the images that make it up do have elements that appear when moused over, but they're mostly nonsensical to a human reader (the first gives "WSPLe; MFADEg"). I think there is a way to make the entire thing have a single piece of alt text, but this is probably best asked on the Template Talk page, or to someone who knows what they're doing with template editing (I don't!).

Unfortunately, the Routemap template dosen't support accessibility well. That template is used in approximately 30,000 articles about railways, light rail, subways, canal systems, and rivers. The template has a notice at the top: "The accessibility of this template is in question. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page." A discussion of the accessibility shortcomings was in the template Talk page in Dec 2024, but does not appear to have resulted in any significant improvements. I have posted a new query in the template Talk page. If any replies there give directions on how to add Alt text, I will do it. Noleander (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The heiroglyphs aren't linked, but clearly aren't in copyright: I'm not qualified to pronounce on their accuracy, but that is at least cited.

The hieroglyphs were thoroughly scrutinized by another FA reviewer here: Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Nile/archive1#Mr_rnddude (and that scrutiny resulted in a change). I'm confident they are accurate, and have valid sourcing. Noleander (talk) 02:45, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The lead image uses fixed pixel size -- generally a no-no -- and I think the alt attribute refers to a previous iteration?

Done. Fixed both issues. Noleander (talk) 23:35, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Noleander (talk) 23:41, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No full stop wanted in the hippopotamus caption, or the one of the Nile crocodile.

Done. Noleander (talk) 23:57, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright -- no issues

Done. used PD-two template. Noleander (talk) 00:11, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That image was created during the GA review, by the GA reviewer, and I validated the data at that time. Noleander (talk) 00:12, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I created that image (by modifying another Commons image to make it accessible) and at the time I validated the data by comparing with the original WP:RS source at https://www.nature.com/articles/s41597-023-02549-6 (full article via WP:TWL). Noleander (talk) 00:14, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright -- action needed

File:Nile 3rd Cataract Left.jpg: without wishing to do any outing, I assume that the uploader and the person identified as the author are the same? If so, no issues here.

I believe all is in order. The original was uploaded to Flickr in 2016; then uploaded to Commons in 2026 (and validated with the FlickrReviewer tool); then I made a cropped version in 2026 and uploaded that to Commons, and gave credit to the original author as required by the cc-by-2.0 license. Noleander (talk) 00:26, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. There are three copyrights involved: (a) The ancient painting in Egypt; (b) The facsimile painting made by a museum-employed artist in mid-20th century; and (c) The photograph of the facsimile painting. I just now added the {{PD-art|PD-old-100-expired}} template, which covers the ancient artwork. The mid-20th century facsimile itself cannot have a copyright. The CC-1.0 license was provided by the museum to cover the the photograph (and perhaps any potential claims related to the facsimile painting). Presumably, the photographer was an employee of the museum, and any rights to work-related photos they took were owned by the museum, per the work contract. Noleander (talk) 00:39, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Added tags {{PD-art-3d}} {{PD-US-expired}}. Noleander (talk) 01:13, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Yes, it was published in Chicago in 1892. Added tag {{PD-US}}. Noleander (talk) 01:18, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abusimbel.jpg: Does this really not meet the Swedish threshold of originality from the framing choices? I've seen the associated VPC discussion.

Done. Replaced the image with another image from Commons that has clean free-to-use status. Noleander (talk) 02:14, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot find a copyright symbol in the image. The image does have the letter "C" twice, within a partial circle, but that is the logo of the Copernicus science program. The image is free-to-use, and Commons has good licensing information. Noleander (talk) 01:21, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at the banner in "licensing", though as it's a green copyright symbol, I think that means it's free-use for at least as far as we need it to be. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:38, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ecluse-Nil.jpg: this one might be complicated, as buildings and bridges usually are considered copyrightable within FoP discussions, and see above re. Egypt's complicated status here.

Done. Removed the image from the article. Noleander (talk) 02:07, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. This has exact same concerns and tags as the "Pairy" image discussed above. See that discussion for details. Noleander (talk) 02:20, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Added new tag {{PD-art|PD-old-100-expired}} for the underlying 2D artwork. Noleander (talk) 02:24, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hapy tying.svg: cites a modern reference book -- I guess it's a trace/version of an older work of art? Probably not an issue but that needs to be declared and tagged appropriately.

Done. I added a link to a Commons photo of the original sculpture in Abu Simbel, Egypt (the sculpture that the sketch is based upon). I added tags {{PD-art-3d}} {{PD-US-expired}} to the sketch license page to cover that sculpture. I added text to the Commons description of the sketch indicating that the drawing is inspired by that ancient sculpture, but differs in many significant ways, so it is more of a schematic diagram. Noleander (talk) 02:33, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Replaced it with another Commons image (of the same scene) that is higher resolution and has the correct license tags, including US tag. Noleander (talk) 02:40, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to do such a thorough review and identifying some issues. I'll start working on them later today! Noleander (talk) 17:53, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@UndercoverClassicist: Thanks again for taking so much time to help with the images of this article. I believe all concerns have been addressed one way or another (see replies above). Noleander (talk) 16:52, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by – or perhaps in this case barge-by – comment: the article is mostly written in American but an English spelling has crept in with "500 metres". I'll look in again if time permits, but it's a very long article – 10,000 words! Tim riley talk 14:40, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley - Thanks for catching the spelling issue; I have fixed it. Article size: It was up to 11,000 words, but I struggled mightily to get it down to 10,000. It is the longest river in the world, after all :-) And a Level 3 Vital Article. Any additional feedback you can provide on the article would be appreciated. Noleander (talk) 15:36, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Tim riley - FYI, I've trimmed the article - now down to 9,572 words. Noleander (talk) 02:40, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

At 7,088 kilometers (4,404 mi) long, it is the longest river in the world, ...

There are a couple of issues with this. Firstly, the length seems suspiciously precise but isn't dated. Per Heraclitus, a river is constantly changing and so this measurement should be attributed and dated. Note that other sources do not agree on this figure. For example, Britannica gives the figure as 6,650 km.

Secondly, the linked longest river in the world explains that the length measurements of many rivers are only approximations (see also coastline paradox). In particular, there seems to exist disagreement as to whether the Nile or the Amazon is the world's longest river. See Britannica for an account of the issue. The statement here seems too definite and should explain that the claim is disputed.

Andrew🐉(talk) 22:30, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed feedback ... much appreciated. The article used to have a sentence covering the subtleties of the length record, but it was trimmed in an attempt to get the article down to a reasonable size. I'll restore it (maybe as a footnote) and also attach a year to the measurement (it was 2008). As you say, measuring rivers is a tricky business, and the values change over time, and will continue to change in the future. As for the word "longest", that statement is found in several reliable, academic sources. The Britannica source (above) is kind of a blog, and ends with "This headline-making news was met with skepticism by many, especially since the Brazilian study was not published, which raised questions about the researchers’ methodology." I'm not aware of any recent academic sources that measured both the Amazon and the Nile, and found the Amazon longer ... but I'll double check that. Noleander (talk) 22:53, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I added the following footnote to the article (cited in three places, wherever the length is mentioned):

The 7,088 km length value for the Nile is based on the Liu 2009 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFLiu2009 (help) study. This study measured ten rivers around the world using the same methodology: the length was measured along the centerline of the river using satellite imagery. The imagery was collected during the years 1999 to 2002. The lengths of all rivers vary over time, as the river changes course, sources are refined, deltas change size, or new measurement methodologies are developed. The title of longest river is somewhat controversial. Sources which state that the Nile is the longest river include Liu 2009 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFLiu2009 (help), Fierro & Nyer 2007, p. 5-35 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFFierroNyer2007 (help), Talbot & Williams 2009, p. 39 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFTalbotWilliams2009 (help), Dumont 2009, p. 1 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFDumont2009 (help), and Sutcliffe 2009, p. 336 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFSutcliffe2009 (help).

I did not put the date of the measurement into the body text, because it is nuanced: the paper was published in 2009, but the methodology relied on imagery from 1999-2002 ... so instead I put those years into the footnote.

I considered adding other length values for the Nile (from other sources) but the values (6,800, 6,400, 6,500, etc) were outdated, vague, and never included a methodology. In my judgement, the Liu 2009 source stands head and shoulders above other sources for the length value.

I searched WP:TWL for any recent, academic source that states that the Nile is not is the longest river, but I could not find one. A google search produced a few results, but they were not peer-reviewed academic sources: some were professors, but they were invariably non-peer-reviewed press releases, rather than reliable, academic journals. And they were potentially biased. I have no skin in the game, and if anyone can find a recent, reliable, academic source that says that the Nile is not the longest, I'll be happy to update the article accordingly.

Thanks again for the feedback on the article! Noleander (talk) 00:24, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the detailed response. I've just started reading through the article and so will comment further as and when I have more observations. More anon. Andrew🐉(talk) 10:12, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As Noleander says that the size of the article was an issue, I've added the {{section sizes}} template which may also help in reviewing the article's overall structure and balance.

I also notice that there's a template requesting a map. As the article has several maps, perhaps this is no longer needed?

Removed. Thanks for catching that, I had forgotten about it. Noleander (talk) 13:37, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew🐉(talk) 10:36, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As always, these are suggestions, not demands; feel free to refuse with justification.

General

the capitalisation of "basin" is inconsistent throughout the article, especially when following "Nile"

Done. Sources are split on whether to capitalize the "B", so I flipped a coin and went with capital "B". Noleander (talk) 13:49, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised that with the superfluity of available sources, Britannica still has to be cited? Especially with the confusing citation Harold Edwin Hurst, 2025...

Regarding Harold Edwin Hurst: he was the world's foremost Nile expert in the 20th century, and his works are still cited by Nile academics in the 21st century. He was the original author of the Britannica article – which lends some weight to that article. Although he has been dead for 48 years, so some of the Britannica 's "Nile" article has probably been re-written by the co-authors.

Reliability: I used Britannica as a source reluctantly, and only as a last resort. Britannica often states basic facts about the Nile that secondary sources do not state because they are so "obvious". Britannica is used in this article only to support non-contentious material.

Regarding the number of citations to the Hurst article: the Nile#Geography section this article adopted Hurst's division of the Nile Basin into seven regions. So, the article necessarily cites him once or twice for each of the seven regions of the Basin, which quickly put the number of cites over ten. Noleander (talk) 14:24, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There are 2,500 words of footnotes, which seems excessive.

Agree. I just reduced the footnotes from 2,625 words to 1,785 words (using Google Doc word counter). There were a large number of footnotes because a couple of months ago the article grew to 11,000 prose words, and when I trimmed the article down to 9,500 words, most of that trimmed material was pushed into footnotes. The remaining footnotes are significant; but I can remove more, if necessary. Noleander (talk) 14:51, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and infobox

I added that map to the InfoBox so we could assess it. The InfoBox had a map when I started working on the article several months ago, but I removed it because (a) it caused the InfoBox to be so tall it encroached on the following section; and (b) there were already five maps in the article body. ~~In my opinion, a map (still) makes the InfoBox too tall and ugly.~~ Upon further review: the tributary labels in that map are very helpful. The map is back in there now: let me know what you think. Noleander (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why are those five cities in particular cited as "major"?

Three are national capitals: Cairo, Khartoum, and Juba. Those three cites are from the northern desert part of the Nile. The other two were selected to give representation to the southern highlands (in other words, I didn't want the InfoBox to be "desert centric"). Both are historically significant for the Nile: Bahir Dar is near the source of the Blue Nile; and Jinja is near one of the sources of the White Nile. The latter two could be removed if needed. Noleander (talk) 15:36, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"although the Blue Nile contributes over two thirds of the water and silt below the confluence of the two" is a bit clunky, especially towards the end. Good to simplify, especially in the lead. I'd say simply that Blue Nile contributes over twice the volume as the White Nile.

Done. Changed to The White Nile is longer and is considered to be the headwaters, yet the Blue Nile contributes over twice the volume as the White Nile. Noleander (talk) 18:06, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"and has followed its present course for about 12,000 years" this doesn't seem to be mentioned/cited in the body

Done. Added a new sentence to body text explicitly stating the most authoritative value (15,000 years); and updated lead to match (15,000). The 12,000 figure is mentioned by one or two sources, but 15,000 has more weight in the sources. Noleander (talk) 18:15, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Other countries in the Nile Basin are..." the general implication is that all of these countries are fully in the basin.

Done. Changed to Other countries that lie wholly or partly in the Nile Basin are Burundi, ... Noleander (talk) 18:19, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The balance of the paragraph on human history seems off. As seen from Andrew Davidson's helpful {{section sizes}} addition on the talk page, the subsections of #Human history are roughly equal on prose size. But in the lead, we have five sentences relating to Ancient Egypt, and then "Nubian, Ethiopian, and Nilotic cultures" and "Egypt from Roman era to colonial era" are completely skipped until one sentence of "Search for the source of the Nile".

Done. Changed that paragraph in the lead to:

The Nile was the foundation of the Ancient Egyptian civilization, which relied on the river for nearly every aspect of life. The annual flooding of the river deposited nutrient-rich silt along the riverbanks. This soil supported crops that enabled a sophisticated society to thrive in an otherwise inhospitable desert. The Nile facilitated trade, communication, transportation, and governance. South of the second Nile cataract lies Nubia, the historical home of the ancient Kerma culture and the Kushite Empire. Many Europeans were fascinated by the Nile, and their explorations around Lake Victoria in the late 19th century located the source of the river. Among the cultures that live along the Nile in the modern era are the the Nilotic peoples, semi-nomadic cattle herders who practice nomadic pastoralism, moving their cattle seasonally in response to the Nile's floods.

Noleander (talk) 18:43, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent work. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:46, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"the Nile plays a critical role in the economy of countries in the Nile basin" is anyone expecting it to play a critical role for countries outside the basin?

Done. Changed to In the modern era, the Nile plays a critical role in the economies of Egypt and Sudan, which rely on it to irrigate ... Noleander (talk) 18:45, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Names and etymology

All good here.

Geography

Is this section the "Geography of the Nile" or the "Geography of the Nile Basin"? Are they the same thing?

That is an excellent question. This article mimics the sources, which generally conflate the Nile River and Nile Basin. I believe that sources avoid separating the basin from the river because such an effort would lead to confusion & contradictions. From a hydrological point of view: any drop of water that falls within the Nile Basin will roll downhill and end up in a tributary of the Nile, then the Nile River itself (ignoring evaporation & seeping into the ground). The only times sources sharply separate the river from the basin is when dealing with human cultures: if a culture is within the basin, but does/did not interact with the Nile or one of its tributaries, then the sources will exclude that culture from a river-oriented discussion. This article follows suit, and only mentions cultures that had significant interaction with the river. Noleander (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shahin 2002 p.272 notes that the basin is one-tenth the surface area of Africa, which seems a good comparison to include for general readers who might appreciate a sense of scale more than a very big number.

Done. Noleander (talk) 19:05, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The map I mentioned above seems to label the different portions of the Nile (Victoria/Mountain etc.) in a way the current one in the section doesn't. Might be more helpful for readers. The current map doesn't help with understanding the sequence.

That's a good point: those labels are very helpful for readers. Definitely a strong argument in favor of keeping that new map in the InfoBox, in spite of the fact that the map makes the InfoBox rather tall. Noleander (talk) 19:05, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Unlike Lake Victoria, Lake Albert is a deep lake surrounded by mountains." is Lake Victoria not surrounded by mountains?

That statement is paraphrasing one of the sources. Lake Victoria is surrounded by rolling hills. The mountains are farther west, on the west edge of the East African Rift, along the string of lakes: Lake Tanganyika, Lake Kivu, Lake Edward, and Lake Albert. Noleander (talk) 19:11, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is the Albert Nile the same as the Mountain Nile? What's the difference between the two?

Done. Clarified the definitions as follows:

Albert Nile – Segment of the White Nile flowing north from Lake Albert to Nimule
Mountain Nile – Segment of the White Nile from the mountains of Uganda to the plains of South Sudan

The Albert Nile is a very short segment. The sources do not make clear whether the Mountain Nile includes the Albert Nile. Noleander (talk) 19:32, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"At the downstream edge of the Sudd swamp, the Nile is joined by the Bahr el Ghazal River (Arabic: 'gazelle river') a tributary from the west. This confluence occurs in Lake No." so is the Sudd swamp identical to Lake No?

Done. The Sudd swamp is huge; Lake No is a small lake at the north end of the swamp. Improved the wording to "At the north edge of the Sudd swamp, the Nile passes through Lake No, a small lake where the Nile is joined by the Bahr el Ghazal River (Arabic: 'gazelle river') – a tributary from the west." Noleander (talk) 19:44, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"it reaches into the Mediterranean Sea to a depth of 1,800 meters (5,900 ft)" do we know how far offshore this is?

I have removed that "... depth of 1,800 meters... " sentence from the article ...the cited sources do not state that fact; and I've gone through my notes and cannot find the source. I've found some new sources that cover the material (with different values), but given the size of the article, it is probably best to simply remove it. Let me know if you want similar material from new sources ... I can add it. Noleander (talk) 20:17, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The final two regions of the Nile Basin are drainage basins of two tributaries: the Blue Nile basin and the Atbarah River basin." this is followed by a section on the drainage basins of four tributaries, including one whose drainage basin is larger than that of the Blue Nile and Atbarah combined...

Done. I re-organized the entire "Geography" section so the material is clearer. The seven regions of the Nile basin now map directly to the seven subsections. And the tributaries are embedded within the appropriate region section. The confusing "Tributaries" section title is now gone. Noleander (talk) 20:41, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps the description of the Bahr el Ghazal tributary would better fit in "Mountain Nile", where it is first introduced? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:52, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks for pointing out that mistake. Noleander (talk) 14:36, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sources

A little odd that this doesn't come before the discussion of the general Nile geography, which seems more logical.

Done. Moved Sources section above Geography section. Noleander (talk) 20:22, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll carefully review that reliable source :-) Noleander (talk) 20:22, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hydrology

The second paragraph seems repetitive.

Done. Noleander (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The White Nile passes through the Sudd swamps before it reaches the Blue Nile; about half the water flowing into the Sudd is lost to evaporation before it flows out" again, this seems like it could be more concise

Done. Changed to As the White Nile passes through the Sudd swamps about half the water is lost to evaporation. Noleander (talk) 21:19, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"that the White Nile backs up during this time at the confluence" does this mean it flows in reverse, or just stays still, or what?

The sources are not clear about that. If I had to guess: the rate-of-flow slows to near zero, and the water level in the swamp rises (but the water does not flow backwards). Noleander (talk)

I am not sure about the "Water sources and sinks" subsection. What additional information am I meant to be getting from the tables that I would not get from a simple list of countries/stations and whether they are a source or a sink? Especially considering that every table has the disclaimer "Data does not include impacts of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, completed in 2025", which seems to amount to "everything may be wrong now".

The water balance information is critical for two reasons:

Many hard-science sources talk about the hydrology data at great length; and
The hydrology tables illustrate the water scarcity issues in the Nile Basin. Some experts predict that the basin population may nearly double in the 21st century; and if a long-term drought were to afflict Ethiopia, it could lead to famine and international violence. (See, e.g., Bunbury 2023 pp 43-44,61,70).

For those reasons, the Nile article is obligated to present the statistics. To display the information, choices include (in order of increasing verbosity):

a) No tables; use simple prose

b) No tables; use lists (perhaps bullet lists)

c) Tables: collapse some, un-collapse others

d) Tables: un-collapse all

In my judgement, (a) is not true to the sources, nor to the gravity of the information. (d) is not bad, but might be overwhelming to lay readers. So that leaves (b) or (c), both of which use roughly the same amount of vertical real estate. Tables (c) are 100x more flexible than lists (b), and will enable the article to evolve and grow in the future decades. So, the article is using (c) now.

Regarding the fact that the GERD dam was just completed in 2025: If anything, that makes the tabular data even more important. Consider this scenario: the year is 2050, a drought has hit North Africa, and the GERD reservoir level is falling. Water discharge from the dam is far below normal, and crops in Sudan and Egypt are failing due to lack of irrigation. The future editors of WP will want to update the Nile article to show the historical changes to the the flow of the river: How much water reached Egypt annually in 2020 (when they stared filling the GERD reservoir)? How much reached Egypt in 2025 (GERD filled)? How much in 2030? 2040? How much after a drought had been going on for 5 years? 10 years? These future WP editors will probably evolve the tables to look like this:

Hydrology table may expand to look like this:
Country	Water balance 2020	Water balance 2030	Water balance 2040
Ethiopia	1111	222	333
... more countries ...	888	000	999
Egypt	333	444	555
Sudan	6666	7777	3333

The hydrology tables in today's Nile article are the baseline for this important information.

In summary, the scientific sources (as opposed to the cultural sources) heavily cover the hydrology statistics; and a tabular layout is essential to presenting the information in an organized fashion. As the 21st century unfolds, the tables can evolve to display essential water scarcity data. Noleander (talk) 22:00, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, an argument from coverage in the sources is the best way to establish WP:DUEWEIGHT, so I can accept that. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:01, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ecology

"There are 36 industries that discharge their pollution sources directly into the Nile, and 41 into irrigation canals." do the groups overlap or are they separate?

Unknown. The source is a 2005 report by the Nile Basin Initiative (NBI) which summarizes some older data including a 1980 report which examined 360 industries and found that 36 of the 360 discharged directly into the river. I cannot find a copy of the 1980 report. From context (in the 2005 report) it appears that all 360 industries are distinct, but I cannot be certain. Noleander (talk) 00:18, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I think the reader gets the point, so that's fine. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:01, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The sacred ibis was important in the ancient Egyptian religion, and millions of the ibis were ritually sacrificed, leading to the eventual extinction of the species in Egypt" our article African sacred ibis state they were present well into the second millennium AD; not sure ancient Egyptian sacrifices can be said to have led to the extirpation...

Done. Thanks for catching that mistake. It now reads "... The species became locally extinct in Egypt in the late 19th century, but remains common in central and southern Africa." Noleander (talk) 00:31, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Geological history

"One hypothesis describes the Nile's geological history as a sequence of five evolutionary periods." ... is there a consequence to this sentence I'm not seeing?

Done. Changed the wording to "One hypothesis describes the Nile's geological history as a sequence of the following five evolutionary periods." ... the following five paragraphs then describe the five periods (one per paragraph). Also, the attached footnote contrasts it with an alternative hypothesis that uses eight periods. Noleander (talk) 00:36, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

When did Obweruka disappear?

Done. I added a footnote stating "Obweruka existed from about 7.5 MYA to 2.5 MYA." The source also says that around 2.5 MYA that paleolake started draining to the west, implying it existed for a brief while after 2.5 MYA, but they don't go into details. Noleander (talk) 00:51, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Human history

Don't think sentences should begin with "and".

Done. Noleander (talk) 00:55, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the order/naming of the cataracts is ever explained in prose, which makes it somewhat confusing when numbers start getting dropped in.

Done. Enhanced the Nile#Main Nile section to explicitly name all six (1,2,3,4,6). In conjunction with the existing map in the Nile#Sources section that shows all cataracts, readers should be satisfied. Noleander (talk) 01:01, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are there any details about how the Kerma culture/Funj Sultanate/Ethiopian Empire had relationships with the Nile, instead of just listing where and when they existed?

No, I could not find many specifics about how they interacted with the river (except the Dinka/Nuer pastoral migrations). If one were to follow WP:PROPORTION to the letter, the article would probably not mention those cultures at all because 98% of the cultural material in the sources focuses on Egypt & Islamic Sudan. I'm using editorial discretion and making a special effort to include Nubian/black cultures - in other words, to avoid being too Egypt-centric. Noleander (talk) 01:16, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does footnote bh ("In 1857, John Hanning Speke and Richard Francis Burton started a search...") really add to the existing text?

Done. Removed that footnote (along with 20 or 30 other minor footnotes). Noleander (talk) 01:08, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Should the "Search for the source of the Nile" subsection be better placed as a subsection of "Sources", where it could be better integrated with the existing text?

I went back and forth on that choice. In the end, I feel it is better within "Human History" because that section is a list of human interactions with the river. Whereas the "Sources" section is primarily a statement of present-day geographical data. Noleander (talk) 03:25, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Water politics in the modern era

Footnote bl needs a citation.

Done. Removed the footnote (I think the statement is true, but I cannot find a source that directly supports it). Noleander (talk) 01:22, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Egypt reserved the right ... Egypt assumed the right ... Egypt assumed the right" is a trifle repetitive.

Done. Changed to "Egypt reserved the right to monitor the Nile flow in the upstream countries, to undertake river-related projects without the consent of upriver nations, and to veto any construction projects that would adversely affect Egypt." Noleander (talk) 01:28, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Egypt and Sudan in the north wielded more power than the other ten nations to the south" comes up around three times

Done. Eliminated repetition. Noleander (talk) 01:34, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If a "Declaration of Principles" was signed in 2015, what was the point of the subsequent talks in the US, the African Union, and the UAE, and the request for UNSC intervention?

The sources do not clearly explain (see Ranjan 2024, pp. 28-29). Reading between the lines, the 2015 Declaration of Principles was apparently very vague, and skimpy on details, numbers, and deadlines. Also: Egypt & Ethiopia didn't trust each other to carry-out whatever they signed. But that is speculation on my part. Noleander (talk) 01:38, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Economy

"The southern nations have few irrigation canals, instead relying on extensive rainfall: the amount of soil water used annually for crops in the south is 229 km3, which is more than twice the total annual water flow of the Nile River (about 100 km3)." this sentence largely duplicates what's just been said

Done. Noleander (talk) 02:52, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"accounts for the majority of inland (fresh water) fish caught in the African continent ... is more than half of the total fresh water yield from the entire African continent" more duplication

Done. Noleander (talk) 02:52, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. I removed the hatnote link to Nile boat because the term "nile boat" is not a commonly used term by academics, and the term is not well defined. The Nile boat article is a bit misleading in its current form; and linking to it could confuse readers. The article Ancient Egyptian royal ships is better quality, but has a very narrow focus. Noleander (talk) 03:02, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done, I think. The footnote IDs have changed over the past couple of days, but I assume that is the footnote that listed a dozen parks near the Nile? If so: that footnote has been deleted. Noleander (talk) 03:07, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article implies that the purpose of the proposed Jonglei Canal was to improve navigation, but the relevant article indicates its purpose was increasing agriculture on the lower Nile.

Done. Changed wording to "Plans to build a canal through the swamp – called the Jonglei Canal – were initiated in the early 20th century with the goal of providing more water to grow cotton in Egypt. Construction was ...". Noleander (talk) 02:08, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It feels like the third paragraph of "Transportation" would work better as the first.

Done. Noleander (talk) 03:09, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"along with the nearby temples that were moved during construction to avoid becoming submerged" this feels like it should have been discussed already

The temple relocation was discussed above in the section Nile#Post-colonial era - "An international campaign to save some monuments from becoming submerged by the new reservoir ...". Noleander (talk) 03:12, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:01, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In culture

Done. Thanks for providing those outstanding links and sources. I've added four works of art to the "In Culture" section from the years 1871, 1937, 1966, and 2023:

" Giuseppe Verdi was commissioned by Isma'il Pasha to compose an opera to celebrate the opening of the Suez Canal. The opera, Aida, was performed at the newly-constructed Egyptian Royal Opera House in 1871. The opera's third act is set on the banks of the Nile river."
" Agatha Christie wrote the popular 1937 mystery novel Death on the Nile, about a murder on a Nile steamboat, which inspired several adaptations."
" Adrift on the Nile is a 1966 novel by Egyptian author and Nobel prize winner Naguib Mahfouz about a young man that lives on a houseboat on the Nile. The river is a metaphor for a life that he cannot control, leading him to turn his back on society."
"Since the start of construction of the Grand Ethiopian Renaissance Dam, Ethiopian musicians have produced songs that celebrate and glorify the Nile and the dam."

To stay in compliance with the WP:OR or WP:SYNTH policies I'm tentatively limiting the article to art/film/music that sources analyze in the context of the Nile (rather than performing my own search for artworks that happen to mention the Nile). Noleander (talk) 03:24, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One more option Noleander; you may have access to a recent publication entitled Ancient Egypt in Video Games through WP:TWL (my link here); the fifth chapter (titled Pharaohs, Labourers and Wonder Builders: Illustrating Ancient Egypt with Game Mechanics in Strategy Games) contains a significant amount of discussion on the Nile's depiction in the game Civilization VI (pp. 95, 100) and wider culture (p. 101). ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:57, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: Done. Used that source and added "The Nile plays a prominent role in several video games, including Civilization VI." - The source has a section "A Problematic Representation" which asserts that many European/American representations of ancient Egypt incorrectly portray the civilization as being 100% focused on the river (and ignore aspects of the civilization that were located in (or used) the desert). That is interesting, but I have not seen it echoed in other sources. In fact, many sources say the opposite: that ancient Egypt was strongly focused on the river in nearly every way. So I did not put that assertion into the Nile article. Noleander (talk) 15:40, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I might add to the above later. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:45, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@AirshipJungleman29: - I have replied to all the issues you mentioned above. I implemented the vast majority, and added explanations for the handful that were not implemented. You inputs have been exceedingly valuable, and very welcome! Noleander (talk) 02:00, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support a wonderful article, ready to join the list of vital-3 FAs. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:44, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure I have the time or energy to review the prose of the whole article, but I want to take a look at the statements related to ancient Egypt.

In the ancient Egyptian language, the same word was used for 'Nile' and 'river': jtrw. and The Nile was also called Ar or Aur meaning 'black' – in reference to the dark color of the Nile floodwaters as they carry sediment from upriver. – These two statements employ different transliteration techniques. The former is preferrable over the latter and the following comment will illustrate why.
The second statement is additionally dubious and was difficult to track down. The Egyptian word for 'black' is km; I can find no reference in any of my dictionaries or grammar books (Allen, Budge (outdated, by comprehensive), Faulkner, or Gardiner) to a word that could be rendered as 'ar' or 'aur' that means 'black'. The transliteration choice here renders it quite difficult to work out what word is even being referred to: Is it ꜣr, ꜥr, ꜣwr, ꜥwr, wr, ỉr/jr, or even ꜥꜣ? The only ones I can make sense of are the last three. There is km-wr or 'Great Black' (km = black; wr = great). The only problem is that this name refers to the bitter lakes region of Egypt. The other option is jtrw-ꜥꜣ (Jeteru-aa or Iteru-aa) or jr-ꜥꜣ (Jer-aa or Ir-aa) meaning 'Great River'. Budge gives jwr-ꜥꜣ as 'ȧur-āa' as a name for the Nile's most significant branch or jwr as 'ȧur' meaning 'stream, canal, river, arm of the Nile'. That explains 'Aur' though with an outdated transliteration; but it does not explain 'black'.
It also doesn't help that the source states that ⲫⲓⲁⲣⲟ is the Coptic word for 'black'. For one: Which dialect? For two: No? The word for 'black' is ⲕⲁⲙ (Sahidic) or ⲭⲙⲟⲙ (Bohairic) which descend from km. The word for river is ⲉⲓⲉⲣⲟ (Sahidic) or ⲓⲁⲣⲟ (Bohairic). The Britannica article doesn't cite its sources here, so beyond this I'm in the dark. (Sources for Coptic: Sahidic dictionary Online Coptic dictionary Bohairic dictionary) Mr rnddude (talk) 00:25, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Mr rnddude - Always good to get input from a subject-matter expert. I've removed the Coptic sentence from the article; and also the "Aur" Egyptian word sentence. The remaining two sentences are:

1) "In the ancient Egyptian language, the same word was used for 'Nile' and 'river': jtrw."{{sfn|Allen|2000|pp=21,101}}

Allen p 21: "... the Nile (known in Egyptian only as jtrw 'the river') ..."

Allen p 101: "... jtrw 'river' ..."

2) "Egyptians called their own country kmt meaning 'black', in reference to the dark color of the Nile floodwaters as they carried sediment from upriver."{{sfn|Allen|2000|p=470}}

Allen : p 470: "kmt (noun) 'Egypt' (literally 'The Black' referring to the cultivated soil along the Nile."

Allen: p 339 (footnote) "The word kmt 'Egypt' literally means 'black', referring to the soil of the Nile Valley."

Sentence (2) was in the article until a month ago, but was commented out for size reasons ... but it still appears in the raw Wiki Markup, so I want to make sure it is accurate (I've restored it to the body text for now, so it is more visible). If there is a source that suggests that sentences 1 or 2 are wrong or misleading, I can use that source instead of (or in addition to) Allen. If the source is not online, can you could provide me with the relevant snippet? Thanks! - Noleander (talk) 03:12, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first sentence is fine. The second sentence needs an adjustment, but nothing to do with the source. James Peter Allen is HQRS. As Allen states, kmt refers to the colour of the land or soil of the Nile Valley. You have kmt as referring to 'the dark color of the Nile floodwaters' from the sediment it carries as it flows – I assume that is because of the Britannica source – I would switch the phrasing to 'in reference to the color of the fertile soil of the Nile valley' or similar. You may also specify a translation of kmt as 'the Black Land'. You have a different copy of Allen with differing pagination, but check the 'Dictionary' section under 'k' (alphabetically ... š, q, k, g, t ...), you might also be able to ctrl+f for literally "Black land" (p. 533 in mine, probably p. 505ish in yours; your p. 101 is my p. 128). Mr rnddude (talk) 05:19, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Egyptian hieroglyphs can be quite complicated. You give the hieroglyphs for river or Nile as: This form appears to refer to the Schoenus or 'river-length'. There are often multiple ways to render Egyptian words. For just 'river', Allen (p. 515 for me) gives two variants, the first being: Faulkner uses a more minimalist version, see p. 33 (if you have an archive.org account to borrow) or p. 40 (no borrow needed), with: Gardiner, See p. 43 & p. 623, goes with: There are many more variants as well. Both Faulkner and Gardiner also use the version that is currently in article for 'river-measure'. For Faulkner see same page and for Gardiner see p. 199. This convention may be purely for convenience or there may be a meaningful difference. I don't know, I don't measure rivers. Mr rnddude (talk) 07:29, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I updated the article to use the plainer hieroglyph from Gardiner (p 43, 623), and added a footnote telling readers about alternative hieroglyphs, with cites to Faulkner and Allen. Noleander (talk) 13:32, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments exclusively on the ancient Egypt-related portions.

"A tune, Hymn to the Nile…" While Egyptian hymns are often presumed to have been sung, there is no record of what melody may have been used for any dynastic Egyptian poem, so "tune" seems like the wrong word. The webpage used as a reference is also less than ideal, as it's based on a text from 1907 and probably overstates the age of the hymn. This page is more up-to-date, and one of its subpages does include a translation. You seem to be listing just a sampling of cultural references to the Nile in these sections, so I won't press this point, but it may be worth mentioning that this hymn is only the best-known of a handful that were dedicated to the Nile. (I can source this point myself if you want to include it.)

Done. Removed word "tune" and changed to use the new source. Noleander (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"…the east side was for the living, and the west side – including the Theban Necropolis and the Giza pyramid complex – was for the dead." This is a gross oversimplification. Many ancient Egyptian cities, including the largest of them all, Memphis, were on the west bank. It's true that most tombs were west of the Nile, but even that wasn't universal, and it's related to beliefs about the sun rather than the idea of the Nile as a dividing line, so my recommendation would be to cut this whole sentence.

Done. Removed sentence. Noleander (talk) 13:35, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The Egyptian religion placed the source of the Nile's annual flood at Elephantine Island (at the first cataract) where the floodwaters were believed to flow up out of the netherworld." This is true but kind of incomplete. On the pages cited, Assmann says there were two purported sources for the Nile: the First Cataract for Upper Egypt and a source in the vicinity of what is now Old Cairo for Lower Egypt. That said, most other secondary sources only mention the belief that the Nile sprang from the First Cataract region, and I sometimes wonder what Egyptian text Assmann drew this from.

I've looked at a few sources to see how they discuss the ancient Egyptians' view of the source(s) of the Nile, and - as you say - they emphasize the Elephantine Island location. None of the sources I looked at mention the Old Cairo second location except Assman. For that reason, it is probably best to leave the article as it stands now (mentioning only Elephantine). Noleander (talk) 14:24, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Following on the two points above, instead of the east bank and west bank, you could say something about the division between Upper Egypt, corresponding to the main Nile downstream of the First Cataract, and Lower Egypt, corresponding to the Delta. The political unification of Upper and Lower Egypt is usually considered the beginning of dynastic Egyptian history, so it might even be mentioned in the section on ancient Egyptian history. This division, the "Two Lands", was central to the Egyptian worldview. E.g., the illustration of Hapy in the myth and religion section is the sema-tawy motif, representing him binding together the Two Lands. (I can source these points myself if you want to include them.)

@A. Parrot: - I will take you up on your offer :-) Would you please steer me towards a source or two that discusses the Upper/Lower division and how that division related to the Nile River. Thanks! Noleander (talk) 14:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Allen 2000, p. 22, points out the division between Upper and Lower Egypt. Other sources are numerous (e.g., the ideological duality of Upper & Lower Egypt and their unification appears in the first paragraph of the "Lower Egypt" entry in the Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Egypt, vol. 2 p. 305, and the start of Chapter 2 of A History of Ancient Egypt by Marc Van De Mieroop, pp. 27-29). Possibly the most significant point is a passage in The Complete Cities of Ancient Egypt by Steven Snape (pp. 181-182) about how the shifting waterways in the Delta made the patterns of settlement there much more complex than in Upper Egypt. If you can't access these sources, I can type up these passages and email them to you over the weekend. A. Parrot (talk) 16:29, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for identifying those sources. I can access them all, so no worries about providing me with quotes. I should be able to take it from here. Noleander (talk) 17:10, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@A. Parrot: - I've added two new passages into the article:

"Ancient Egypt consisted of two regions: Lower Egypt (the Nile Delta) and Upper Egypt (the Nile Valley, roughly between Giza and the first cataract). The Nile played a role in determining the unique character of each region, because the ever-shifting waterways in Lower Egypt meant that transportation routes, settlements, and administrative regions were often forced to relocate. The Lower and Upper regions were each represented by a unique Nile plant: papyrus and sedge, respectively." Redford 2001, pp. 17, 305–306, Articles: "Geography", "Lower Egypt" harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRedford2001 (help). Redford 2001a, pp. 464–466, Article: "Upper Egypt" harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRedford2001a (help)

and

" The sun god Ra passed through the sky each day from east to west, and the three phases of the day (sunrise, daytime, and sunset) corresponded to the human lifecycle: birth, life, and death. For this reason, many burial sites were positioned on the west bank of the Nile, where they would be closer to the setting sun." Redford 2001, p. 147, Article: "Hymns" harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRedford2001 (help). Redford 2001a, pp. 123, 376, Articles: "Re", "Temples" harvnb error: no target: CITEREFRedford2001a (help). Tvedt 2021, p. 10 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFTvedt2021 (help). Fleming & Lothian 1997, pp. 18, 29, 60 harvnb error: no target: CITEREFFlemingLothian1997 (help).

My intention is not to present a complete explanation of these complex topics to the reader; rather, it is to illustrate that the Nile river permeated nearly every aspect of the life of Ancient Egypt. These seem like two excellent examples. Regarding the "burial on west bank of Nile" material: Although the river was not the reason that many burials were on the west bank, many readers will be curious why so many major burial sites were on that side. It seems appropriate for the Nile article to answer that common question, even if the explanation is not based on the river itself. If you have a moment to review this new text, and let me know if they are wanting, it would be appreciated. Noleander (talk) 22:49, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@A. Parrot: - Thanks: those are some excellent suggestions and ideas. I see from your home page that you have written several articles about ancient Egypt that achieved Featured Article status ... nice work! I'm wrapping up for the day, but I'll start implementing your suggestions tomorrow. Noleander (talk) 03:20, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Egyptians called their own country" - not sure the word "own" is adding much

Done. Noleander (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The distance was measured along the centerline of the river using satellite imagery." -Obviously writing from a position of ignorance, but it is not hugely clear to me why this is significant.

Hmmm. I'm not sure how to improve that. When geographers measure the length of a river, there are various approaches: then can measure down the centerline; or along the left bank or the right bank; or "hug the inside corner" for a shorter distance. Each approach will produce a different value for the river's length. The purpose of that sentence "... distance was measured along the centerline..." is to tell the reader what approach these geographers were using. Then, when comparing with the lengths of other rivers, measured by other geographers, one can tell if they are using the same approach or a different approach (are they comparing apples to oranges?). I'm happy to improve the text to make it clearer - if anyone has suggestions let me know & I can implement it. Noleander (talk) 19:31, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Changed to "Although the Nile is the longest river in the world, it does not have the the largest discharge." Noleander (talk) 00:00, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"backs up during this time at the confluence" - Is this where it meets the river?

Done. Added a wikilink to confluence at that location; and also at the 1st occurrence of "confluence". Noleander (talk) 00:00, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The cumulative amount of rock eroded in the past 30 million years from the Ethiopia headwaters of the Nile is about 102,000 km3, which is roughly comparable to the volume of the soil in the Nile Delta (including the underwater portion) which is about 150,000 km3" - Is this soil all eroded from the rock?

Done. Clarified wording to be: "The soil in the Nile Delta originated as rocks in Ethiopia. The cumulative amount of rock eroded in the past 30 million years from the Ethiopia headwaters .... Noleander (talk) 00:10, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"These data were" - I think "This data was" or "These figures were" would sound more natural here.

Done. Changed to "This data was ...". Noleander (talk) 00:10, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Every measurement site had unique collection time spans, specified in the sources provided for each datum." - You only have a citation after one of the bullet points so it is hard to know what sources you are referring to.

Done. Changed to: "The sediment transport data was gathered over a wide range of years, spanning from 1997 to 2019. Every measurement site had unique collection time spans, specified in Lemma 2019, p. 11 and Sutcliffe 2009, p. 359. Noleander (talk) 00:17, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"as well as policy makers who negotiate water sharing issues" - It might be helpful to include an example of the kind of thing you mean here. Perhaps in a footnote.--Llewee (talk) 23:12, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Added new footnote: "Sources and sinks are useful to policy makers when negotiating international water-sharing issues, such as dam construction. In the 21st century, Egypt and Sudan continue to rely on extracting large amounts of water from the Nile for their existence. Some experts predict that the Nile Basin may experience a water scarcity problem in the future, if population growth, agricultural needs, and climate change combine to create a scenario where the water demands exceed the amount of water available. (citations are in the article, omitted here for clarity). Noleander (talk) 00:28, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The data is based on measurements made at a dozen river measurement stations." - Do these stations use the same measurement methods as discussed in the previous section?

More or less. To measure discharge (flow) they measure how deep & wide the river is, and multiply it by the speed of the river current. To measure sediment transport: they see how much dirt/sand is in a liter of river water & multiply it by the discharge. Let me know if you think that should be explained in the article. Due to article size issues, I'm reluctant to add material without a reviewer saying it is necessary. Noleander (talk) 00:32, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Measurements of the Nile's flow have always been essential to help Egyptians manage their safety and irrigation. ... An ideal flood in Egypt – not too high and not too low – was a 6-meter (20 ft) rise over the non-flood water level." - I assume the human aspects of the river's history come up later. Nevertheless, it might be helpful to briefly explain why it was beneficial for Egyptians to know these things and why a certain level of flooding was desirable.

Done: Changed to "An ideal flood in Egypt – not too high and not too low – was a 6-meter (20 ft) rise over the non-flood water level. Any higher and disastrous floods may damage the river communities; any lower, and fertile silt would not be deposited on the croplands." Noleander (talk) 02:50, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Noleander (talk) 23:12, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Historically, the water of the Nile was noted for being drinkable," - Perhaps it would be helpful to include a specific example of this opinion from a prominent source in a footnote.

Done. Noleander (talk) 23:12, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The Nile perch was introduced to Lake Victoria by Ugandan authorities in a clandestine effort to create a new fishery; but this has never been acknowledged by Uganda." - Were they reluctant to admit to this because of the environmental damage?

The sources I read do not say. It may have been because there are three countries that share Lake Victoria, and perhaps Uganda did not want to ask permission of the other two nations. But I'm not sure. Noleander (talk) 23:39, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"These five periods were proposed by Abdelsalam 2018 ... Other scientists hypothesize a different set of evolutionary periods" - Is there a reason why you decided to focus on this particular version of events?

Yes, the other geological history source is Rushdi Said, but Said's theory was older (he first proposed it around 1993) and – more importantly – it is far more complicated. The 2018 Abdelsalam source has 30 years of additional research behind it, and it is much more understandable to lay readers of Wikipedia. Even the names of Said's eight phases are more arcane. I don't think either one is "right" or "wrong" ... they are simply two different approaches to interpreting the same ancient, vague geological data. Readers that are curious can follow the links to Said's writings and go from there. Noleander (talk) 23:45, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The first evolutionary period was from about 20 million years ago (MYA) to 6 MYA. Around 20 MYA, the west flank of the East African Rift System began to uplift ..." Are these events known for certain to have happened or are they based on the hypothesis mentioned above.

The specific geological events are fairly certain, according to my interpretation of multiple sources. The hypothesis/guesswork revolves mostly around how to partition the long sequence of geological events into periods The mere act of dividing 20 million years into 4 or 5 or 8 eras is the creative/subjective work. An entire WP article could be written about the geological history of the Nile and various interpretations of it. Noleander (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The present-day course of the Nile was established in this period." - Given that this period goes up to the present day, it's not clear when the current course was established.

I changed that text to "The present-day course of the Nile was established early in this period." [emphasis added] The sources state values between 15,000 to 12,000 KYA. I provided three sources for that sentence and gave the specific value from each source. I think scholars will never be able to agree on a specific number, because the river is always changing, so there is no way to concretely define what "flows in the current course" means. Noleander (talk) 00:06, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Some scholars have hypothesized that these peoples, or their contemporaries, may have domesticated sheep, goats, or cattle." - I assume this means their contemporaries who lived in the area in which case that should be clarified.

Done. Changed to ... or other peoples that resided nearby,.... Noleander (talk) 23:39, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

""up" was south; "left" was east, and "right" was west" - Could this be clarified? Were "up" and "south" the same words in the ancient Egyptian language?

Done. Changed to ... the same word could be used for both up and south; another word for left and east; and another for right and west....

"The Egyptians were familiar with the course of the Nile upstream to the sixth cataract (present-day Khartoum), but apparently were not familiar with the river's course (nor its source) beyond that." The use of the word "apparantly" suggests it isn't clear in a way that is a bit comfusing.--Llewee (talk) 23:16, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Removed word "apparently". The sources use terms like that, to convey they are 99% certain, but not 100% certain, I think. Noleander (talk) 23:42, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"who led Kush from the cities Napata and Meroë" - What is the term "Kush" referring to here, the Kushite people?

Done. Changed to "The Kushite Empire conquered much of Egypt under the rule of its Black Pharaohs, who led the empire from the cities Napata and Meroë on the banks of the Nile". Noleander (talk) 14:03, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"His accounts were not published until the 20th century, and do not contain a specific date for his visit to Gish Abay." - So when did Europeans in general find out about the source of the Blue Nile?

Done. Changed to "His accounts do not contain a specific date for his visit to Gish Abay. Later European explorers who reached Ethiopia in the 17th and 18th centuries – including Jerónimo Lobo and James Bruce – publicized Páez's writings and estimated that he visited the source between 1613 and 1618." Removed the "not published until the 20th century" since that was causing confusion. That simply means that his works were not printed & sold until 20th century; but before then, there were manuscript copies that were passed around and studied in Europe. Noleander (talk) 14:09, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"After the British colonial rule of Egypt commenced in 1882," - Would it be better grammar to take out "the"?

Done. Noleander (talk) 14:11, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

" The agreement provided that Egypt and Sudan utilize 48 and 4 billion cubic meters of the Nile flow per year, respectively. Egypt reserved the right to monitor the Nile flow in the upstream countries, to undertake river-related projects without the consent of upriver nations, and to veto any construction projects that would adversely affect Egypt" - This agreement seems quite sympathetic to Egypt, was there a reason for this?

I cannot find a specific reason for the apportionment in the sources. I suspect the apportionment was based on (1) Egypt had a much larger population than Sudan; (2) Egypt had more acreage that required irrigation than Sudan; (3) Egypt was already withdrawing more water than Sudan (in roughly that 12:1 ratio); and (4) Sudan was politically very weak, and at that time was ruled by Britain & Egypt, so Egypt was in a dominant negotiating position. But that is just speculation on my part. When the agreement was updated in 1959 (and Sudan was more independent) the ratio improved in Sudan's favor from 12:1 to 3:1. Noleander (talk) 14:19, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Upstream countries within the Nile Basin were excluded from the 1959 agreement – including Ethiopia, which is the source of over two-thirds of the Nile's water." Why?

The source does not say why the upstream countries were excluded. Reading between the lines: in 1959 the most important upstream country, Ethiopia, was relatively poor and did not have much political power. Ethiopia did not build their first major dam until 1973; and it was not until 2011 that Ethiopia had sufficient funds to announce the creation of the first dam large enough to impact Egypt & Sudan - the GERD. Noleander (talk) 17:21, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"In 1960, Egypt started building the Aswan High Dam which stores roughly two years' flow of the Nile River." - Why is it linked here rather than the previous paragraph?

Done. Thanks for finding that. Noleander (talk) 14:22, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"At the start of the 21st century, power shifted to the upstream nations as they began to build dams without the consent of Egypt or Sudan." - Was there a reason why the upstream nations now felt able to do so this when they hadn't done previously?

I cannot find an explanation in the sources, but I think the explanation proposed two questions above is valid: Ethiopia was relatively poor until the late 20th century, and it was not until 2011 that Ethiopia got the money together to build a dam big enough to catch the attention of Egypt and Sudan. Egypt was several decades ahead of Ethiopia in terms of economic development. Noleander (talk) 17:28, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Tourism and recreation" - Do any statistics exist for how many tourists visit the Nile today?--Llewee (talk) 13:00, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I just did a quick search for figures, and all I can find are number of tourists visiting Egypt (14-19 million annually); number of tourists visiting pyramids (14-15 million); number of tourists visiting Luxor (5 million). None of the sources state how many are visiting the river, as a river. I searched for "number of tourists taking cruises on the Nile" but could not find specific numbers. If one assumed that 10% of the visitors to Egypt got on a boat, that would be about 1.5 to 2 million. All of the above numbers are for Egypt only: it is unlikely that any RS provides aggregate statistics for all the countries in the Nile Basin. In summary: I don't think sources provide a solid, reliable figure for number of people "visiting the Nile". Noleander (talk) 17:36, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Llewee - I think I've addressed all the questions you posed above. Noleander (talk) 17:37, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I'm happy for my last edit on here for a while to be in Support of the nomination. Llewee (talk) 19:00, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hope I don't have to spotcheck this. Despite the number of footnotes and refs, it seems like we are mostly working off a few sources. Fair enough, in a topic this broad you need to focus on the most important aspects. I am not sure that MDPI is a very reliable source. For an African river, there sure are only a few African sources. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:58, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus - Thanks for taking time to review the sources.

"For an African river, there sure are only a few African sources" - Correct, the vast majority of authors that write on the Nile are from Europe and US. The academic authors in the fields of Geography, History, and Hydrology typically write in English (regardless of what continent they are from), so language is not the issue. My gut feeling is that the large number of non-African authors is due to (a) The history of British colonialism in northeast Africa (Britain had large numbers of scientists, geographers and explorers studying the region for over a century); and (b) the fascination many Europeans had for Egypt & the Nile. So, today, the world's foremost Nile experts are all from Europe & US: Tvedt, Sutcliffe, Collins, Dumont, and Hurst. In spite of that, I made an effort to utilize many authors from Africa, including Abdelsalam, Abotalib, Alnaqbi, Hassan, Hegab, Shuka, El-Shabrawy, El-Sheekhm, Embabi, etc.
"I am not sure that MDPI is a very reliable source." - You are right to be concerned. Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources lists MDPI with a yellow caution. WP:MDPI says: "Publications in MDPI journals are considered questionable. Editors have raised concerns about the robustness of MDPI's peer review process and their lack of selectivity in what they publish." That same page, however, notes that only 5% of MDPI's publications are suspect; and it does not have a red "prohibited" status. I used three MDPI sources only reluctantly. Why did I use them? Because of issue #1 above .. a lack of African sources. All three of the MDPI sources used are by African authors. I have access to the full content of these three sources, and - in my assessment - the content is accurate and reliable. In addition, they are not used in the article to support any contentious or controversial material. That said, if you feel the MDPI sources are not acceptable, I can remove the sources and the (small amount of) material that they are supporting.

Noleander (talk) 14:19, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know from experience that even African topics are better covered abroad; try to find the African sources for African humid period some time. That said, comprehensiveness means that I need to ask in thus cases. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:01, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Aha .. you wrote African humid period, very nice! This article links to it, as you know. If you ever want to take it to FAC, let me know and I'll be happy to do a Peer Review of it. Noleander (talk) 17:30, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Given its length, I don't think it'd pass FAC. In some years it will hit the PEIS limit and then a split would be needed; that would make it FAC viable but upkeep becomes harder after a split so I am not going to do it pre-emptively. The other articles I am working on for FAC right now are Lake Tauca, Laguna Miscanti and at FAC right now is Misti. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:58, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Btw, since the 1980s, universities have been critically underfunded. What little funds there are get put into hard sciences and technological disciplines that further economic development. Re history, a lot of the main African scholars moved to the US, and there's been very little research done on precolonial history since the '80s because it's not viewed as relevant for today's problems Kowal2701 (talk, contribs) 15:13, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

With some of these MDPI uses for dams, I wonder if government sources or sources linked to the dam operators would be better. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:59, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I eliminated all three sources published by MDPI (although I have no reason to think the sources contained errors or were biased in any way). One I removed altogether (not needed); the other two I replaced with NGO sources on the dams. 01:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC) Noleander (talk) 01:55, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Nick-D (talk) 10:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Rhodesia may be one of the only countries in history to be fatally undermined by conscription. Throughout its existence between 1965 and 1980, men from the small white minority that dominated the Southern African country were required to serve in the Army and various other security services. As an insurgency against white rule gained pace, conscription requirements were intensified on white men, causing many to leave the country. Coloured, Indian and black men were also conscripted, but showed little enthusiasm for sustaining white rule. These factors contributed to the end of Rhodesia and the country's transition to majority rule as Zimbabwe.

All up, I think - and hope - this makes for a surprisingly interesting read. However, please note that while the article is quite comprehensive, it includes some gaps that I haven't been able to resolve despite considerable research. As one of the leading historians of this topic has noted, this is due in part to the difficulty she and her colleagues have experienced piecing the subject together due to the frequent and confusing changes to the conscription scheme by the Rhodesian government; this is noted in the article.

I have been working on this article for a while. It was assessed as a good article last October. In January this year it passed a Military History Wikiproject A-class review. I have since expanded and copy edited the article, and am hopeful that the FA criteria are now met. Thank you in advance for your comments. Nick-D (talk) 10:52, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

―Howard • 🌽³³ 12:28, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Coloured vs black: Some readers unfamiliar with Africa might not understand the distinction between those two designations in this article. US readers, in particular, may think both terms refer to the same populace. Can this be clarified somehow? Examples where readers may get confused:
- Coloured and Indian men were also subjected to conscription but were assigned less important roles. The great majority of the population, who were black, were exempt from conscription until shortly before the end of the war. - In the 1st sentence, some readers will think coloured includes black. The second sentence will clarify for some readers, confuse others.

- The coloured and Indian ethnic groups were also treated as inferior by the whites, with black Rhodesians facing the most extensive racial discrimination. - Some readers may think that blacks are same as (or subset of) coloured.

Consider adding a prominent and clear statement defining and distingishing the two terms where the terms first appear (even in the lead, if necessary)

I've added some text and a note explaining this. Nick-D (talk) 10:46, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

... and Rhodesia's situation deteriorated... - A bit vague. Can the article be more specific: Inflation? Violence? Chaos? Starvation? Fighting related to the civil war? Fighting unrelated to the civil war? International pressure?

P vs PP errors
- Tsigo & Ndawana 2019, p. 91, 94-96. P/PP error? p. 91, 94-9; Hyphen in pg. range;
- Beckett 2011, p. 164-166. P/PP error? p. 164-166.; Hyphen in pg. range;
- Vickery 1989, p. 428-29. P/PP error? p. 428-29.; Hyphen in pg. range;
- Good 1973, p. 58-60. P/PP error? p. 58-60.; Hyphen in pg. range;

Cite uniformity: WP:CITEVAR as of 2025 requires uniform capitalization of source titles. The way the source capitalizes its own title should be ignored. This article mostly uses Title case, but a few words are not capitalized, e.g.:
- The Rhodesian Army: counter-insurgency, 1972-1979".
- Black soldiers in the Rhodesian Army: Colonialism, Professionalism, and Race.
- The wretched of the empire: Politics, ideology and counterinsurgency in Rhodesia, 1965–80"
- .. others? ...
  - I think that guideline is seriously wrong-headed (I think that this kind of variation boosts article credibility by demonstrating that editors have actually consulted the sources and care enough about them to use the author's preferred title), but done in the interests of consistency with it. Nick-D (talk) 10:24, 16 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

... was particularly economically harmful... those two adverbs in a row are tough to digest. Consider rewording, maybe ... particularly harmful economically... ... tho I'm not sure that is better.

Many firms developed a preference for hiring black workers over whites as they were not called up. Some readers may think "they were not" applies to whites since that noun is closer.

Overall, the prose is professional quality and meets WP:FACR requirements.

Overall, the article complies with WP MOS guidelines.

Images: the images are relevant and informative.

Can 1 or 2 images be placed into these large text-only sections?
- Introduction of conscription
- Administration of the conscription system

The MOS does not require that images relate to the section they are placed within, so any images relevant to the article's topic could go there. Those two sections are adjacent, and anything to break-up the text would improve the aesthetics. Not an FA requirement, just a suggestion.

I've added a photo to the administration section. Unfortunately due to the quirks of Zimbabwean copyright laws, there are very few images on Commons relevant to Rhodesia that are actually compliant with Wikipedia's licencing. Nick-D (talk) 11:18, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I shall take a look at this.

Lead:

The relatively large Rhodesian Security Forces, most of whose personnel were conscripts, contributed to the government having the confidence Would ...contributed to the government's confidence be more adequate?
Is it stated how long their national service should be?

Background:

including restrictions on land ownership and the jobs they could work in. – Erm, I think saying "restrictions on land ownership and jobs" might suffice. Or "employment"
with there being This phrase is a bit odd
during most years of the country's existence. I actually considered whether during much of the country's existence would be better but then the meaning would be vaguer and might refer to the area.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 11:52, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
- The sources that discuss migration into and out of Rhodesia analyse this year by year (reflecting the way data was collected), so I think this phrasing is OK Nick-D (talk) 09:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

More comments to come.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 09:36, 29 March 2026 (UTC) Conscription of whites and other minority groups:[reply]

A labour conscription scheme was also introduced during 1940 Would "in 1940" be more suitable? Similar for "During 1963"
- The previous sentence uses 'In November', and I was trying to vary things. I think that the 1963 text is OK, and I was also trying to limit repetition given the para starts with "in the early 1960s" Nick-D (talk) 09:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Territorials were frequently called up during the period between 1953 and 1963 – "during the period" is quite redundant
Also "in which" -> "when"
I note some commas are absent after time periods (e.g. "In 1962", "By 1967" or "At this point"). I did some edits on this myself to keep it consistent, but it's your choice whether to use commas or otherwise
the period of full time national service remained four and a half months – "remained at four and a half months"
also led to multiple changes to the periods for which conscripts were required to serve and the eligible age ranges Might suggest using "duration" instead of "period"
- I think this is OK given that it also captures the episodic nature of reservists' active service with the frequency and time periods of call ups changing for them over time. Nick-D (talk) 09:11, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
a range of changes Might just say "changes"
I was actually wondering who were exactly the "nationalists" until I figured these were the guerilla forces fighting for African nationalism, which you have already linked in the first instance. There isn't exactly an article for Zimbabwe nationalism?
Following the withdrawal in 1975 might rewrite to Following the 1975 withdrawal
this change badly harmed morale in the Security Forces Might say "damaged" rather than "badly harmed". Also "badly" isn't necessary since "harmed" already implied a negative connotation
Following considerable debate among whom and where?
The worsening war situation required the continuation of large scale call ups though. Remove the "though". If required to add a contrast, just add "However" at the beginning of that sentence
(one of the two main nationalist groups during the Bush War) Would prefer moving this as a hatnote and cite accordingly.
The most senior coloured soldier in the army resigned in protest Is it known who he is?

More comments to come.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 05:10, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Conscription of black Rhodesians:

White Rhodesians considered it unfair for them to be required to undertake national service if blacks were not given the country was now, at least in theory, racially integrated. This sentence seems a bit confusing, particularly with the lack of commas. Might suggest splitting.
published regulations setting out the arrangements Might be quite repetitive. Could be shorter
at least three years secondary education – at least three years of secondary education
It was estimated by who?
- The source doesn't specify. It says "But as of Jan. 1, military authorities are drafting from a pool of about 25,000 blacks 18 to 25 who have at least three years’ secondary schooling.". I've trimmed the wording here. Nick-D (talk) 08:01, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
as the white authorities did not want to relinquish power and it was anticipated there would be resistance to this measure among the black majority – ...and they anticipated resistance to this measure...
including as the government attempted to address the resultant manpower shortages by increasing the conscription requirements facing other population groups. Sentence here might be a bit too clunky

Administration:

The criticism led to Cowper being forced to resign – The criticism led to Cowper's resignation
No other issues for administration section.

To continue.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 00:42, 2 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Impact of conscription on the Rhodesian Security Forces:

Throughout the Rhodesian Front's period in power – When the Rhodesian Front was in power
to support its goals While we all might know what these goals here, might reiterate briefly what these goals were (to reinforce white rule)
The British government believed intervening would lead to combat. Might say The British government believed that intervention would lead to armed conflict.
assessed a larger force would be required to disarm the Rhodesian Security Forces and then administer the country than was immediately available This clause here is quite clunky.
They made an important contribution to security for the 1979 Rhodesian general election and fought well in some districts, however. The "however" at the end is quite odd. Suggest They nevertheless made an...
a live and let live approach Might link to the wiktionary entry because not everyone would understand the idiom. [34]
with some committing serious crimes. Such as?
the nationalists press-ganged black Rhodesian What's press-ganged?
- It's linked where the term is first descripted. How it operated in these contexts isn't explained by the sources, but it was likely a crude arrangement where armed men forced young men selected more or less at random to join them. Nick-D (talk) 09:00, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
due to the size of the white population and the important role white men played in the economy. – Might rewrite due to the size of the white population and their importance in the economy.. Trying to see how to also reiterate it's because of the small population (cos "size" is a bit vague)

To continue.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 01:36, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Social and economic effects:

These views were common across families with different political opinions Might rewrite: These views were common across families regardless of political opinions
Some were enthusiastic about serving in the Security Forces while others were uncommitted This statement might be stronger if there's any data of how many are actually enthusiastic
- The source doesn't say, and this would have likely been unquantifiable at the time (especially as the Rhodesian military didn't properly track the numbers of men who evaded requirements). Nick-D (talk) 11:17, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
were seen as unreasonable might clarify if it's the white Rhodesian families
caused many Rhodesians to conclude the war was lost Only the whites or Rhodesians in general?
It's interesting this section said there is enthusiasm for being called up, yet the previous sections noted that there were those who evaded conscription or deserted.
- It seems that there was very wide support for the full time national service period, but much less support for conscripts being called up after this. I've added a sentence to make this clearer. Nick-D (talk) 11:17, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
over the absence of young white men, including as they were often managers in factories This part here reads quite awkwardly
This damaged the Rhodesian economy, which was also faltering for other reasons. Other reasons such as?

Conscription and emigration:

Staying would involve more frequently being required to fight in a war that appeared lost. Might rewrite to Staying would require more frequent call-ups to fight in a war that appeared lost. or"...to fight a losing war."
From 1977, the sons of adults who were preparing to emigrate from Rhodesia were required to complete national service if they were called up before their parents completed the necessary paperwork to leave the country A bit clunky here.
To feel like prisoners sound a little unencyclopedic here.
- It reflects the source, which says "these restrictions made many Rhodesians feel like prisoners" and goes onto note that the main newspaper compared them to the Berlin Wall. Nick-D (talk) 11:31, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A Rhodesian conscript told The Guardian in 1977 his request for asylum was rejected as he was considered a supporter of the Rhodesian government because he was serving in the armed forces. Split this sentence
I wonder if this section could just be renamed "Emigration" because conscription is already the subject of the article in general. Subsections could be renamed "Migration policies" and "Impact on the white population".
- I think that the title for the overall section is OK given it's about the link between conscription and emigration rather than emigration more broadly, but have trimmed the sub-heading titles as suggested. Nick-D (talk) 11:31, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's all my comments. Would be happy to support once these comments are addressed. A very comprehensive article at this stage.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 07:34, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support. I reviewed this at A-Class and support this nomination. A couple of comments:

the British Home Office did not automatically grant asylum to men seeking to enter the UK to avoid fighting for the Rhodesian government, with applications being assessed on their individual merits.

Any idea what these merits were?
The source doesn't specify unfortunately, and I can't find any other news coverage from the time that provides more details. Nick-D (talk) 10:49, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By 1977, most of the Rhodesia Regiment's infantry companies were well below their authorised strengths.

What was the strength of the Rhodesian forces?
That's noted in the second para of the 'Impact of conscription during the Bush War' section. The size fluctuated a bit. I haven't been able to provide useful figures on the total size of the military on a year by year basis - I tried using old editions of The Military Balance to develop a graph on the size of the Territorial Forces, but had to give up as each edition in the 1970s used a different methodology for accounting for numbers of personnel across the security forces. Nick-D (talk) 10:49, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hawkeye7 (discuss) 19:20, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first FA review/comment, so I'm choosing to only review the element of prose. I have a passing familiarity with Rhodesia and the Bush War (read: listened to a jokey podcast about it once) but other than that, I have little familiarity with military history or the Rhodesian governnment.

The Rhodesian Front was deeply committed to maintaining the white community's privileged status, which motivated a decision to declare independence rather than initiate a transition to majority rule which the British government was advocating for. I think this is better introduced by contrasting the Rhodesian Front's racist stance with the NIBMAR position of the British government, rather than mentioning the declaration of independence here. I would suggest The Rhodesian Front was deeply committed to maintaining the white community's privileged status, while the British government advocated for majority rule before independence. This led to the government issuing Rhodesia's Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI) from the United Kingdom in November 1965...
UDI was illegal...under what law? British colonial law? International law? A treaty signed? Perhaps this is left vague because the source is similarly vague, but specificity here may be wise.
- It was illegal under the relevant laws applying to Rhodesia at the time. I've added a note on this, but the issue is largely outside the article's scope. Sources usually just say that UDI was was illegal, so this doesn't seem a point of contention in the modern literature. Nick-D (talk) 11:51, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The number of white people in Southern Rhodesia increased from 82,000 in 1946 to 250,000 in 1965 almost entirely because of immigration from mainly English-speaking countries. I would split this into two sentences, maybe make it "this was almost entirely". There's also a bit of redundancy owing to "almost" and "mainly".
coloured and Indian men were not liable for conscription at this time. Perhaps change to "not eligible for conscription" or "not liable to be conscripted".
The RAR is introduced in the conscription of whites et al section but its purpose is not explained. Is it analogous to the armed forces of Rhodesia? Do we know anything about why it was black-majority, if conscription in the country was race-selective?
- I've added a bit here. The article currently notes that the RAR was retained in the period immediately before UDI as the government could not replace its manpower with white soldiers, despite the military recommending doing so. Nick-D (talk) 11:14, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The most senior coloured soldier in the army, a Warrant Officer 1, resigned in protest. I assume we do not know this person's name, but it may be worth mentioning.
I note that there is a difference in the description of white and black draft-dodgers. White men between 50 and 60 are described as having "only 20 percent report[ing] for duty", while a "widespread boycott" is described among black men when only 300/1500 report for duty. This presumably owes to differences in the source, and the obvious political nature of a black person signing up for an army that is (more or less) in defence of white supremacy, but I write this because I think it might be interesting for the author to consider, if not an active problem to fix.
- I've followed the sources here - the cited text says that "blacks had massively boycotted conscription". The sources for draft dodging by older people don't use this kind of language, though the article attributes this to a perception that this requirement was unreasonable (see the 'Social impact' section). Nick-D (talk) 11:51, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The government also accepted an offer from a computer company to develop a database... Do we know which computer company this was? I assume not, but my curiosity was piqued by this.
The government was able to refute allegations of sportsmen and homosexuals being able to evade conscription, but there was a perception the sons of prominent citizens were not called up. Maybe this would be too granular, but I am also immediately intrigued as to why sportsmen and homosexuals were perceived as being able to evade conscription. Was there an exemption for homosexuality, as was common among militaries at the time? Did an analogous exemption exist for sportsmen?
- The source doesn't provide details here. I imagine that there was a perception that sportsmen were exempt as they were able to continue their careers seemingly unaffected (presumably they were allowed to defer rather than avoid their obligations, but no source discusses this). I haven't seen any sources say that homosexuals were exempt - as there were relatively few exemptions, they may not have been. Nick-D (talk) 11:51, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
As late as 1977 the Army did not keep records of deserters. "As late as" implies to me that it was exceptional they hadn't started keeping records, but 1977 is so late in Rhodesia's existence that it might be better to note that they (presumably) only began keeping records of deserters in 1977, unless the source states something like "there were no records of deserters in 1977" or somesuch.
- The source says "In 1977, for example, the BSAP discovered that the army had no list of men who left their units never to return", so doesn't say what was done about this. Nick-D (talk) 10:15, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Peter McLaughlin, who later became a historian, noted in 1978... What was he at the time?
To expand the pool of white manpower, the Rhodesian government encouraged immigration into the country. From where exactly? I assume the campaign was targeted towards specific countries, given the white-supremacist policies of the Rhodesian government, is there any further information on this?

I hope my comments are helpful. Overall, I considered this article to be a very intriguing and detailed examination of an, er, interesting moment in military history. I was particularly amused by the white nationalist MP who proposed mandatory dog tagging of those eligible for conscription. I think the prose is generally high-quality and easy to follow, even for someone with little knowledge in the topic. I am not sure that I fully understand the featured article criteria as a new editor, so I will refrain from giving my support, but with greater familiarity I likely would. Best of luck with this nomination and great work on a very detailed look into this topic! --LivelyRatification (talk) 11:00, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Article looks good in general, solid referencing and footnotes. There are a few points I wish to comment on:

Coloured is a reference to a specific southern African ethnic group and in my opinion, should be capitalised per the usual convention in South African and Zimbabwean English. As an aside, this article may benefit from some of the information from the Goffal article, which deals with Coloured Zimbabweans in particular.

- As a postscript to the above, the Rhodesian Security Forces seem to have classified recruits of mixed race who had one white and one Indian parent as "Eurasian" rather than Coloured or Indian (Howard's source notes this distinction existed since being codified in the Defence Act of 1955). Meaning that "coloured" as a catch all phrase to refer to Rhodesians of mixed race (as opposed to the specific ethnic group of European/African ancestry) is not technically accurate either.

"CAE" recruits might be a tad less tedious for the readership than constantly writing out "Coloured and Indian". This was, according to Howard, the official terminology for "Coloured, Asian, and Eurasian" personnel, again per the aforementioned Defence Act of 1955. For the record, this isn't an issue with form so much as a stylistic choice, but given the sheer number of times the phrase "Coloured and Indian" appears in the article, perhaps it's worth considering.

There are lots of references to pay, but few specifics given. The specifics of the pay scale for white and Coloured/Indian conscripts should be included in the article if possible. This information is readily available in Luise White's paper "Other People’s Sons: Conscription, Citizenship, and Families 1970-80" (and may be replicated in some of the many other source works produced by White and already cited in the article).

Until 1978, coloured and Indian reservists were posted to protection companies in the Army or served as drivers. This section should mention the Reinforcement Holding Unit in the section on Indian and Coloured recruits. This was the military unit for mustered Indians and Coloureds for most of Rhodesia's history, alongside the protection companies, which were separate.

After 1978, coloured and Indian reservists were generally assigned to the Rhodesian Defence Regiment, making up most of its personnel (the remainder being low quality whites). What are "low quality whites"? White personnel with poor disciplinary records? Or physical ailments? What constitutes "low quality"? This seems like a subjective remark which needs to be either specified with details, or attributed to a specific quote by Moorcraft & McLaughlin.
- The source doesn't define this unfortunately - it calls them "low calibre" but doesn't say why. Some other sources note that there was a system of some kind for grading the military effectiveness of conscripts, but none explains this aside from noting that commanders of Army units had considerable discretion over who they called up. The source here notes that the reservists assigned to the RDR were often elderly, which I've added and tweaked the wording more broadly. Nick-D (talk) 10:13, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Security units This section title is somewhat misleading, since both the Rhodesian Army/Air Force, and police, and the various paramilitary agencies, were considered part of the security forces. Recommend changing the name of the title to "paramilitary units".

Impact of conscription during the Bush War This section title reads as redundant to the later sections "Social and economic effects" and "Impact on the white population", because all these sections describe the various facets of the impact of conscription during the Bush War era. Suggest rewording to "Impact of conscription on the Bush War" or "Impact of conscription on the war effort" to clarify for the readership.

Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 19:21, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I looked at this for GA class and happy to review again. I have a bit of knowledge of the region but not particularly this era.

"Southern Rhodesia was a self-governing British colony located in southern Africa which was founded by the British South Africa Company in 1890 and achieved self-government in 1923"

"self-governing ... achieved self-government" seems a bit redundant, I don't think you lose anything by omitting the first one

"The black population grew at a much faster rate than the white community between 1965 to 1980"

Reads better to me as "between 1965 and 1980"

"Second World War" is slightly more popular in British English but its not so distinct as the WWI/FWW comparison. Feel free to ignore this, existing articles use both forms.

"From mid-1942, the Southern Rhodesian government required thousands of black men to work on white-owned farms", do we know why this was? A shortage of food or for export to the Empire?
"At this time, most members of the small regular army were blacks serving in the RAR"

Do we know what proportion were conscripts?

"This usually occurred as soon as they left secondary education"

I'd be tempted to link secondary education

"The South African government provided important economic"

I would state in this footnote that this was a white-minority apartheid government, to provide some context on why they supported Rhodesia

I've read down to the "Conscription of black Rhodesians" section and will continue when I can - Dumelow (talk) 07:43, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Relatively high rates of pay, the provision of health care, education and housing and loyalty towards the Rhodesian government proved sufficient to attract sufficient black volunteers"

I think this would benefit from a serial semicolon eg. "Relatively high rates of pay; the provision of health care, education and housing; and loyalty towards the Rhodesian government proved sufficient to attract sufficient black volunteers"

"There were concerns within the civil service and Army over extending conscription in this way. This was due to concerns that many black men would refuse to serve and some of those who were conscripted would be loyal to the nationalists"

Can we avoid the repetition of "concerns"?

"Police rapidly supressed these protests"

Typo on suppressed

"In the town of Gwelo, seven 17 year old boys"

I think this should be "17-year-old"?

"There was a widespread boycott among black men of conscription when it began in January 1979."

Reads strangely to me, but might just be personal preference. I couldn't immediately come up with an alternative phrasing

"Historian Matthew Preston has written the failure of this call up did not affect the war effort as there was "no shortage of volunteers" and it "was essentially a political exercise aimed at placating a white public that objected to whites-only conscription continuing now that 'majority rule' had been agreed"."

Reads better to me with "that" after "written", but again might just be personal preference

I've read down to "Administration of the conscription system" so far - Dumelow (talk) 11:56, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"He implemented reforms over late 1977 which sought to provide greater predictability of call up requirements and spread the burden more fairly"

Reads better to me as "in late 1977"

In the penultimate paragraph of "Paramilitary units" you use RDR as an acronym for the Rhodesian Defence Regiment but do not introduce it in brackets here or at its earlier mention

"Some of the conscripted members of these units adopted a live and let live approach with the nationalist forces when they were posted to operational areas"

I was a little confused by this mention of the Security Force Auxiliary units role as previously you stated it was, in part, a private army of ZANU. Does it mean only fighting ZAPU forces or in the period before ZANU became involved in running the units?

"During the first years of the Bush War, the insurgency was small enough to be mainly handled by the BSAP. The regular army and specialist Territorial units were only occasionally involved.[160] The role of the military increased over time, and by 1967 large numbers of Territorials were regularly needed."

You've previously stated that the war began in 1966. If large numbers of territorials were needed by 1967 then it doesn't follow that during the "first years" it was handled mainly by the police.

Just spotted that you have a mention of "Rhodesia Zimbabwe" in the "Background" section that should presumably be "Zimbabwe Rhodesia"?

Nominator(s): ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 00:29, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about one of Singapore's worst train disruptions in its history, since it took a vital train line out of commission for nearly a week, affecting about 2.6 million commuters. The reason is due to an old train whose axle box somehow fell out and damaged the tracks and other equipment, and it derailed while it was being pulled out of service. This incident was even mentioned by a few international news organisations. A report later emerged that fixing the operator's Hot Axle Box Detection System's "Null ID" error could have identified the affected train and prevented the incident. ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 00:29, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

I vividly remembered this incident (having experienced its impacts), so seeing it up on FAC is a surprise. A quick disclosure that I am one of the top 5 contributors to this article, but all my edits took place around the incident. I have also consulted with other users on this matter, and they said that it was okay. Due to this, I will not support or oppose this nomination. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 00:17, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also as an FYI, ZKang gave me permission off-Wiki to BOLDly address comments, so keep that in mind. Icepinner (Come to Hakurei Shrine!) 15:00, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Background

"The MRT network began" link Mass Rapid Transit (Singapore) here? You should also put the full name here
"and the stretch between Outram Park MRT station and Clementi MRT station" perhaps rephrase it to "Outram Park and Clementi stations"? It's already established that the system is the MRT, so no need to repeat it.
"A power outage at Buona Vista station led to service disruptions on the EWL, NSL and the Circle Line (CCL) in April 2016.[11][12]... Another power outage on the EWL, NSL and CCL occurred in October 2020.[11][14][15]" Is it necessary to mention these incidents? Sure, they are there to establish context, but there have been a myriad of power outages on the MRT since its operation. The mentioned power outages lasted for 2-3 hours, but I felt like this was the case with most of the MRT power outage incidents?

Incident

"At about 9 a.m. Singapore Time (SGT)" have colons per MOS:TIME?
Footnote a: "initially reported as 1.6 km (0.99 mi)" First word should be capitalised...
"suspended train services between Queenstown and Boon Lay stations" link Boon Lay MRT station here.

Repair and migration works

"engineers had to use mechanical jigs" link Jig (tool)?
"On 29 September, In a joint statement, SMRT and LTA" ah...

Impact

"given the emainations' full duration" emaination...?
"the National Transport Workers' Union" link National Trades Union Congress here?
- Not sure, given NTWU is kinda a union within NTUC

Investigation

"Jumadi Husani from the Road and Transport Authority in Dubai said the axle box, bogie, and train wheels should not have come off under normal circumstances, and suggested it might be due to improper installation of parts after maintenance or that the defective component are not replaced" " Iirc, Husani's statement was initally a quote, hence the singular quotation mark?

Aftermath

Lead

"Experts described the incident as "rare".[2]" this already mentioned in the body, so no need for the lead per WP:LEADCITE

I will do the source review. ~~I will continue later.~~ I am done reviewing. 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 02:10, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"between Outram Park station" please tell why this station is important, as it is not mentioned in the lead.
- Because... the MRT network opened in stages? And this affected segment opened in 1988?
"The East–West Line (EWL) is operated by SMRT Trains" source does not show this.
- Source says: SMRT operates the North-South Line, East-West Line, Circle Line, Thomson-East Coast Line and the Bukit Panjang LRT.
"The Kawasaki Heavy Industries C151 first-generation trains" not mentioned in source 6.
- The trains, which cost around $827 million, will replace 66 first-generation trains which have been in service from the time the MRT started more than 30 years ago. The wikilink also made it clear the Kawasaki C151 is the first generation train.

Still, in my opinion, that is original research. The brand and type of train is not even mentioned by the source, just said as "66 first-generation trains". I do not know where Kawasaki Heavy Industries C151 comes from.

"in April 2016" add the day (25 April 2016)
"In November 2017, a software error in the EWL signalling system caused the Joo Koon rail accident when two trains collided at Joo Koon station" you should add the day and the number of injuries, like the Clementi rail accident mentioned above.
There is something wrong with the link of the MOT final report; use this archive link instead

"At about 9:00 a.m. Singapore Time (SGT)" not mentioned in the page.
- Mentioned in FN17. That report is more to cite what the train number is
"The dislodged bogie damaged the third rail" the specific rail is not mentioned in the source.

Then why is FN20 placed at the end of the sentence and not both FN17 and FN20?

"Power cables and two of the three damaged point machines" source says all three.
""the axle box, bogie, and train wheels should not have come off under normal circumstances, and suggested it might be due to improper installation of parts after maintenance or that the defective component are not replaced"" some of this shouldn't be placed in quotes
"by Alstom Movia R151 trains" the brand is the only thing mentioned in the source after, not the type. Please also add an instance of source 65 after this sentence too.
Please put both instances of source 49 at the last paragraph of Aftermath to the end of the paragraph.
@ZKang123: why didn't you ping me? All issues seem to be resolved, so I will support this for FA. Good job! 🍗TheNuggeteer🍗 (My "blotter") 12:18, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

dislodged, derailing the train, and damaging the track and equipment between Clementi and Dover stations. - No comma after "derailing the train", as both are effects of the dislodgement rather than parallel constructs
Services resumed on 1 October. feels like it would be better in Paragraph 2, as it deals more with the disruption, while Paragraph 3 focuses on the aftermath.
The LTA report concluded the failure began with degraded grease in an axle bearing that caused overheating and fire damage to the chevron springs, leading to the detachment of the axle box and the train derailment near Dover station. - Are any of these technical terms worth wikilinking? "Axle bearing", "chevron springs"?
switchover - When a verb, is switchover one word or two (switch over?)
Before moving the train back to Ulu Pandan Depot, - You've mentioned several stalled trains; since I'm assuming you're referring to T310, would it be possible to make this more explicit?
The next day, SMRT and LTA reported that their engineers made "significant progress" with the maintenance and the completion of heavy rail delivery work. - Feels like "had made" is appropriate here, as they are announcing something that was in the past at the time it was announced.
said "the axle box, bogie, and train wheels should not have come off under normal circumstances, and suggested it might be due to improper installation of parts after maintenance or that the defective component are not replaced". - Two things. One, as this is a direct quote, as I understand WP:V there should be a reference here. Two, the construction of "said" in Wiki-voice and "suggested" in the direct quote is a bit awkward. Any chance of reworking this?
too burnt and damaged in the incident - Is "too" necessary here?
Because SMRT was required to continue regular maintenance of old trains still in service,[65] SMRT had authorised two extensions to this interval through an internal waiver process - Perhaps replace the second SMRT with a synonym? ("The company", "it", etc.) — Chris Woodrich (talk) 03:12, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Looks good, lah! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 22:26, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I will leave some comments next week. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:50, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here are my initial comments.

Lead

Para 1: "Singapore Mass Rapid Transit (MRT) East–West Line (EWL)" - Is there a better way to write this? Technically, there is no problem, just that the two parenthetical passages right next to each other seem a bit clunky.
Para 1: "an axle box of a Kawasaki C151 train dislodged" - Should this be "on a Kawasaki C151 train", since the issue was specifically that the axle box fell off the train?
Para 1: "This resulted in the suspension of regular services between Boon Lay and Queenstown stations" and Para 2: "services were expected to be restored only some days later." - Do we know when service was restored? If so I would add the date when service resumed.
Para 2: "Experts described the incident as "rare"" - It would be interesting if there were data on exactly how rare such incidents were.
Para 3: "SMRT was subsequently fined S$2.4 million (2020) (US$1.74 million)" - The two parenthetical passages directly next to each other are definitely clunky here.

Background

Para 2: "two trains to collide Clementi station" - This should be "two trains to collide at Clementi station".
Para 2: "due to an error in the track alignments" - This, similarly, can be "due to an error in track alignment".

More next week. – Epicgenius (talk) 14:58, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed most of the comments above. As for the comment: "Do we know when service was restored? If so I would add the date when service resumed.", the last paragraph said services were restored on 1 October. Also, adjusted the SGD convert template to not show the date.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 01:41, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Incident:

Para 1: "The 850 passengers on the train disembarked and SMRT staff guided them to Clementi station" - Wait, so they disembarked in between stations, before the train was taken out of service?
- Actually the 850 passengers is another stalled train; shifted it
Actually, I would recommend making the infobox map of the disruption area more prominent. I think it would be helpful to have that be shown by default, rather than auto-hidden.
- Will need more time to work on this
Para 1: "the T310 train had to switch over at Queenstown station. Near Dover station, a defective axle box dropped onto the tracks..." - It may be helpful to note that Dover is between Clementi and Queenstown (e.g. "Partway through the trip, near Dover station, a defective axle box dropped onto the tracks.")
- Wrote that the train was already heading westward
Para 1: " damaged the third rail, some power cables, some point machines that enable trains to change tracks, and some rail fasteners" - I would remove "some", which is repeated three times here. By default, "the bogie damaged power cables" (for example) means that at least some of them were damaged. If all power cables were damaged, this would have been stated explicitly.

Repair and mitigation works:

Para 1: "The incident caused "extensive damage" to the affected track stretch; it included 46 rail cracks, exposure of the third rail's cables, and damage to three point machines, power cables, and rail fasteners" - The damage is already mentioned in some detail above. I recommend moving this info so all the details about the damage are in the same place.
Para 2: "The authorities initially hoped to restore partial services between Jurong East and Buona Vista by 27 September" - What would this have entailed? It sounds like partial service was already restored with the shuttle trains.
- The partial service is only between Queenstown and Buona Vista, and Jurong East to Boon Lay. There were no trains running on the stretch between Buona Vista and Jurong East.
Para 3: " Once repairs were finished, systematic and functional tests, including checks on tracks, power supply and train signalling, and running trains at different speeds to ensure smooth operations, were planned for 29 September 2024" - I would add emdashes, or spaced endashes, before and after "including checks on tracks, power supply and train signalling, and running trains at different speeds to ensure smooth operations", since that clause is an entire parenthetical phrase.
Para 3: "On this day, it was estimated 374,000 passengers were affected" - Here, "estimated" can be interpreted both as an active and passive verb, which is confusing. I would change to "On this day, it was estimated that 374,000 passengers were affected) or "On this day, an estimated 374,000 passengers were affected".
- Fixed. I think someone forgot "that"
Para 4: "completion of locomotive stress tests, and other tests for electric meggering and track circuiting" - Why not "completion of locomotive stress tests, electric meggering and track circuiting tests"?
Para 4: "The LTA and SMRT announced train services would resume on 1 October with temporary speed restrictions on westbound tracks for safety. " - From the above, I thought the incident took place on an eastbound train (before it had the chance to switch over at Queenstown).
- No, it's on the westbound. I also fixed accordingly.

Impact:

Para 1: "According to CNA and South China Morning Post, the incident was the worst disruption to the MRT system in its history." - I would say "most severe" rather than "worst"; the former is more formal, and the latter can be erroneously treated as an opinion (even though it may be factual).
Para 1: "the long walking distance between Jurong East station and its bridging bus stop" - I suggest "associated" before "bridging bus stop".
Para 2: "The disruption was estimated to have affected more than 2.1 million commuters as of 30 September" - Presumably, these aren't 2.1 million unique passengers, but rather 2.1 million trips since many people are likely to be regular or semi-regular commuters.
- Sources say 2.1 million passengers and erm, that's not unusual because Singapore has six million people. And that west side is about a third of Singapore
  - Based on an off-wiki chat with ZKang, it looks like the sources do say 2.1 million unique people. To reiterate what I said offline, sources sometimes conflate "rides" (how many times a farecard is swiped into or out of the station) and "riders" (the physical number of people who ride). It is actually quite plausible that 2.1 million unique people were affected, but I wanted to check. Epicgenius (talk) 21:49, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Para 2: "According to minister Chee, passengers travelling between Boon Lay and Queenstown were not charged, and bridging and regular bus services were provided for free." - I don't think we need to attribute Chee here, per WP:INTEXT, unless for some reason this was controversial, or the buses were not in fact carrying passengers for free.
Para 3: "According to MOE, on 26 September, five students were late for their papers. One student took the examination in a different examination centre, and all of them were given the examinations' full duration." - That second sentence may be excessive detail, since you already mentioned that students were granted the full time for their paper. Also, the fact that one student sat their paper at a different location seems really minor here.
- It's a bit unique here since you have to take the exam in the school.

Regulatory and parliamentary response:

I will continue my review later, and hope to be finished early next week. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:06, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed the above issues.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:15, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Investigation:

Para 1: "suggested it might be due to faulty assembly of components after maintenance or the failure to replace defective parts" - This should probably be "suggested it might have been due to faulty assembly of components after maintenance or the failure to replace defective parts", since this is talking about something in the past tense.

Para 1: "Malcolm Dobell, who is the former Head of Train Systems for London Underground," - You can drop "who is".

Para 1: "The investigation would seek the root cause of the axle-box failure, and the fault-detection and incident-handling procedures." - Just to clarify, what was the investigation doing with the fault-detection and incident-handling procedures? (There is no verb before this clause, so usually this would read "the investigation would seek ... the fault-detection and incident-handling procedures", but this doesn't sound quite right.)

"Examine" in source. So I added a verb.

Para 2: "Both investigations concluded the" - I would add "that" after "concluded" for clarity

Para 3: "Both investigations also established the train had exceeded its prescribed overhaul interval of 500,000 kilometres" - For the non-railfans, what is an "overhaul interval"? We both know what it means, but I don't know if a regular reader would know. Also, I would suggest "Both investigations also established that the train"

Para 4: "The TSIB report noted while" - Same here: "The TSIB report noted that while". (Incidentally, I find it both fascinating and alarming that the controller was trained to ignore errors they couldn't fix.)

This has become a DYK fact in some way btw. Also fixed.

Para 4: "SMRT eventually rectified the error." - This is also mentioned in the second paragraph of "Aftermath" ("The operator also resolved the HABDS system fault"). It may be better if you linked to the "Aftermath" section (e.g. "SMRT eventually rectified the error (see {{section link||Aftermath}}") or removed this sentence altogether, mentioning this rectification only in the Aftermath section.

Aftermath:

Para 1: " all Kawasaki C151 trains were set for decommissioning in the third quarter of 2025" - First, I would suggest "were scheduled for decommissioning" instead, as that is more formal. Second, I would make it clear that the axle-box overhauls were a temporary measure because the R151 was already being planned to replace the C151.

""*Added this was done in October 2024.

Done

@ZKang123, that's it from me. Please let me know when you get around to these. – Epicgenius (talk) 13:37, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all the above issues. Thanks for the thorough review.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 10:45, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I support this article for FAC promotion. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:31, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Only some minor drive by comments on this very solid article based on spot checks:

"Passengers travelling between Boon Lay and Queenstown were not charged, and bridging and regular bus services were provided for free" - As what's likely a minor matter, the source says it was those who exited at stations between those two who weren't charged rather than only those travelling between them.
- Clarified that passengers alighting at these stations would not be charged
"more than 300 engineers were involved " - the source describes them as "more than 300 engineers and technicians"
"According to CNA and South China Morning Post, the incident was the most severe disruption to the MRT system in its history" - this Singapore Times story referenced elsewhere says it was "one of the worst to hit Singapore’s MRT system in its 37-year history".
"Malcolm Dobell, the former Head of Train Systems for London Underground, was appointed as the EAP Chairman, and was assisted by five other local and overseas experts. The investigation would seek the root cause of the axle-box failure, and review the fault-detection and incident-handling procedures." - this wording is a bit confusing given that the source says that it was the Land Transport Authority that was doing the investigation noted in the second sentence. The EAP was responsible for reviewing these findings and providing expert advice for the investigation.
The various other things I checked were all fine. Nick-D (talk) 11:09, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Under repairs & mitigation you use en dashes, but under aftermath you use em dashes; pick one.
Under impact: "though according to The Straits Times, [...] According to MOE, [...] According to [SEAB]," occurs in three consecutive sentences. Preferably reword the second one to avoid repetition.
If "Parliamentary Questions" is a proper noun, capitalise the Q.
SGD to USD conversions:
- First thing that stands out to me is the false precision. Generally the same number of significant figures should be used (e.g. 2.4m SGD = 1.8m USD), with tolerance for one more where it would be useful (600k SGD = 450k USD, 3m SGD = 2.2k USD, 10m SGD = 7.5m USD).
- Only in the aftermath section does it state that the conversion was done with 2021 values, but the IMF source cited has the latest data from 2024.
- The successive parentheses of (2021) (US$xx) is a bit of an eyesore, and repeating the citation to the IMF at every USD conversion doesn't feel particularly efficient. My suggestion would be to put a note out at the first conversion in the lead, saying something along the lines of "YYYY USD, converted using data from the International Monetary Fund[source]".

Rest looks good, though I don't have time to do a full review. ~ KN2731 {talk · contribs} 00:08, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I might need more time to consider this point. A possibility is also establishing another series of footnotes (as has been done for S. R. Crown Hall) but even I felt it's overkill. Also, the reason for the double brackets is because of the template being used. I removed that bracket but I wonder if I should reinstate it.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 07:04, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:45, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a British corvette that ended up serving under four flags. She conducted nearly 100 convoy escort tasks during WWII, first with the British then with the Yugoslav navy-in-exile. While under the British flag she sank a German U-boat (with assistance from smaller ship) and drove others away from convoys, for which her captain was decorated. After the war the new Yugoslav government had to relinquish her, and she ended up serving with the Egyptian navy. This is one of the few remaining non-Featured articles of the 36-article Featured Topic Ships of the Royal Yugoslav Navy. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:45, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Done, thanks Nikki! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:52, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be better to use cite book instead of cite web for the Navy Lists? e.g. The Navy List for June 1943. Vol. 2. National Library of Scotland. 1943. p. 1878. To take that June 1943 issue as an example, it seems odd for a 2258 page edition in two volumes to be rendered as an article rather than a book.

Sure, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:49, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Do the full names of the captains really have to be given? If so, then possibly reference the pages where you got the full name.

Probably not, reduced to initials. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:49, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly add RN, RNR and RNVR as appropriate after the captains' names.

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:49, 20 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you have, the MoS requires that these abbreviations be given in full at first mention. And really there should also be a brief in line explanation of what each means. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:25, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good point Gog. I've placed them in full after each and linked to the relevant article. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:51, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support by ZKang123

[edit]

Will leave a review.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 06:17, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Design, description and construction:

Many ships of the class were modified while they were under construction So these ships weren't originally intended for this class?

Yes, but as lessons were learned, mods were made with later ships of the class and of ships already in service. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:24, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

included a total of "a total of" is redundant.

Good point, deleted. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:24, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Career:

During the balance of 1940, What does "balance" mean here

The remainder of 1940. Changed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Personally, I will try to avoid WP:PROSELIST given most sentences here tend to begin with dates (e.g. "During 1941", "On 1 July 1941" etc.) Also, in fact within the same paragraph, you don't have to keep mentioning the year since it's also largely in chronological order.

Have tweaked these, see if there are any others you think need trimming? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

conducting a total of 17 convoy escorts Again "a total" is unnecessary

Quite, done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

as her crew was not considered "politically reliable" because they were not aligned with Josip Broz Tito's Partisan forces. A bit of a run on here (...as ...because...); would suggest splitting

Done. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The requirement to return Partizanka was a painful blow to the Yugoslavs Why does Partizanka need to be returned?

The British required it. Tweaked the wording. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This occurred in the immediate aftermath of the 1948 Arab–Israeli War, and was part of a significant fleet expansion. How did this transfer come about? Like, did Egypt purchase the ship or loan it?

Purchase, clarified. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These are all my comments. Quite short, but in good shape for FA.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 04:48, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for taking a look, ZKang123. See what you think of my edits in response? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:44, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No other issues I see. Support.--ZKang123 (talk · contribs) 02:11, 15 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

G'day GGOTCC, I've responded to the above review now, so feel free to review at your leisure! Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:45, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing! I got sidetracked by my classes, but will do that now! Sorry about the delay. GGOTCC 05:15, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Under the first paragraph of "Design, description and construction", I think it would be great to include information about the Flower-class and the intended purpose. The article states that they were based off Southern Pride, but why? The first paragraph is shallow, as the reader has no idea why the sketch was made or what the drydock had to do with the Royal Navy
Do any of the sources mention the namesake of the Flower-class? This can be used to state that a Mallow is a flower.
Are the stats in the first section specifically for Mallow, or her class? In USS Gyatt, I generalized the measurements and cited data applied for the entire class because each vessel varied from one another. Here, you could state that the dimensions are for the Flowers in general, not just Mallow
Shoreham-class sloop HMS Rochester I understand MOS:SEAOFBLUE issues, but why not link Shoreham-class sloop if both whaling ship and Southern Pride are linked before?

I think the argument is that "whaling ship" might be less widely understood without the link than the class link for HMS Rochester where you can hover over or click on the ship link and it gets you info on what a sloop is. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lieutenant Commander W. B. Piggott, RNR Is writing the branch of service like this a British thing? I only seen it as shorthand for "Lieutenant Commander W. B. Piggott of the Royal Navy Reserve" when it is fully written out in the prose.

Great question. It was suggested elsewhere, but now I'm not so sure they should be rendered as postnoms, but just as you suggest. Have changed as suggested. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it MOS to use dashes to abbreviate a timespan? AutoWikiBrowser switches them out when I use it.

Which timespan are you referring to? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:14, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Transfer date of 11 January 1944 is never cited in the article

It comes from the renaming ceremony photograph, which is held by the British Imperial War Museum in London. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:59, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am happy to see small ships get attention the deserve! However, I have a few questions. I assume you have nothing about what happened after she was decommissioned in 1975, why the Royal Navy wanted her back (and why the Yugoslavs obeyed), or why the ship was given to the Royal Yugoslav Navy if they were considered unreliable (and whose allegiance were they too)? Explanations at these points would really flush out the article
Is convoyweb.org.uk reliable?

The convoyweb Arnold Hague Convoy Database that these entries are drawn from was established by Arnold Hague, who was a RN/RNR officer and then a sub-editor for Jane's Fighting Ships. He also authored several books on the subject of the Allied convoy system in WWII. So, despite the site being arguably an SPS, Hague was an SME published by reliable independent publications. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:57, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I hope to be able to get to this one tomorrow. Hog Farm _Talk 01:51, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is it intentional that World War II is not mentioned by name outside of the first sentence of the article?

Great point, no. Fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"under as yard number 1065" - I don't think this is grammatical?

Correct, fixed. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just to avoid sea of blue. If anyone wants to they can hover over or click the ship link and the link to the class is there. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Later that year, she was transferred to the Egyptian Navy in which she served as El Sudan." - I'd recommend stating here outright that this was a purchase

Sure, done. I'm just putting together a bit of an expansion on the first para of the Design section, in which I'll explain the need for losts of cheap escorts to deal with the u-boat threat, and I'll obviously keep the reference to WWII in that. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

" During her final escort of the year she was detached from convoy KMS 66 as her crew was not considered "politically reliable". This stemmed from the fact that they were not aligned with Josip Broz Tito's Partisan forces. " - this will need a separate source, as it is found on a different page on the convoyweb website. Additionally - even if we're considering Arnold Hague to be a subject-matter expert who is okay to cite their self-published work, the page this is from (here) notes that the notes were extracted by one Don Kindell from Hague's papers. Is it possible to distinguish on convoyweb what's from Hague and what's from other contributions who likely don't qualify as subject-matter experts?

The overall data is clearly drawn from Arnold Hague's papers (and Hague is a SME on Allied convoys), and that note is specifically annotated as "Additional notes by Arnold Hague and co-workers" for this particular convoy. Now, perhaps the bit in parens is extra from a co-worker, but I think the "not a politically reliable ship in the Eastern Med" is likely to be directly from Hague's notes. I could trim it to remove "This stemmed from the fact that they were not aligned with Josip Broz Tito's Partisan forces." as I think the rest is almost certainly Hague's work. Although, to be fair, this sentence is highly likely to be true given that by late 1944, the Allies were completely aligned with Tito, and were paying lip service only to the forces of the government-in-exile, and given the crew were ex-Royal Yugoslav Navy personnel aligned with the government-in-exile, they wouldn't have been seen as Tito-aligned. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the main concern here is the convoyweb question. Hog Farm _Talk 01:10, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is ready for further discussion, HF. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Changes look good so far; please let me know when you've finished putting together the design section expansion. Hog Farm _Talk 02:39, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Shocksingularity (talk) 22:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have been working on this article since October 2025, and I feel that it has improved significantly since. @Johnjbarton and I have worked on editing the factual content to ensure all content is accurate and verifiable, and add sources from scientific journals (as new as possible, when relevant) to replace old sources from popular science websites. We have also cleaned up some information that was not within the scope of the encyclopedia. @Noleander and @Femke did a peer review of this article and helped clean up MOS violations and non-standardized styles.

A few notes, because I know these will be commented on:

WP:PROSESIZE is currently at about 10,650 words, shortened from over 13,000. Given the scope of the article, I believe that this word count is appropriate.
For standardization and to avoid extremely lengthy citations, each citation with more than 3 authors is capped to 2 authors et. al.
Any claim that needs 3+ sources to verify all of its content is encased in a WP:CITEBUNDLE.
Page numbers in citations: When a source is used only once, or the same page number is used each time, the pagenumber attribute within the citation template is used. Otherwise, template:rp is used.
ID numbers on sources: As many ID numbers as possible are used.
The Interstellar black hole image (without lens flare) is not a fair-use image; It is actually under a CC-BY license. However, the black hole image with lens flare is under a more restrictive license that is not allowed on Commons, which is why the non-lens-flare image is used.

Thank you in advance to anyone who reviews this article! Your time is appreciated. Shocksingularity (talk) 22:19, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I made changes to the History to address the items raised by RoySmith for that section, except the last three items. Johnjbarton (talk) 04:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey @Shocksingularity, I think it will be better to use Sagittarius A* image rather than Messier 87 image Abdullah1099 (talk) 16:06, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did a peer review of this, so I'll continue here with a FAC review.

Prose size: this is a Level 3 WP:Vital article with about 2 million page views per year. So exceeding the 9,000 word guideline from WP:SIZERULE by about 18% seems acceptable.

For a nonspinning, uncharged black hole, the radius of the event horizon, or Schwarzschild radius, is proportional to the mass, M, through [formula omitted] where rs is the Schwarzschild radius and M☉ is the mass of the Sun. For a black hole with nonzero spin or electric charge, the radius is smaller, until an extremal black hole could have an event horizon close to [formula omitted] half the radius of a nonspinning, uncharged black hole of the same mass.

These two sentences contain several important facts. The bold text should say For a black hole of the same mass with nonzero spin or electric charge, the radius is smaller. The current text puts the " black hole of the same mass" far away at the end of the 2nd sentence where most readers won't make the connection. Suggest make this 3 sentences by breaking the 2nd sentence into two; and adding words as shown in the blue text above.

Same green text as immediately above: "... until an extremal black hole could have an event horizon close to..." The word "until" reads awkwardly and will confuse some readers. I think it is trying to say "... in the limit where rotational speeds and charge are extremely large ... the radius approaches half the radius of a non-spinning uncharged black hole of the same mass." Or something like that.

Ref Check tool says that Book citations are not showing city/location consistently: "Inconsistent use of Publisher Location (3 with; 23 without)". Probably easiest to remove the "location" field from the 3 book templates that have it.

Ambiguous: ... can be inferred through its interaction with other matter and with electromagnetic radiation such as visible light. There are two ways to read that: does "interaction" apply only to matter? or also to EM radiation?

Does the Evolution section need an introductory sentence or two? That section follows the Formation section, but it may not be clear to readers what Evolution section covers. Consider 1 or 2 sentences at the very start of Evolution section that say something like "After a black hole is formed, it may experience additional events or transformations, including merger, ... etc ..."

Merge Open questions section with Alternatives section into a "Future research" or "Areas of investigation" section? The phrase "Open questions" is a bit idiomatic, and in fact there is a box on the right side that uses the alterntive term "Unsolved problem" ... which is it? You and I know, but readers w/o native English knowledge may get confused by the two phrases. And the "Alternatives" section is also discussing an open question, true? To clarify for lay readers: Consider merging both sections into one called "Areas of investigation" .. (and "Alternatives" becomes a subsection under the merged section).

I skimmed through the notes provided below by RoySmith and they are very constructive and useful. The article was in great shape a week ago, and it is even better now. That said, I'll see if I can find more suggestions.

The turn of the millennium saw the first 3 candidate detections of black holes in this way... Word "saw" is confusing since it is in the context of detecting objects (seeing black holes). Should "3" be "three" per MOS:SPELL09? Consider The first three candidate black holes of the millenium were detected this way ...

This [2022] was also the first determination of an isolated black hole mass, 7.1±1.3 M☉ I'm not certain what this means. Could be:

The first time they got the mass of a black hole without accompanying bodies;
the first time they got the mass of a black hole far from any other bodies; or
the first time they got the mass of a black hole with mass 7.1 M☉.

I know it is not (3), but emphasizing the mass 7.1 is probably not needed and detracts from the point of the sentence. Is "isolated black hole" an important concept? If so, maybe add a couple of words defining it such as "without accompanying bodies" or "far from any other bodies"

- Removed the mass and clarified what the sentence means. The sentence in the article also kind of understated the discovery, so I adjusted the wording. (This was the first detection of an isolated stellar black hole whatsoever, not just the first detection whatsoever) Shocksingularity (talk) 04:00, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is a small thing: a couple items in "External Links" section are using Sentence case:
- 6-year-long study tracks stars orbiting Sagittarius A*
- Computer visualisation of the signal detected by LIGO
- 3D simulations of colliding black holes hailed as most realistic yet
- Fall into a black hole

All the sources in the article use title case, so these Ext Links jump out (to me at least). The article is so elegant, it is a shame to have this minor inconsistency. Not required for FA.

... black holes do not themselves emit any electromagnetic radiation other than the hypothetical Hawking radiation, so astrophysicists searching for black holes must generally rely on indirect observations.

Pointing out that Hawking radiation is extremely weak would be helpful.

Hawking Radiation is 99% concrete as a theory, no? Maybe dispense with the word "hypothetical".

- I don't know if I want to remove the "hypothetical" just yet because Hawking radiation still hasn't been confirmed. Although the theory is certainly sound, we still haven't detected any Hawking radiation, and efforts to do so by searching for black hole "explosions" haven't turned anything up. Plus, the existence of Hawking radiation causes problems e.g. the information paradox. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:00, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The word "generally" is not needed is it? There are no direct observations, correct?

- Removed the word "generally" because that is true. However, I'm not sure if I really like that clause, because it implies that the only way to observe/detect something is by observing its electromagnetic radiation, which is not true. I'll have to think on that and whether to remove it. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:00, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Consider ... black holes do not themselves emit any electromagnetic radiation other than the extremely weak Hawking radiation, so astrophysicists searching for black holes rely on indirect observations.

I don't really care about WP:CAPFRAG, but other reviewers might, so heads up: the MOS says "Most captions are not complete sentences, but merely sentence fragments, which should not end with a period or full stop. ". Article has some captions that are fragments and yet end in a period, e.g.:

The M87* relativistic jet; inset is the black hole shadow.
An M87* image with superimposed lines representing the magnitude and direction of polarisation.
... others? ...
THis one is missing a period at the end: Two galaxies from the first billion years after the Big Bang. The galaxy on the left hosts a luminous quasar at its center

Like I said, not a show-stopper for me.

In the section "Observational evidence" is a list of indirect evidence that may be a sign of a black hole. I was expecting to see "accretion disk" and "Jets" listed prominently as evidence; but they are sort of buried within the "Active galactic nucleus" subsection. Maybe accretion disks & jets only appear in the context of galactic nuclei? I.e. jets are only observed from a giant black hole at the center of a galaxy? Makes sense. I'm not suggesting any changes here; just thinking out loud.
- There were originally sections for "jets" and "accretion disk" in "observational evidence", but they were moved to "structure" because there were no sections on jets/disks there and they were more about theory rather than actual observation/observational techniques. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:00, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was watching the PR, so I'll jump in with both feet now.

A black hole is an astronomical body so compact that its gravity prevents anything Is the defining characteristic its compactness or its mass? Maybe this will get clarified later on, but it's odd to have the first sentence raising such questions in my mind. The second sentence also uses the word "compact". I think the problem here is that there's a common English meaning for "compact" and there's a technical meaning for it as described in Compact object and they're not quite the same thing. So at a minimum, I'l link to Compact object, but even better would be to describe it in lay terms, perhaps "... so massive and dense that ...".
- I have linked to compact object. I am a bit wary about putting "massive" or "dense" because a black hole need not be particularly massive (at least in the lay sense of the term) nor dense. (For example, Andromeda's central SMBH is about as dense as water, at least if we are using the classical "mass/volume" formula, which may not apply for black holes.) Shocksingularity (talk) 03:11, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just as a heads up, WP:MTAU is probably going to be one of my main themes in this review, so expect more comments like the above. I have a technical background; I'm not your primary audience. You're writing for high-school kids, and lay people. Not an easy task to make a topic like this approachable to that audience, but that's the task you've taken on.

In general relativity, crossing a black hole's event horizon seals an object's fate. Two comments here. One clarify that you mean "crossing inbound". Second, what does it mean to seal an object's fate?
- I have reworded seals an object's fate to traps an object inside. I am not sure how to clarify the "crossing inbound" part without giving readers the wrong idea (eg, that there is some way to cross outbound). Any ideas? Shocksingularity (talk) 03:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Michell correctly hypothesized that such supermassive but non-radiating bodies ... Here you're using "supermassive" in a generic sense. I think some readers will be confused and think you're talking about supermassive black holes. Is there a different word you can use here?

In 1796, Laplace mentioned ... See WP:SAID

showed that the laws of electromagnetism would be invariant why "would be" as opposed to "are"?

Einstein predicted ... half of the lensing effect of gravity on light The use of "half" implies that this is precisely 50% of the effect. Is that correct, or is it just "one of two factors which cause ..."?

Ralph Fowler showed that quantum-mechanical degeneracy pressure was larger than thermal pressure ... explain what "degeneracy pressure" and "thermal pressure" are.

In this period, more general black hole solutions were found. You talk about "solutions" in multiple places. I know what you mean, but I suspect most lay readers (by which I mean anybody who has not taken differential equations, i.e. just about all of our readers) will have no clue. So this bears some explaining.

Roger Penrose proved that general relativity without quantum mechanics requires that singularities appear in all black holes this implies that GR with QM does not require that. Was that your intent?

Almost every galaxy had a supermassive black hole at its center, many of which were quiescent What does it mean to be quiescent? Also, I assume it's the black holes that are quiescent, not the galaxies?

Since the initial discovery in 2015, hundreds more gravitational waves have been observed by LIGO and another interferometer, Virgo move the explanation that LIGO and Virgo are interferometers to the first sentence in this paragraph.
Andrea Ghez and Reinhard Genzel shared one-half I don't think you need the hyphen in "one-half". I could be wrong about that.
Hawking's extensive theoretical work on black holes would not be honoured since he died in 2018 "had died", I think.

In December 1967, a student reportedly suggested the phrase black hole Is the student's name known?

(that takes me to the end of History; I'll work my way through this bit by bit over a few days)

However, there are several other definitions that can be used to describe or identify a black hole, although they are not universally agreed upon by physicists. "Although" is redundant with "However".

these Schwarzschild black holes are the only vacuum solution that is spherically symmetric Give some short but comprehensible explanation of what a "vacuum solution" is. The article you link to is anything but comprehensible.

The total electric charge Q and the total angular momentum J are expected to satisfy the inequality ... There's a few undefined terms here: e0, c, G. Also, now that we've started to introduce scary equations, is there some way to summarize this for the lay reader? You say "constrained by the mass", but it took me a bit of looking at the equation to get to "More massive black holes can have more charge, and they can have more angular momentum. And moreover, each of charge and angular momentum eats into the other one's budget in some weird non-linear way". I more or less understand this stuff; a typical lay reader will have no clue what this means. Also, what does "expected" mean? Does it mean "We think this is how it works, but we're not really sure"? If so, say that. As for Black holes with the maximum possible charge or spin satisfying this inequality are called extremal black holes, if I understand extremal black holes correctly, "maximum possible charge or spin" is not really the right way to describe that. It's not "charge or spin", it's "combination (in that weird non-linear way) of charge and spin".
- I reworded the sentence before the equation to While a black hole can theoretically have any positive mass, its charge and angular momentum are limited by its mass, with this limit being greater for more massive black holes. Hopefully this explains the physical meaning better. I also added the meaning of constants in the equation, changed maximum possible charge or spin to maximum possible combination of charge and spin, and removed "expected" before the inequality (because if it violated the inequality, it would be a naked singularity, which is not a black hole anyway). Shocksingularity (talk) 03:08, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sagittarius A* rotates at about 90% of the maximum rate I assume this means "maximum as predicted by that Q^2 + J^2 < M^2 inequality from the previous section? Does that inequality have a name?
Hmmm, I see one reference to this being called the "Kerr-Newman bound". RoySmith (talk) 00:55, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On the topic of charge, I assume we're talking about net charge? That should be stated somewhere.

A spinning black hole has angular momentum you've already stated that all black holes spin, so the logical conclusion here is that all black holes have angular momentum.
- Comment: Since the distribution of mass is unknown and potentially all located at a singular point, there need be no connection between rotation and angular momentum. However I do not recall seeing any published discussion of this. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:19, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That uncharged limit is ... I had to do a little algebra to see that this is just the original inequality with Q set to 0. So you should explain that's where this comes from.

Most black holes are believed to have an approximately neutral charge, ah, so that answers my question above about net charge. Why not put the "Charge" sub-section before the "Spin and angular momentum" sub-section, and then you can say something like, "Since Q is likely to be close to zero, we can simplify the above inequality as ...", which also answers the question I've been silently wondering about, i.e. which of these two terms usually dominates?
The charge Q for a nonspinning black hole is bounded by as with above, you should explain that this is obtained by setting J=0 (I assume it is; I haven't done the algebra) in the big inequality (and a little bit more reshuffling to make the e0, etc, go away)

This is the first time you use the symbol M☉, so you should define it here.

Smaller progenitor stars, with masses less than about 8 M☉, will be held together by the degeneracy pressure of electrons ... the star will be held together by neutron degeneracy pressure I don't understand this. My understanding of degeneracy pressure is that is pushes things apart, not holds them together.

greater than 10^9-10^10 solar masses ... once a black hole reaches 50–100 billion times the mass of the Sun Why the switch from exponential notation to writing out "billion"? It just makes it hard to compare the numbers.

Regarding File:Anatomy of a Black Hole.jpg, see MOS:TEXTASIMAGES
These jets can extend as far as millions of parsecs from the black hole itself most lay readers will have no clue what a parsec is, so define it here. To be honest, I'm not even sure what it is other that "a big unit of distance that astronomers use". Bigger than a light-year, I think? Yeah, looking it up, it's 3.26 light-years. Is there any reason in this article to use both units? Saying "millions of light-years" would be just as accurate as saying "millions of parsecs", and one less thing to befuddle the lay reader.
converting its gravitational energy into heat and releasing a large flux of x-rays Is it important to say "flux" here? Would not the plain English word "amount" work just as well? Again, one less thing for the lay reader to stumble over, and the linked-to flux article is just going to be gibberish to them.
The temperature of these disks can range from thousands to millions of Kelvin I'm not sure, but I think the plural "Kelvins" is more correct.
In the Radius sub-section, you need to define all the terms in the equations.
Since the volume within the Schwarzschild radius increase with the cube of the radius I think you want "increases".

Other more speculative mechanisms include primordial black holes created from density fluctuations in the early universe, the collapse of dark stars, a hypothetical object powered by annihilation of dark matter, or from hypothetical self-interacting dark matter Some of the commas here delimit list items, others set of explanatory phrases. I can't find where the rule is written down (part of WP:MOS, I'm sure), but what you want to do in this case is alternate between semicolons and commas.
Observations of quasars at redshift z∼7 explain what z~7 means.
- Removed this altogether. Redshift values just identify how old a source is based on the expansion of the universe, and it is already mentioned that they are from less than 1 billion years after the Big Bang, so the technical term is not needed. Shocksingularity (talk) 03:53, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Black holes can also merge with other objects It's kind of odd to start a new section with an "also" sentence, since it's not clear what the antecedent of "also" is. Maybe add an introductory, "In addition to ..., black holes can also ..." or something along those lines. Or maybe just drop the "also".

As a binary of supermassive black holes approach each other, most nearby stars are ejected it seems counter-intuitive (what doesn't in this field?) that stars would get ejected. Can you explain this a bit? I see there's a good explanation at Binary black hole#Final parsec problem, so just pull some of that up to here.

About 90% of this energy is released within about 20 black hole radii you don't need both abouts.

At a certain rate of accretion ... the black hole should unable to accrete any faster Why "should" instead of "will"?
- I tried to make this section flow a bit better. It is mentioned why they "should" (but don't necessarily do) a couple sentences later: However, many black holes accrete beyond this rate due to their non-spherical geometry or instabilities in the accretion disk. I have changed "should" to "should, in theory" and "however" to "realistically" to hopefully connect these points better. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:02, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A possible exception is the burst of gamma rays emitted in the last stage of the evaporation of primordial black holes how long does that burst last?

black holes have entropy which scales with their surface area What does "scales with" mean? Are you saying it's directly proportional, or some other function?

However, these conclusions are derived without a complete theory of quantum gravity, although it's weird to have both "however" and "although" in the same sentence.

Observational evidence

[edit]

Instead of the somewhat verbose "Detection of gravitational waves from merging black holes" L3 heading, perhaps just "Gravitational waves from merging black holes"?
The laser beams reflect off of mirrors in the tunnels and converge at the intersection of the arms, cancelling each other out mention and link to Destructive interference.
Since then, one of the stars what is "then" 1995? 1998?
a feature unique to black holes perhaps "the defining feature of ..."?
One such effect is gravitational lensing: The deformation of spacetime around a massive object causes light rays to be deflected, making objects behind them appear distorted my understanding (I could be wrong) is that in British English, you don't capitalize the word after a colon.

the model for stellar-mass black holes assumes of an upper limit for the mass of a neutron star ... "assumes the existence of", perhaps? Or just drop the "of" entirely?

No issues.

OK, that does it for a full read-through. Despite the volume of items I've noted, I think this is in pretty good shape. The early couple of sections (say, before Properties) I think should be approachable by anybody with reasonable scientific literacy. It gets (pardon the pun) hairier after that, but that's OK and to be expected for an article about such an advanced subject. RoySmith (talk) 00:12, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm very close to supporting this. I'm sure there's still lots of tweaks that can be made, but overall this is extremely well written and does an admirable job meeting WP:FACR #1 (prose is engaging) and of making a highly technical topic understandable per WP:MTAU.

My one remaining complaint that's keeping me from declaring support is that this really is image-heavy to the extent that page layout suffers. As I've mentioned elsewhere, you should take a hard look at all of the images and figure out which of them really do advance the reader's understanding and which could be dropped without loss and/or reduced in size. The elephant in the room in that regard is File:Anatomy of a Black Hole.jpg. It not only makes a mess of layout due to its size, but violates MOS:TEXTASIMAGES as noted above. I really think it has to go. RoySmith (talk) 12:57, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed Did Scientists Just Detect an Exploding Black Hole? in the NY Times today (that URL should get you past the paywall for 30 days). I don't know if there's anything in there worth adding, but take a look. RoySmith (talk) 20:46, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I meant to weigh in on the peer review, but never found the time. I'll try to do better here. At minimum, I should be able to find the time to take a look at the "In fiction" section (I am the main author of the black holes in fiction article). If I haven't got round to it in a week or two, please ping me. TompaDompa (talk) 23:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure some of the FAQ hard core will object, but if we're going to do fiction, surely we need to mention the drink. RoySmith (talk) 23:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback! I am currently quite busy, but I will work on those edits as soon as I have time. I just wanted to let you know that I did read them. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:44, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In fiction

I'll start with looking at this section, and we'll see if I find the time to look at the rest.

The section has a {{main}} template linking to Black holes in fiction. I don't think this section does a very good job at being a summary of that article per WP:SUMMARYSTYLE. The balance of different aspects does not seem right, and there is nothing about supermassive or micro black holes, for instance.
The balance of sources used for this section strikes me as a bit peculiar. The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction, Science Fact and Science Fiction: An Encyclopedia, The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy, and Science Fiction Literature Through History: An Encyclopedia are all high-quality sources on science fiction written by established experts on the genre, but the other sources are quite a bit more marginal (not counting Kip Thorne, who is a great source on black holes in general and if anything too close to Interstellar to be appropriate to cite there, but not really someone known for insights on science fiction more broadly).
- I will note that the source citing Kip Thorne is only for the ratio of time dilation used in the movie, which is pretty objective (if you do the math, you will find that he is right). Shocksingularity (talk) 02:44, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  - It can't be right that Thorne is only cited for the ratio—what's the source for the Interstellar example apart from Thorne? It's not The Greenwood Encyclopedia of Science Fiction and Fantasy, the other source cited for the sentence (and which was published in 2005, way before Interstellar). TompaDompa (talk) 22:30, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    Thorne is explicitly cited "for example", is clearly about Interstellar and black holes, so I'm confused about what the issue could be here.
    Can we back up to "the other sources are quite a bit more marginal"? Which sources are you doubting?
    Rodriguez, M. “Blame it on the Black Star”: Black Holes in Culture.
    
    Fraknoi, A. (2010, August). Science Fiction Stories with Good Astronomy and Physics: A Topical Index. In Science Education and Outreach: Forging a Path to the Future (Vol. 431, p. 526).
    9 citations, but that is common among articles for teaching; I would move it to verify Black holes have been portrayed in science fiction in a variety of ways. which is about all it says.
    I removed it altogether, I don't think we need an individual source for Black holes have been portrayed in science fiction in a variety of ways when the entire point of the section is to talk about the variety of ways in which they are portrayed. That is, the statement is backed up by the rest of the sources in the section. Shocksingularity (talk) 04:26, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    
    Tayag, Yasmin (2019-04-20). "How 'High Life' Created a Black Hole That Looks Just Like the Historic Photo". Inverse. Retrieved 2026-03-31.
    Quotes from ETH astronomers, credible content
    We could lose the last sentence "black holes can feature as hazards " Johnjbarton (talk) 23:45, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think File:Interstellar black hole (no lens flare).jpg adds basically anything here. There is already the very similar-looking File:Black Hole Desktop & Phone Wallpapers (SVS14146 - BH accretion disk viz desktop).png in the "Accretion disk" section, and that's a better image.
It seems rather odd to me to speak of "Disney's The Black Hole", "Christopher Nolan's science fiction epic Interstellar", and "the 2018 Netflix reboot of Lost in Space", but omitting the authors of all the written works.
The Skylark of Space should be in italics: The Skylark of Space.
"As black holes grew to public recognition in the 1960s and 1970s, they began to be featured in films as well as novels, such as Disney's The Black Hole. Black holes have also been used in works of the 21st century, such as Christopher Nolan's science fiction epic Interstellar." – this seems rather trivial, no? It doesn't say much other than that black holes have continued appearing in fiction and that some of these appearances have been in films.
"Additionally, black holes can feature as hazards to spacefarers and planets: A black hole threatens a deep-space outpost in 1978 short story The Black Hole Passes, and a binary black hole dangerously alters the orbit of a planet in the 2018 Netflix reboot of Lost in Space." – the sources cited here not being my first choice of ones to rely on for something like this aside, this sentence makes connections that I do not see those sources making.

I might take a closer look at the section later. I think it would benefit from some editing directed by the guidance laid out at WP:ANALYSISBEFOREEXAMPLES. TompaDompa (talk) 22:22, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The section looks quite a bit different now, and not necessarily for the better. There are two different ways to approach a section like this one, given the existence of the stand-alone article Black holes in fiction. One is to cover the same ground as Black holes in fiction and serve as a much briefer condensation of that article's main points per WP:SUMMARYSTYLE (in which case the section should include {{Main|Black holes in fiction}}). The other is to cover different ground than that article does (in which case the section should include {{Further|Black holes in fiction}}), such as the points "Fictional treatments of black holes are [...] used as a mechanism for teaching science." and "Fans of science fiction art typically want the fiction to closely follow the science.". As it stand, the section doesn't really commit to either approach. Either way, the section is rather heavy on examples for such a comparatively short section (and the section should probably be fairly short as per WP:DUEASPECT). A couple of other comments:

"Lynn Gamwell in her book Conjuring the void: the art of black holes used the black holes as example to explore how art and science interact." – the book title should be given in WP:TITLECASE, and the sentence is an anacoluthon.
"Fans of science fiction art typically want the fiction to closely follow the science." – I don't think "science fiction art" is the right term here, since it usually refers to illustrations (cover art for science fiction magazines) rather than narrative science fiction (books, films, and so on). I am also fairly confident that this is simply wrong: science fiction fans are usually not only interested in hard science fiction (as the popularity of e.g. Star Wars and Star Trek attests to). This is also not what the source says—it says "Science Fiction enthusiasts are stereotypically, and perhaps ironically, overly concerned with the accuracy and believability of the science fiction films they watch.", which is significantly different.

TompaDompa (talk) 21:55, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your general point: I agree. All I did was convert a random collection of claims into a verifiable random collection of claims. Black holes in fiction almost exclusively about depiction. I tried a compromise, let me know if it is getting better.

Gamwell: fixed (I claim). Fans/art: I changed art to films. However I disagree about Star Wars/Trek: these popular works transcended exactly the "fans" part. I guess most viewers of Star Wars would not class themselves as "science fiction fans", thus the source seems ok to me. Johnjbarton (talk) 23:58, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The new approach with a separate "depictions" subsection is an improvement, yes. That said, I think what you are saying about it being a "random collection of claims" is pretty on point—it's not much of a summary, and that's a problem. It is almost certainly possible to write a brief WP:SUMMARYSTYLE condensation of Black holes in fiction here, but it would look quite different to what we currently have, and I would question whether it would represent due weight for the overarching topic of black holes. I think it would be better to leave the description of how black holes have been depicted almost entirely to the sub-article Black holes in fiction. From the current "In fiction" section, I would keep the first paragraph, and from the "Depictions" subsection I would keep only (1) that objects with the overall characteristics of black holes appeared in fiction prior to the term being adopted, (2) that relativistic effects such as gravitational time dilation have been portrayed, and (3) that black holes have been portrayed as means to traverse space (whether as wormholes or otherwise). I would then incorporate those three points in the first paragraph, and do so without naming any examples. That could be two fairly short sentences.

Maybe Star Wars and Star Trek weren't the best examples, but my point about science fiction fans for the most part being interested in more than just hard science fiction still stands (even in well-regarded works, violations of the square–cube law are commonplace, faster-than-light travel is a common plot device, and so on). More importantly, the source doesn't say "typically" but "stereotypically", which indicates that it might be a misapprehension (i.e. "science fiction fans are widely held to be concerned with scientific accuracy" rather than "science fiction fans are concerned with accuracy"). At any rate, we can't say "typically" where the source says "stereotypically". This issue would of course be sidestepped entirely if this part is omitted (e.g. by following my suggestion in the paragraph above). TompaDompa (talk) 05:05, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have cut most of the section per your comments, how does it look now? Shocksingularity (talk) 17:13, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely better. It takes a lot more effort to be able to confidently say that there are no significant issues remaining in the later stages of a review than it does to spot issues in the early stages of a review, so I think we shall have to be content with me saying that the main issues I initially had with the content of the section have been resolved. I would suggest adding {{Further|Black holes in fiction}} to the section or alternatively adding a "See also" section at the bottom of the article and linking to Black holes in fiction, but that's optional. TompaDompa (talk) 21:58, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Added Further. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:35, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am impressed by the quality of this contribution. I have a couple of nitpicks for now:

The use of the {{clear}} template under Microlensing is generating too much whitespace.
Reference 5 is used in the Lead alone and not under Event Horizon. This seems odd. Are the citations necessary in the Lead? (See WP:LEADCITE)

Perhaps more to come. Graham Beards (talk) 16:44, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the {{clear}}, I think it generally causes more problems than it solves. The real problem is too many images which starts pushing things out of whack starting around Direct interferometry. Perhaps not all of these images are needed? The "EHT telescopes observe from different angles" one, for example, really doesn't add anything useful. Note that MOS:IMAGEREL says Images must be significant and relevant in the topic's context, not primarily decorative. At least some of the image used don't really obey that. Or perhaps {{multiple image}} (especially with direction=horizontal) could be used to get a more compact layout. Another possibility is to scale some of them down with upright=0.85 (or whatever number works). RoySmith (talk) 17:08, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the general reader will be thankful for the economy of equations. This comment is just to note that I have checked the ones included for accuracy and I have not found any issues. Also, I like the way the article balances established knowledge with more speculative ideas. I have reservations about the Further Reading section, and the External Links to a lesser extent. This is not an esoteric subject. Do our readers really need this guidance? I doubt it. Graham Beards (talk) 08:41, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have removed the "further reading" section and overhauled the "external links" section:
- Replaced BBC's In Our Time podcast episode on black holes (from 2001) with more recent NOVA episode Black Hole Apocalypse (2017).
- Fixed a dead link for ESA's black hole simulation interactive.
- Removed a link to Hubble information on black holes that does not really provide much more information beyond what is in this article
- Removed a Q&A last updated in 1995 that mostly covers what's already in the article
- Removed paywalled NYT article that is mostly about low-importance/outdated/already stated information
- Removed video of stars moving around Sag A*: we already have a video of that in the article, and the linked video is from 2008
- Removed "Movie of black hole candidate" video (the "candidate" in question was Sag A* and the source was last updated in 2002)
- Removed link to paper w/ videos of gravitational waves - hard to access videos, and we already have a video of GW
- Added link to black hole parameters calculator
- Added link to NASA simulation of falling into a black hole and explanation video
- Added link to PBS Space Time black holes playlist
Shocksingularity (talk) 04:33, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments, mostly about the physics: Esculenta (talk) 20:17, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

GRS 1915+105 is misidentified as supermassive. The "Spin and angular momentum" section states: "One supermassive black hole, GRS 1915+105, has been estimated to spin at over 1,000 revolutions per second." GRS 1915+105 is a stellar-mass black hole (approximately 12–14 M_☉) in an X-ray binary system — a microquasar, not a supermassive black hole. "Supermassive" should be changed to "stellar" or "stellar-mass".

Retrograde ISCO radius is wrong by a factor of two. The "Innermost stable circular orbit" section states the retrograde ISCO "can be as far out as about $9 r_{s}$ $9r_{\text{s}}$ ". Per Bardeen, Press & Teukolsky (1972), the retrograde ISCO for a maximally spinning Kerr black hole is at $9 G M / c^{2} = 4.5 r_{s}$ $9GM/c^{2}=4.5\,r_{\text{s}}$ . The article appears to have confused the gravitational radius $G M / c^{2}$ $GM/c^{2}$ with the Schwarzschild radius $r_{s} = 2 G M / c^{2}$ $r_{\text{s}}=2GM/c^{2}$ . This should read $4.5 r_{s}$ $4.5\,r_{\text{s}}$ (or equivalently $9 G M / c^{2}$ $9\,GM/c^{2}$ ).

The photon sphere radii for Kerr black holes are incorrect. The "Photon sphere and shadow" section states the prograde photon sphere is "1–3 Schwarzschild radii" and the retrograde photon sphere is "3–5 Schwarzschild radii" from the centre. Again per Bardeen et al. (1972), the actual ranges (expressed in gravitational radii $M = G M / c^{2}$ $M=GM/c^{2}$ ) are: prograde $M$ $M$ to $3 M$ $3M$ , i.e. $0.5 r_{s}$ $0.5\,r_{\text{s}}$ to $1.5 r_{s}$ $1.5\,r_{\text{s}}$ ; retrograde $3 M$ $3M$ to $4 M$ $4M$ , i.e. $1.5 r_{s}$ $1.5\,r_{\text{s}}$ to $2 r_{s}$ $2\,r_{\text{s}}$ . The stated ranges are wrong regardless of whether "Schwarzschild radii" is read as $r_{s}$ $r_{\text{s}}$ or as $G M / c^{2}$ $GM/c^{2}$ (the retrograde upper bound should be 4, not 5, even in gravitational radii).

There are incompatible unit systems for the charge bound. The "Mass" section gives the general Kerr–Newman inequality in SI form with the explicit $4 π ϵ_{0}$ $4\pi \epsilon _{0}$ factor:

\frac{Q^{2}}{4 π ϵ_{0}} + \frac{c^{2} J^{2}}{G M^{2}} \leq G M^{2} .

${\frac {Q^{2}}{4\pi \epsilon _{0}}}+{\frac {c^{2}J^{2}}{GM^{2}}}\leq GM^{2}.$

However, the "Charge" section gives the nonspinning charge bound as:

Q \leq \sqrt{G} M,

$Q\leq {\sqrt {G}}\,M,$

which follows from setting

J = 0

$J=0$ only in Gaussian units (i.e. without the

4 π ϵ_{0}

$4\pi \epsilon _{0}$ ). In SI, setting

J = 0

$J=0$ in the inequality above yields

Q \leq \sqrt{4 π ϵ_{0} G} M

$Q\leq {\sqrt {4\pi \epsilon _{0}G}}\,M$ . The two equations as written use incompatible unit conventions for charge; one or the other needs to be adjusted for consistency.

Minor: "38% diameter reduction" for charged black holes may be misleading. The "Charge" section states: "The presence of charge can reduce the diameter of the black hole by up to 38%." That is misleading as written. For the event horizon itself, an extremal Reissner-Nordström black hole has a horizon radius of $r_{s} / 2$ $r_{\text{s}}/2$ , not $r_{s}$ $r_{\text{s}}$ , so the horizon diameter is reduced by 50%, not 38%. The 38% figure appears instead to refer to the diameter of the black hole's shadow, as discussed in the cited sources (Zajaček et al. 2018; Zakharov et al. 2005). The wording should therefore be checked against those sources and revised to make clear that it is the shadow diameter, not the event-horizon diameter, that is being described.

Minor: event horizon formula in the note uses implicit geometrised units. The note gives the outer event horizon radius as $M + \sqrt{M^{2} - (J / M)^{2} - Q^{2}}$ $M+{\sqrt {M^{2}-(J/M)^{2}-Q^{2}}}$ , which is in geometrised units ( $G = c = 1$ $G=c=1$ ). The main text uses SI throughout (with explicit $G$ $G$ and $c$ $c$ ). This is not wrong per se, but could confuse readers given the conventions used elsewhere in the article.

Internal contradiction on spin: earlier the article says Schwarzschild black holes have no angular momentum, but later it says "All black holes spin, often fast." In a general article, those two statements cannot both stand unqualified.
- Schwarzschild black holes are more of a theoretical construct than an actual astrophysical thing. In reality, all black holes spin because there are infinite ways to spin but only one way to not spin.Shocksingularity (talk) 03:05, 1 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Newman solution misdescribed as cylindrical: the history section says Newman found a "cylindrically symmetric" rotating, charged black-hole solution. Kerr–Newman is stationary and axisymmetric, not cylindrically symmetric.

Photon-sphere capture criterion phrased wrongly: the article says rays with impact parameters smaller than "the radius of the photon sphere" fall in. That is the wrong quantity. Capture is set by the critical impact parameter; for Schwarzschild it is b_crit = 3√3 M, not the photon-sphere radius 3M.

Wrong wikilink target in the M87 paragraph: the sentence about M87 links "galactic centre" to Galactic Center, i.e. the Milky Way page, which is the wrong destination in a sentence about Messier 87.

Irrelevant supporting citation on GRS 1915+105: the second reference on that sentence is Eilon & Ori (2016), a paper on gravitational shock waves inside a spherical charged black hole. It does not support a claim about the observed spin of GRS 1915+105.

Minor copy-edit and markup slips:

"gasses" should be "gases"
"progenated" is wrong and should be something like "formed from" or "produced by"
"Sagittarius A*; The data had been collected in 2017" should not capitalise after the semicolon

Source and image review and spotcheck

[edit]

Going to head up that given the scope of the article, I am not trying to review completeness. I see that many of the known luminaries in black hole research are cited, though. Some sources might need a ref?none. What's https://web.archive.org/web/20090423053437/http://nrumiano.free.fr/Estars/int_bh.html? File:BKLChaotic.gif needs some kind of source. File:X-RayFlare-BlackHole-MilkyWay-20140105.jpg doesn't appear on its source. ALT text and sectioning of the images seem OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:45, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "Some sources might need a ref?none" : A Ref Check tool is indeed showing several warnings: "Harv warning: There is no link pointing to this citation." Those warnings are mostly within bulleted (bundled) cites such as:

97) Coleman
126) Page
206) Philip Gibbs.
etc

I believe that is an artifact of the bullets: the Ref Check tool cannot parse the bullets properly and issues those false-positive warnings. Noleander (talk) 18:10, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

BKLChaotic is the uploader's own work, which is why it doesn't have a source. I'll look into the others. Shocksingularity (talk) 00:46, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am unable to find this image in the article now. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:37, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding File:BKLChaotic.gif, I meant a source saying that the black hole behaviour actually resembles this graph. Anyhow, since a spotcheck was asked for, here's one for this version:

5 OK
30 OK
35 OK
77 I know I'll sound ridiculous, but what is the name of Sagittarius A* in these tables?
96 Might need a source that says a black hole actually gains mass during accretion (white dwarfs sometimes lose it). I mean, the reverse would be unphysical but it's not a common knowledge á la conservation of energy
123 OK
126 OK although I wonder if MDPI is a good source here.
140 OK
149 Is this applicable outside of Bonnor–Vaidya spacetime, or is this distinction irrelevant?
158 OK
178 OK
226 OK. Been always wondering if we can actually assume black-bodiness for this radiation (e.g in charged black holes) or not.
232 Where does it say that no such flashes have been observed? Might also want to tag the statement with an "as of 2025"
242 OK
245 I kinda worry this source is one theory among several, and thus not quite strong enough to support the claim.
254 Might want to use a source that explicitly mentions an observed binary black hole.
256 OK
292 OK
298 Need a quote.

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:36, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For BKLChaotic, per the BKL Singularity page it says that the video was created in Mathematica using equation 35 of the article. I am not sure exactly where they found this equation, but I did find a similar equation (2.42) in this paper. I suspect they may be mathematically the same but I am not positive yet because there is a lot of notation and prior steps to dig through. I will look into it further to see if I can find a source that specifically uses the formula given in the WP article. Shocksingularity (talk) 03:03, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

77: Sgr A* (10th row of the table, dimensionless spin parameter is given in column four (J))

126: What is MDPI?

149: Yes. The part of this source that's verifying the claim is actually section 2.1 which discusses the radius of the photon sphere in Reissner-Nordstrom spacetime

232: Interestingly, the final phase of the evaporation of a black hole is potentially observable if a population of black holes exists with masses significantly lighter than those of stellar origin implies that we have not yet observed one (or they would not have used "potentially").

245: What do you mean by "theory" here?

254: Source already mentions that LIGO has observed merging BBHs: Since its first historic detection, LIGO has discovered dozens more gravitational waves generated by merging black holes, a few colliding neutron stars and neutron star/black hole mergers, and even some 'mystery' events... Shocksingularity (talk) 03:24, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MDPI is very uneven. I don't reject them out of hand, but some editors do. A lot of almost fringe but also some reviews on less popular topics. Johnjbarton (talk) 04:39, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Means that there are multiple possible neutron star EoSes and thus multiple theories on the maximum mass of a neutron star; unless we've established the One True NS EoS we can't cherrypick one of them. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:02, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

True, but the TOV limit represents the maximum mass of a neutron star. It is not part of any theory of a specific equation of state, although getting a better idea of a NS EOS would narrow it down. So regardless of what NS EOS is true, the statement still holds. Shocksingularity (talk) 01:51, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I ran the experimental Source Verifier resulting in this Report. The tool has several technological limitations. Supported claims are typical OK but the partial/unsupported ones are really just a list of issues to check.

What do the green-check-done notations mean? Does that mean you've manually verified those entries? RoySmith (talk) 13:40, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes exactly, thanks. I added these marks in manual edits after the Report was created. The Report has a link to version scanned at the top. But if you compare the Report to the current version some entries will be confusing because I made corresponding changes. Johnjbarton (talk) 16:15, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ok @Shocksingularity and I have gone through the Source Verifier Report and checked all of the Not Supported and Partial Support entries as well as some Error cases that had partial information. We made a lot of changes as a result. Most of the changes were just tightening up the verification, but a couple of whoppers and a number of "not-quite-right"s were also fixed. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:05, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy hello. I'm in no place to give a full review, but two things caught my eye.
"The black holes in quiescent galaxies accrete matter more slowly or radiate less efficiently" occurs twice, in back-to-back paragraphs. That seems extraneous.
"In January 2022, astronomers reported the first confirmed detection of an isolated stellar black hole—a black hole with no binary partner—and its mass; The black hole was found via detection of microlensing by the Hubble Space Telescope." Two issues with this one. First, either "The" shouldn't be capitalized, or the punctuation needs to change. Second, does that mean that astronerms confirmed the detection of its mass? Or is there something missing from the sentence? I'd suggest a general rewrite. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 02:05, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Removed one of the duplicated sentences and reworded the sentence about the isolated stellar black hole to this: In January 2022, astronomers reported the first confirmed detection of an isolated stellar black hole and calculation of its mass; an isolated black hole is a black hole with no binary partner. The black hole was found via detection of microlensing by the Hubble Space Telescope. Shocksingularity (talk) 15:30, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps you mean "along with a calculation of its mass"? CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 05:29, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Is "first confirmed detection" what the sources verify? The Sahu claims "first unambiguous detection and mass measurement" but Lam claims they are also found it. We don't actually take sides but it may appear that we support Sahu's POV. (This is why we generally want a secondary source to support "first"). Lam's main point is to dispute the mass measurement. There is actually quite a bit of back and forth about the mass analysis. For example,
Sahu, K. C., Anderson, J., Casertano, S., Bond, H. E., Dominik, M., Calamida, A., ... & Rejkuba, M. (2025). OGLE-2011-BLG-0462: an isolated stellar-mass black hole confirmed using new HST astrometry and updated photometry. The Astrophysical Journal, 983(2), 104.

Here Sahu is asserting they are right and Lam is wrong. Maybe, but a WP:NPOV description shouldn't be based on their papers.

If these sources are about a "first" I think we should put them in the History and include a sentence or two in the Microlensing about how the mass measurement is accomplished. Johnjbarton (talk) 15:19, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
We could also consider making the sentence less specific so that it agrees with both sources? eg "In 2022, astronomers detected an isolated stellar black hole and calculated its mass..." Shocksingularity (talk) 02:13, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): LittleJerry (talk) 20:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You've read that right. The great white shark is ready for the gauntlet. Special thanks to Macrophyseter and Noleander. LittleJerry (talk) 20:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You wait three hours for a species article at FAC, and then...

I noticed this on the European rabbit article as well: the rather pretty {{Fossilrange}} template is absolutely useless when that range is less than about 20 million years – present. This one's not quite as bad, but it's very difficult to see the marker at all at standard screen size, and harder still to register that it is a marker (rather than, say, interpreting the chart to mean that the range goes from Precambrian to Neogene). I don't think that's necessarily this nominator's or this article's problem, but I think it's worth putting out.
- In an interesting coincidence, there's actually a template in the works by User:Chaotic Enby to deal with this sort of problem, but I'm not sure it's ready yet to implement on FACs/FAs. But there's hope! SilverTiger12 (talk) 19:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  The template is coded already at {{Period fossil range}} – I was mostly waiting to see if the consensus favored its original version with the bars stacked on each other, or the sandboxed one with the zoom-in, before we could officially mark it as ready for mainspace. I was thinking whether we should make a "Neogene + Quaternary" bar or even a Cenozoic one, and this seems like a good case for it! We currently have these per period, but many recent taxa extend back to the late Neogene, given how short the Quaternary is compared to every other period. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 19:59, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  Ooh, that's good. Personally, I'm not sure a template needs positive consensus for use in mainspace -- WP:BEBOLD and all that. We might well seek consensus if we were going to replace existing templates en masse, and of course consensus may develop not to use a template in mainspace, but fundamentally adding one is no different in outcome to making an edit (albeit a very large, complicated and code-heavy one) in the page itself -- it's just that most of the changes are physically made on a different page. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:33, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've implemented the feedback I got from other folks, and the template got a very positive reception, so I believe consensus is there! There's a Cenozoic bar, so something like the following could work: Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 14:54, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely looks like an improvement to me. We can carry on refining and improving, of course, but I'd 100% support pushing it to the article for now. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:13, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

the largest living macropredatory shark and fish: what does macropredatory mean? Even for a reader who can parse it as "big" and "eating living things", the meaning isn't obvious (I had to look it up), and even then it's not particularly clear why it's a useful distinction (what's the alternative? Are non-macropredatory animals generally bigger?) It might help to give this space to breathe: something like "it is the third largest living species of fish, and the largest to feed on live prey; the two larger are both filter-feeding sharks"? Might have to move this to somewhere else in the lead to do that.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They are estimated to reach a length close to 6.1 m (20 ft): the last subject was "males": are we now talking about great whites in general?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I missed this, but as MPF says below, the metric figure should be rounded to 1 sf. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:47, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They said 0. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One significant figure: so the rounding to 6 we have now is correct. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 14:27, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They are estimated to reach ... The shark has about 300 ... White sharks: can we pick a lane on singular/plural? Personally I'm not a huge fan of "the shark eats seals" -- it makes it sound like there's just the one of them -- but either's workable as long as it's consistent.

This is typical in books and articles on species. LittleJerry (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On which: is it worth sticking to "great white shark" versus "white sharks"? I know we've said in the first sentence that they're the same thing, but part of me wants to interpret "white sharks" as a category of which "great white shark" is a member. See in particular The great white shark has had a fearsome reputation among the public. It is featured in the 1974 novel Jaws and its 1975 film adaptation, both of which portray it as a ferocious man-eater. In reality, white sharks normally do not prey on humans

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Juvenile white sharks typically inhabit shallower water and cannot eat marine mammals until they reach around 3 m (9.8 ft).: the sharks or the mammals?

I think its obvious. Why would readers think the mammals?

It's grammatically rather than logically ambiguous (admittedly, it's not ridiculous that an animal would have a minimum prey size, but 3m seems rather big) -- more a matter of sub-optimal prose than likely confusion. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:31, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 19:05, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Though an apex predator, the species is sometimes preyed on by orcas: doesn't an apex predator have no natural predators of its own? Or is it a bit more complicated than that?

The literature still considers it an apex predator. LittleJerry (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did some digging and found this article that explicitly discusses the phenomenon, calling them "coexisting apex predators" while also saying that orcas are the sharks' (only) natural predator. I think we're good here for the lead: I haven't seen how it's presented in the body yet. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:45, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

White shark aggregations have attracted tourists who may view them ... in shark cages.: it sounds here like we mean that the sharks are in cages.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

. As of 2025, it is estimated to have declined in numbers by 30–49% over the past 159 years: this is slightly odd phrasing. I would go for "it is estimated to have declined in numbers ... between 1866 and 2025".

Removed.

Major threats have included bycatching by commercial fisheries: I think it's still bycatch when we mean the action/process rather than the fish. Googling "bycatching" gets a load of results using "bycatch" like that, and nothing for the term itself.

Changed

protective drum-lines and gillnets along beaches: what's a drum-line and/or a gillnet?

Linked. LittleJerry (talk) 23:12, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Several governments have enacted protections for the species, including bans on catching and killing.: suggest adding it, although I like the idea of a ban on sharks killing people.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:05, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's the lead: more to follow. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 21:04, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that others have got their (multiple rows of?) teeth into the body below, so I'll hold off to avoid duplication -- could you ping me with the comments from Femke and Noleander are addressed? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:51, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. LittleJerry (talk) 20:24, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I won't put my oar in too deeply until the others have finished, for everyone's sake, but a quick one I notice on re-read:

is also present near the coasts of South America, but appears to be uncommon: this contradicts the map in the infobox, which says it may have been extirpated from there. That latter suggestion is not mentioned in the article text, as far as I can see, and therefore is not cited. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:13, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:27, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

UndercoverClassicist, how about now? LittleJerry (talk) 21:12, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reading Femke's comments below, I can see that most (including several not marked, like "cephalopods" and "project" have been actioned, though I still have concerns here. This is, as she notes, a prominent article that can expect, more than most, a non-expert audience. It's therefore particularly incumbent upon us to make the prose clear to them, and I don't think we're doing that effectively at the moment. A few passages that I found completely impenetrable, or suspect others might:

Most phylogenetic analyses based on molecular data or anatomical features place the white shark as the sister clade to the mako shark clade with the Lamna clade as the sister clade to all others in the family

This section's subject is already highly technical and there is no other way to put this without looking amateurish. I don't get the push to become Simple English Wikipedia. LittleJerry (talk) 21:35, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If you look at the rules at simplewiki (for instance, their use of Basic English), you'll see that the suggestions in this review stop short far from what is required there. I'm sure I'm using more than 850 words, and that the text I'm suggesting is not suitable for children and people with learning disabilities. I'm trying to focus on a typical person without prior knowledge on the topic, who might be on the younger side (say 15), but not a child. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:27, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Teeth from the same geologic layer may exhibit significant variation in serration development and morphology

That's pretty understandable. Its not jargon, but educational language. LittleJerry (talk) 21:39, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree on both points here. Clear writing isn't amateurish in the slightest: after all, any fool can make complicated ideas sound complicated. The tricky thing is making complicated ideas sound straightforward, but that's exactly what the FA criteria require us to do. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:14, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So now we're saying that "anatomical", "morphology" and "significant" are too complicated for average readers? I am perplexed by this. I need more opinions. WP:OVERSIMPLIFY states that: "It is important not to oversimplify material in the effort to make it more understandable". LittleJerry (talk) 22:29, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say 'significant' is an easy enough word, and not ambiguous in this context. Anatomical is more difficult, but perhaps can be derived from context if the context is clear enough. Serration and morphology are likely more challenging. Not sure how to reword this though. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:27, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If I asked an average native English-speaking teenager what "morphology" is in the context of "morphology of the tooth". They would absolutely get it. You're confusing jargon with "official" word. We can't change Nasal mucosa to snot. LittleJerry (talk) 20:23, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Snot is in an informal register, which I agree is unsuitable for Wikipedia. If we simplify register to span from informal, plain, to formal, Wikipedia ideally choses the middle register, which is easy to read but does not feel off or childish. That's not always possible. For instance, in English, there is only an informal and formal word for tummy/abdomen, and we might have to err towards a more formal word. When we have to, we should make the surrounding text easy enough to understand for people to understand. This light jargon might not need an explanation, as many people sort of know what it is, but only as long as the context is clear.

Now, I understood this second example on first read, because climate scientists talk about coastal morphology. I can imagine that people without a scientific background would not know this. My guess is that about 30% of readers know what morphology is. I'm not sure how to simplify serrations (I saw a museum describe it as saw-like edges, which might work, but might be vaguer in some sense), but one step towards simplifying could be "Teeth from the same rock layer can differ significantly in their shape and their serrations". —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:49, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to this, we should help readers understand why we're talking about layers of rock here -- the key point here is that geological layers correspond to (usually very long) time periods. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 21:18, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

so I have to explain geology too? LittleJerry (talk) 23:39, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If anything, the argument for explaining here is even stronger -- it may well be true that the median reader of an article about sharks will have a higher-than-average background knowledge about sharks, but we can't rely on them having knowledge of a different field to understand what we've written. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:19, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I literally changed it from strata to "geologic layer" so it can paint a visual picture. The average reader already associates geology with time. LittleJerry (talk) 12:01, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"My guess is that about 30% of readers know what morphology is" How would you know that? You seem to be assuming that every technical word is unfamiliar to average readers. Technical does not mean its an alien language. They can easily enter the lexicon and I can guarantee that the average person is familiar with the term symbiosis. LittleJerry (talk) 23:38, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's a guess, so I don't know. I asked my partner, who has a PhD in an unrelated field, if he could explain morphology. Without context, he could not, with a bit of context his guess was that it means 'change' (you morph into something else). With the word symbiosis, I think the share of people who know what it means is higher, as it's a more common word that sometimes occurs in pop culture (symbionts in Star Trek for instance). With a simple enough context, that word might not need explaining. Most Wikipedia editors, and I suspect you, are highly educated and have read a lot. As such you might experience the curse of knowledge, where you overestimate the knowledge of others in topics you have expertise. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:20, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On seperate note, I have quite a few copyediting points, particularly for the "Etymology and naming" section; the article could really do with a close read for MoS, grammar and stylistic consistency. I'm happy to give some illustrative examples later but an exhaustive list would be quite long. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 21:24, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Illustrative (but not exhaustive) examples:

In the "Etymology and naming section", we occasionally (Lamia) mark, but usually don't mark, words used as words. This creates ambiguity in phrases like "Australian variant white pointer": only part of that is a name.
described by Carl Linnaeus in his 1758 10th edition of Systema Naturae: only Systema Naturae (which should have lang templates) is a title, but for some reason the edition info has been sucked into the formatting.
Note a consists entirely of a string of lower-case Latin: it needs to be rewritten to be absolutely clear what it is (the translation of Belon's book title), and formatted appropriately. The following sentence of body text is impenetrable to anyone who doesn't speak Latin.
The province of KwaZulu-Natal, via the KwaZulu-Natal Sharks Board (KZN),: KZN is the abbreviation for the province, not the sharks board, and should be placed as such.
Since 1997, the US federal government has prohibited harvesting of the white shark in US waters and any individual that is caught is expected to be released immediately: on first read, I thought that any individual that is caught meant any fisherman caught harvesting sharks.
In 2009, white sharks were also given legal protections from fishing and capturing by the European Commission specifically Regulation No 43/2009: the end of this sentence is not grammatical, and I can't see any easy fix short of a rewrite. The Numero sign is always abbreviated with a dot, but that's not the biggest issue here.
The "Bites" section uses single and double quotes variously (see MOS:SINGLE) and has a few easily spotted grammatical errors (e.g. Fisherman were the most likely to encounter a shark.
an estimated 3–4 m (9.8–13.1 ft) white shark: needs a false precision fix.

In other cases, the prose is grammatical but lacks the fluency and polish needed at FA: see for instance:

Prior to the 1970s, the white shark as a species was known mostly to biologists and fishermen. The release of the 1971 documentary Blue Water, White Death is crediting with bringing the shark to public attention. The white shark's popularity would increase further with the 1974 novel Jaws written by Peter Benchley, and its 1975 film adaptation directed by Steven Spielberg. The novel and film helped create the image of the species as a dangerous man-eater. Benchley would later express regret stating "I cannot rewrite Jaws, nor make an ignoble monster of this magnificent animal

I think this is all very fixable, but it will require some close attention from a capable nit-picker: perhaps better done at PR than here. I would oppose promotion until these issues are fixed, as I think they are incompatible with meeting the criteria. Please ping me or reply if/when you've had a good pass through and are ready for another look. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 22:31, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all points except 3 and 8, since I don't know Latin nor how to fix the false precision. Mox Eden (talk) 03:47, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to make that conversion "by hand", ie without using the template. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:31, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The species is estimated to reach a length close to 6.1 m" — looks like spurious accuracy; change to 6 m, or if 6.1 m is an accurate measurement, remove 'estimated' and specify the source.

20 ft is the important measurement. LittleJerry (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@LittleJerry Check MOS:METRIC. I'd suggest using {{convert|6|m|ft|0}} to avoid spurious accuracy. - MPF (talk) 02:12, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Though an apex predator, the species is sometimes preyed on by orcas" — Clearer wording "Though often considered an apex predator, the species is preyed on by orcas". This seems to happen regularly (see e.g. here), with GWS fleeing an area if Orca are present. That GWS are preyed on, however commonly or rarely, means they are not the apex predator in the ecosystem (the term "apex predator" is heavily over-used in popular writing for a wide range of predators that are not at the apex).

They are considered to be apex predators in the literature. LittleJerry (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Check engvar compliance per the tag at the top of the page; I've already corrected multiple 'gray' and 'behavior', but I may well have missed some others. - MPF (talk) 01:15, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is US English. White sharks aren't found in UK waters. LittleJerry (talk) 01:34, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@LittleJerry They do occur in UK waters, though only rarely; but more significantly, they are important in Australian and South African seas just as much or more than US waters, so MOS:TIES does not apply; therefore, MOS:RETAIN does apply. I just checked the history of the page (back to 2006), and it was using 'behaviour' spelling pretty consistently in the early days of the page. The engvar tag was added by @Mazewaxie in 2020 and reconfirmed in 2024; perhaps they can add their reasons for doing so - MPF (talk) 02:02, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They are famously absent in UK waters, but I can accept Australian English. That's probably what it was made to be. Not Oxford English. LittleJerry (talk) 02:03, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

Alt text shouldn't replicate captions

File:Great_white_shark_size_comparison.svg: what's the source of the data used for this comparison?

File:The_American_Museum_journal_(c1900-(1918))_(17973126708).jpg: is a more specific tag available?

File:Lamna_nasus.jpg: source link is dead. Ditto File:Isurus_oxyrinchus.jpg

File:Carcharodon_carcharias_skeleton.jpg needs a US tag and author date of death

Fixed all. LittleJerry (talk) 21:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I did a Peer Review on this - I'll follow that up with some comments here in FAC.

Images in the article are superlative.

Images: Can an image be placed into the Conservation section? That section is a big wall of text with no pics. MOS:SECTIONLOC says that images are not required to relate to the section they are placed in: "An image should generally be placed in the most relevant article section; if this is not possible, try not to place an image too early, i.e., far ahead of the text discussing what the image illustrates, if this could puzzle the reader. "

Couldn't find a suitable pic. File:Atlantic Shark Institute White Shark Capture.webp probably needs to be deleted as there is no evidence that it is free to use. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Needed word? "The great white shark (Carcharodon carcharias), also known as the white shark, white pointer, or simply great white..." is "great white" so different than "white shark" or "white pointer" to deserve a "simply"?

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Unusual phrasing: "The white shark has had a fearsome reputation among the public..." Not sure exactly what that choice of words is trying to imply ... are those words suggesting that the shark no longer has a fearsome reputation? My gut feeling is that it is still feared thanks to Jaws & Shark Week. Can the word "had" be eliminated?

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Word raises questions: "The white shark is the sole recognized extant species in the genus ...". The word "recognized" suggests that there is some controversy, as if some scientists have tried to add more species into the genus and were rebuffed. If that is not the case, consider removing the word. If it is the case, add some details about the dispute.

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Only 1 of 7 books contains city of publication: Duffy, Clinton A. J.; Francis, Malcolm; Dunn, M. R.; Finucci, Brit; Ford, Richard; Hitchmough, Rod; Rolfe, Jeremy (2018). Conservation Status of New Zealand Chondrichthyans (Chimaeras, Sharks and Rays), 2016 (PDF). Wellington, New Zealand: Department of Conservation. For uniformity, suggest removing the city so it uses same pattern as other books cited.

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Alt text for wrong animal: "A world map shows killer whales are found throughout every ocean, except parts of the Arctic. They are also absent from the Black and Baltic seas."

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Better word? "... being dwarfed only by the whale shark and basking shark...." Sounds a bit sensational and may have misleading connotations. I know those other two fish are a lot bigger, but consider a plainer wording. e.g. ... but it is smaller than both the whale shark and the basking shark

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Word needed? "The white shark is considered to be one of the largest living sharks and fish, ..." Is "considered to be" needed?

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No need for quote marks: ...and the species' genome shows "positive selection in key genes involved in the wound-healing process" ... Unless that author is saying something controversial, that fact should be stated in the encyclopedia's voice. You may need to change a few words or re-arrange to avoid overly-close paraphrasing.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Some cites have a very long list of authors e.g. Huveneers, C.; Apps, K.; Becerril-García, E. E.; Bruce, B.; Butcher, P. A.; Carlisle, A. B.; Chapple, T. K.; Christiansen, H. M.; Cliff, G.; Curtis, T. H.; Daly-Engel, T. S.; Dewar, H.; Dicken, M. L.; Domeier, M. L.; Duffy, C. A. J.; Ford, R.; Francis, M. P.; French, G. C. A.; Galván-Magaña, F.; García-Rodríguez, E.; Gennari, E.; Graham, B.; Hayden, B.; Hoyos-Padilla, E. M.; Hussey, N. E.; Jewell, O. J. D.; Jorgensen, S. J.; Kock, A. A.; Lowe, C. G.; Lyons, K.; Meyer, L.; Oelofse, G.; Oñate-González, E. C.; Oosthuizen, H.; O'Sullivan, J. B.; Ramm, K.; Skomal, G.; Sloan, S.; Smale, M. J.; Sosa-Nishizaki, O.; Sperone, E.; Tamburin, E.; Towner, A. V.; Wcisel, M. A.; Weng, K. C.; Werry, J. M.

Listing all authors is not required in WP cites, and looks ugly, IMHO. Consider providing just one or two authors then have "et al" using this:

 | last1 = Huveneers
 | first1 = C.
 | display-authors=etal

That is adequate for this encyclopedia's needs.

I'm pretty sure we have to cite all of them. LittleJerry (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's your choice ... doesn't impact FA approval or not. But using "et al" is common in WP citations, even in FA articles. Noleander (talk) 14:26, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's common in the footnotes -- but it's usual and probably important to have the full citation somewhere on the page. This article uses only a single list of references, which makes that approach less practical: it would need to have a separate "works cited" or "bibliography". I don't think I've seen an FA which only lists sources as e.g. "Smith et al". UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 14:53, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've been looking for a WP guideline that covers this issue, but I cannot find one. I know that lots of FA articles use "et al" (even for sources cited only once). For example, the Sun article uses "et al" ten times. I've used "et al" a few times in my FA articles, because I'm too lazy to type all the names, and because I think a huge name list looks ugly. It seems like an encyclopedia should not have to follow the same citation rigor as an academic journal (where tenure requires getting named). That said, I'd have no problem complying with a WP guideline that told me that a full name list was required at least once. Noleander (talk) 15:04, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose it becomes less of a drama the more bibliographic information is provided -- if you have e.g. date, journal, volume, pages and a link, there's no real obscurity and no real problem. If you leave off information that readers would need to track down the original source, that is a problem. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:19, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Caption accuracy White shark near two surfers off southern California That is one surfer and one one paddleboarder. Not sure how to re-word it. "Two humans"? "Two people"?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 15:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wording There is some fear that interactions with tourists could affect the sharks' behavior. Is "concern" a better word?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 15:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wording "...of anglers doing such activity and ..." Reads a bit awkwardly. Not sure how to improve it.

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 15:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Quotes within quotes: "Not All Sharks Are "Swimming Noses": Variation in Olfactory Bulb Size in Cartilaginous Fishes". MOS says to use single quotes for a quote within a longer quote (and that overrides the fact that the source's own title had double quotes) ... so: "Not All Sharks Are 'Swimming Noses': Variation in Olfactory Bulb Size in Cartilaginous Fishes".

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 15:34, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Overall: compliance with MOS meets FA criteria (with a few exceptions noted above)

Overall: prose quality meets FA criteria (with a few exceptions noted above). I'm sure other reviewers can spot some additional improvements.

Breadth/depth: I am not a fish expert, so I cannot assess if all appropriate material is included. But from a lay persons viewpoint: the article answers all my questions.

Cites/sources: Formatting and quality meet FA criteria.

Second pass

Wording The overwhelming majority of fossils as a result are teeth. A bit awkward. Consider As a result, the overwhelming majority of fossils are teeth.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Simplify Another white shark from South Africa was tracked and documented swimming to ... can "and documented" be removed?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wording ... and may dive to depths of up to 1,300 m (4,300 ft) but are typically closer to the surface. consider ... are typically found close to the surface but may dive to depths of up to 1,300 m (4,300 ft).

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fact or not? White sharks are said to prefer prey with high fat content, ... Who says they prefer high fat food? Scientists? is that fact in dispute?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Verbose: ... to concede via the most tenacious splashing, which appears to be determined by a cumulative signal strength of vigor and strength The bolded text seems a bit clunky; and is perhaps unneeded?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Scare quotes: ... have implemented "shark control" programs (shark culling) to reduce... Consider ... have implemented shark culling programs to reduce...

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify: A 2018 study of sharks off eastern Australia and New Zealand found that juveniles had a survival rate of over 70%, while adults survived at a rate of over 90%. I'm not sure what "survival rate" means here. Does the juvenile 70% mean that 70% of juveniles typically survive to adulthood? That makes sense. The 90% for adults is confusing: does it mean that 90% of adults survive until ... what? old age?

It doesn't say. It is probably old age. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No need to say it came from a study: A 2024 metastudy concluded that white sharks ... I suppose 99% of the fact in the article come from a study. Unless there is some dispute about the fact, no reason to tell the reader that a metastudy was conducted. Consider moving "metastudy was conducted" into an efn footnote?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Precise or not? ...but can sprint close to 24.1 km/h ... the use of a decimal point: 24.1 vs 24 tells me the scientists measured pretty accurately, so the "close to" is confusing. Does the source support "sprint up to 24.1"?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify Increased observation of young sharks... could be interpreted to mean "more scientists are watching". Consider Increased sightings of young sharks...

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify: There is evidence that the species can change pigments, adding melanin to blotches of white. - Change over multiple generations? Or an individual can change over its lifetime? Within a single day?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Typo? ... Atlantic (which is known to deter white sharks)> and ...

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Its long gill slits do not reach around the head. Is that common? unusual?

No idea. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Clarify: According to shark expert J. E. Randall, the largest white shark reliably measured was a 5.94 m (19.5 ft) specimen reported from Ledge Point, Western Australia in 1987. While unconfirmed, Randall states that the species can likely grow larger than 6 m (20 ft) in length" Does "while unconfirmed" refer to the preceding "5.94 m" or the follwing "6 m"?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see reviewer Femke below wrote: "... the article assumes too much background knowledge. This is a topic a lot of folks will find interesting, not only people with prior knowledge about biology ... [ping me] once you've ... ensure[d] the article meets WP:MTAU ...". As a non-fish person, maybe I can help resolve that (valid) concern by pointing out some parts of the article that may be too technical. List follows:

Lead: consider pinnipeds -> seals

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead: consider ovoviviparity -> delete word & use it as a wikilink for the following "pups hatching from eggs .."

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead: 4.6–4.9 m (15–16 ft) in length and weigh 1,000–1,900 kg (2,200–4,200 lb) while males average 3.4–4.0 m (11–13 ft) and weigh 680–1,000 kg (1,500–2,200 lb). - that is a whole lot of digits in the first paragraph (!) of the lead ... may be off-putting to lay readers. Consider deleting all of it from the lead. The killer whale FA article has no numbers in the lead.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology: aquatilibus duo, cum eiconibus ad vivam ipsorum effigiem quoad ejus fieri potuit, ad amplissimum cardinalem Castilioneum - If the book were significant, it would have a WP article. Consider deleting this book title (or move it into an efn footnote).

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Phylogeny: Body text is much nicer now than yesterday. Consider adding a sentnece or two at the end of the body text which defines "cladogram" and tells readers how the following two diagrams relate to the Taxonomy section body textz.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

And have a Wikilink to cladogram somewhere, e.g. in the clad. diagram titles?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fossil: piscivorous - eliminate and make it a wikilink from the following "fish-eating"

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Convert quote from source to encyclopedias voice (and plainer English): "became confused by Pleistocene climatic oscillations"

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Convert quote from source to encyclopedias voice (and plainer English): "white shark mitogenomes are informative about the species’ deep history but are of very limited use for estimating recent connectivity"

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Populations: A bit technical: This differed significantly from the study's mitochondrial DNA, which suggest older divergences and deep geographic structuring of haplotypes. The observed level of segregation far exceeded that predicted by forward-in-time simulations of sex-specific philopatry from the demographic model, indicating that neither philopatry nor genetic drift alone can explain the mito-nuclear discordance.[20] The autosomal divergences are assumed to have been caused by climate-driven oceanographic changes.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Populations: consider elasmobranchs -> sharks and rays

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Size: Consider caudal fin -> tail fin (and add wikilink)

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Senses: nictitating membranes -> Consider adding parenthetical definition after this e.g.: (a transparent third eyelid)

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Physiology: White sharks are somewhat warm-blooded, or more specifically regionally endothermic.[67] This allows them to be active and hunt in cool waters, and one study found that stomach temperatures ranged from 24.7–26.8 °C (76–80 °F) in waters 12.9–16.1 °C (55–61 °F).[68] Regional endothermy involves a complex blood vessel system known ... Thoughts: (1) First sentence: eliminate "specifically regionally endothermic" and replace with something like "use a system of blood vessels to warm-up portions of their body" (2) Move the bunch of numbers towards the end of the paragraph; (3) introduce and link "regionally endothermic" in 2nd or 3rd sentence.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Distribution ... will congregate in anticyclonic eddies ... Those two wikilinks are not too helpful. I presume this is what the source means: .. will congregate in the middle of high pressure zones ..., correct?

No idea. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Diet: mechanoreceptors - Either define in parenthesis after; or replace with plain English e.g. " a sensory receptor that responds to pressure"

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reproduction: claspers - Either define in parenthesis after; or replace with plain English

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Reproduction: lek mating - Either define in parenthesis after; or replace with plain English

I already describe it. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mortality: ectoparasitic - Wikilink or define.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:48, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is all the improvements I can find. I think if you address some of the items above, that might resolve the "too technical" concerns, but - of course - I cannot speak for other reviewers. It is a great article!! I really enjoyed reading it, and I learned a lot. Notify me when you've considered the above, and I'll support the nomination. Noleander (talk) 22:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Supporting this nomination: the prose, MOS compliance, and cite/source formatting meet FA requirements. I have not done a source review or image review. The article is not overly technical, from my viewpoint as a lay person. This is a level 4 Vital article, with about 950,000 annual views. The article is interesting, aesthetically pleasing, and engaging. A great read! Noleander (talk) 14:50, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Not promosing a full review yet, but my initial comments:

I would avoid mentioning the order in the lead: As a member of the order Lamniformes, it is closely related to the mako sharks, the porbeagle, and the salmon shark.. It's already in the infobox, and it's jargon that some people might not be familiar with. Simply say "It is closely related to"
There's three measurements in the lead. I would leave out either the sex-based one or the extreme one. You can't avoid the conversion to US units in the article, but these conversions do make the article look untidy if there's too many numbers.
Link temperate -> mild jargon
De aquatilibus duo --> use the lang template so screen readers can pronounce correctly.
The white shark is the sole recognized extant species in the genus Carcharodon -> what is extant. Are there unrecognized species? If not, omit recognized.
The Phylogeny section is overly technical. I've reviwed enough animal articles to know about clades, but that remains jargon. Is there a plain english heading possible? What is topology, clocks, autosomal, snp? Are lamnids lamiformes?
White sharks communicate with each other through a complex array of body language. --> with each other is unnecessary
two–to–ten pups --> this should not have an n-dash. Easiest is to use spaces, but you can also do 2–10 pups.
Explain chumming
I don't understand what a recovery score is.

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:01, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all. LittleJerry (talk) 14:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first one is still open, and clade is not explained. The figure uses the term Lamniformes and the text Lamnidae. Are those the same?

The article defines the difference in the first paragraph of the section. LittleJerry (talk) 00:57, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Didnt look at the previous subsection, apologies. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The text around recovery is still unclear. To me, the text says it's both in decline and recovering. Does this mean the overall numbers are going down but in 59% of its range there is a local recovery? Or does it refer to different time periods? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:58, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A more recent 2024 clock using shifted the range between 57.2 and 31.8 mya --> rm using

Removed fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.

Define mya on first mention

Fixed.

Almost 60% of the white shark's genome consists of repeated sequences and is relatively stable --> Quite a long paragraph. Can it be cut in half?

Fixed.

" became confused --> unnecessary space

Fixed.

A 2024 study states that "white shark mitogenomes are informative about the species’ deep history but are of very limited use for estimating recent connectivity". This autosomal (non-sexual nuclear DNA) study concluded that white shark populations can be divided into three major clades, --> My guess was that autosomal meant mitochondrial DNA, but this text implies it's something different. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:41, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.

The white shark has a stocky, torpedo-shaped body with a short, cone-shaped snout; long gill slits that do not reach around the head; a large triangular first dorsal fin, which partly lines up with the pectoral fins, and tiny second dorsal fin; a caudal fin with similarly sized lobes and one keel; and a tiny anal fin. --> Give the reader a bit more breathing room here, by making it multilpe sentences. Something like "The white shark has a stocky, torpedo-shaped body with a short, cone-shaped snout. Its gill slits are long but do not extend around the head. The first dorsal fin is large and triangular, and sits roughly in line with the pectoral fins, while the second dorsal fin is much smaller. The tail fin has two lobes of similar size and a single keel, and the anal fin is tiny."

Fixed.

Isn't countershading a type of camoeflage? Might be nice to highlight for those unfamiliar

I already defined it. LittleJerry (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You say what it is, but not what it's for. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:35, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 17:27, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

explain dermal dentrites. Ologies had the most amazing episode about teeth including these amazing dentrites [35]. Definitely worth a listen, even if you might already be familiar with more of the science than I was

Fixed.

Typically, one wants to avoid 'former' and 'latter' as it makes the reader jump back. You can say something like "Females are generally larger than males, averaging 4.6–4.9 m (15–16 ft) in length compared with 3.4–4.0 m (11–13 ft) for males, and weighing 1,000–1,900 kg (2,200–4,200 lb) versus 680–1,000 kg (1,500–2,200 lb)." That way you also put the two comparisons next to other, avoiding more jumping for readers. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:09, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed.

Labelling the latter as the largest ever would be OR when there's no other reception. Randel's statement is historically important. LittleJerry (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 19:59, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

White sharks display various surface behaviors, .. very long sentence. I'd say something like "White sharks also display several surface behaviours. These include poking their heads above the water, or spyhopping, to observe objects at the surface. Another behaviour, known as “repetitive aerial gaping”, occurs when a spyhopping shark repeatedly opens its mouth while floating belly-up, possibly as a sign of frustration after missing bait"

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can we say seals instead of pinnipeds? I had no idea we were talking about seals there :). In the lead, each word should be understandable on sight (in the body ideally as well of course)

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The arrival of orcas in an area can cause white sharks to flee, as has been documented both off South Africa and California. A 2026 study off Neptune Islands concurred this, but found that orcas alone are unlikely to cause white sharks to leave an area long term --> I don't think 'concurred this' is correct English. We don't have to say this explicitly, a rewording as "However, a 2026 study at the Neptune Islands found that orcas alone are unlikely to drive them away permanently" makes this clear too.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Linked. LittleJerry (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's at the bottom of the explanation pyramid. Please explain.

Due. LittleJerry (talk) 17:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

ampullae of Lorenzini --> relink upon second mention?

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

At Neptune Islands, it was found that white sharks used more energy during encounters with cage divers. --> more energy compared to interactions with tourist? or are these the tourists?

They are the tourists. LittleJerry (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Please clarify the text. Perhaps it's because cage diving is unexplained. I visually cage diving as having both the shark and the human in a cage in captivity. Given you've explained the sentence refers to humans, I now imagine a cage with a human in being lowered into the sea to look at sharks.. Probably also wrong, but it's a difficult step from the previous sentence. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No reader is going to think that the shark is in the cage with the diver. That's ridiculous. LittleJerry (talk) 14:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

the beginning of the subsection literally states that tourists watch them from inside cages. It's explained enough. LittleJerry (talk) 14:56, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hah, I should be more careful reviewing just before bed (must have glazed over the first paragraph, or it didn't click that these shark cages go underwater and the people inside 'dive'). I don't think the image of a shark cage in the article is clear without clicking on it. Perhaps the best way to explain is to simply replacing the fourth gallery image with the lead one in shark cage? That one shows the tourists diving, rather than just hovering on the surface. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

chumming is still unexplained.

I wrote "throwing of chum in the water". LittleJerry (talk) 23:52, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That is a hint to explaining chumming, but I imagine most people would not know what chum is.. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They'll know when looking at the context and "chum" sounds like food. Chum is already linked in the above in the section. LittleJerry (talk) 14:32, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To me, chum does not sound like food. This is not a case of me asking for an explanation because I believe others don't understand it. I did not understand the word before clicking on it. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:26, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 17:46, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That was my first read through. Overall, the article assumes too much background knowledge. This is a topic a lot of folks will find interesting, not only people with prior knowledge about biology. Not ready to support yet, but feel free to ping me once you've done another pass-through to ensure the article meets WP:MTAU (not only my examples), and ideally once the review is a bit further along. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:32, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In January 2023, the Mexican government banned white shark tourism at Guadalupe; due to reports --> semicolon does not seem correct there. What about "In January 2023, the Mexican government banned white shark tourism at Guadalupe. This followed reports of .." —Femke 🐦 (talk) 15:34, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Femke, fixed all. LittleJerry (talk) 23:56, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
There's one more hidden commentabove about the explanation of how the species can be both in recovery and in decline. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:33, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Done. LittleJerry (talk) 22:14, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Femke? LittleJerry (talk) 13:28, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If I'm not crashing out tomorrow, I plan to do my second pass then. Almost surely before end of week. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 22:29, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Second read

Its archived. LittleJerry (talk) 23:27, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Libri de Piscibus Marinis -> use the lang template for accessibility

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 23:27, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I love evolutionary history, and will give comments about that subsection when not close to bedtime. After having read the cited papers there, I finally understand what the section is trying to say. My initial suggestion is to change 'phylogeny' into evolutionary history, as it's good practice to give readers and understandable TOC.

Phylogeny and fossil are both evolutionary history. Phylogeny can't be replaced as a word.

Can the overall heading be evolutionary history, and fossil history a subsection of that? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:30, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 23:27, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Recent genetic evidence --> skip recent per MOS:RECENT

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:27, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The sentence starting with "A 2024 study using nuclear DNA" is quite complicated and has some minor issues with punctuation. What about "A 2024 study using nuclear DNA concluded that white shark populations can be divided into three major clades: North Atlantic (represented by the US East Coast and the Mediterranean), Indo-Pacific (represented by Australia, New Zealand, and South Africa), and North Pacific (represented by California, Baja California, and East Asia). These clades diverged relatively recently, around 100,000–200,000 years ago, in response to lowered sea levels"

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 23:27, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The white shark is considered one of the largest living sharks and fish --> 'is considered'? this is a fact, not a matter of opinion right?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 01:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Like previously in the lead, put the comparisons of length and weight next to each other, to prevent a reader having to switch back.

I have no idea what this means. LittleJerry (talk) 01:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You're now comparing the weight and length in a staggered way (length female, weight female, length male, weight male). Like you implemented for the lead before, instead compared length Vs length and weight Vs weight. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:36, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is how I've done it for other FAs. Length and weight go together when compaing. LittleJerry (talk) 17:28, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As juveniles, they .. This is awkward grammatically, as 'As juveniles' usually signals a subject. Better phrasing would be "In juveniles, they are elongated and pointed, but they become broader and more serrated as the animals mature"

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 01:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

allowing them to project in and out -> maybe simpler wording is possible? Is project jargon?

No project is not jargon, is a verb. LittleJerry (talk) 01:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good to know, that means you can choose a more natural sounding verb like extend without losing precision? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:49, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

olfaction (smell) -> start with the plain English to avoid a tiny moment of confusion

I dont see the need

also appears to play a role in olfactory sensing: olfactory sensing -> smell

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 01:25, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

White sharks range from > the next sentence starts with 'it'. Keep it consistent, either singular or plural.
A 2018 study indicated that white sharks will congregate in anticyclonic eddies in the open ocean > possibly replace 'anticyclonic eddies' with warmer areas? The conclusion of the paper was they seek out these ocean weather systems likely to minimise energy expenditure.

I have no idea if thats the way to phrase it. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

White shark aggregations can also differ in composition of individuals based on age and sex > RM also, not doing much here

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cephalopods > explain by giving an example
That's what links are for. I can't keep giving examples in parentheses because it looks amateurish. This is not Simple English Wikipedia. Readers should expect some scientific language when reading a biology article.
Per MOS:JARGON and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Linking#General_points_on_linking_style, links are not substitutes for explaining terms. You've written an article about perhaps the most famous shark of all. We're going to see children, teenagers, movie fans etc read this, who will have no inkling of what these terms mean. You're right that explaining things in parenthesis is can make text less engaging, but that's far from the only solution. You can sometimes avoid jargon altogether (using summary style to omit unimportant details, or using plain English), you can explain is as a natural part of the sentence, or you can give contextual clues for less heavy jargon (or when you repeat jargon after explaining it elsewhere; readers will forget when there are too many explanations). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:59, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cetaceans > similarly explain with an example

Fine. Done both. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mob the shark : explain?
It's linked and the average reader knows what it means to be mobbed. Mob is part of the lexicon. LittleJerry (talk) 17:45, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sharks over that length> larger sharks. I first read 'over that length' as referring to an area before conclusion that doesn't make sense

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Birth intervals last two or three years > They give birth every two to three years

I have to paraphase. Thats closes to the source. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For the growth rate, do we need the historical study? I'm assuming with modern technology the newer study supersedes the older?

Yes. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These cateceans > these whales or the orcas (keep it simple)

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Their meat was considered tasty but was not considered worth it due to the difficulty of hauling them in -> slightly awkward with the double 'considered'. What about "Their meat was considered tasty, but not worth it, as the sharks were difficult to haul in" or "Their meat was considered tasty, but the difficulty of catching them made it not worth the effort."

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Of all shark species, the white shark is responsible for the largest number of recorded shark bite incidents on humans, with 351 documented unprovoked bite incidents on humans since 1580 as of 2024 -> Among all shark species, the white shark accounts for the greatest number of recorded bite incidents involving humans, with 351 documented unprovoked cases since 1580 as of 2024 (sentence was a bit too long)

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I love your description of the debate around reasons for biting humans
Attempts had been made since 1955 -> have been?

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Bit awkward phrasing: "In the same area, excessive boats drove away many sharks, though the implementation in 2012 of new regulations on the number of licensed boat operators and number of operating days per week allowed for the population to recover" > What about "In the same area, heavy boat traffic drove many sharks away; however, regulations introduced in 2012 limiting the number of licensed operators and operating days allowed the population to recover", or "In the same area, intensive boat activity drove many sharks away, but regulations introduced in 2012—limiting the number of licensed operators and their operating days—enabled the population to recover."

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Another unnecessary WP:ALSO: There is also no strong evidence.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The biggest threat to white shark populations is accidental catching in fishing nets and, in Australia and South Africa, beach protection programs, where they are caught in protective drum-lines and gillnets. -> a slightly awkward sentence: I don't think 'shark populations' are caught in drum-lines and gillnets. I don't know what drum-lines and gillnets are, and as a Dutch person, the term beach protection means erosion control / beach nourishment. What about wording like "The greatest threat to white shark populations is accidental capture in fishing nets, as well as in shark control programs in Australia and South Africa, where drum lines and gillnets are used to protect swimmers.".

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A 2025 study suggested the global population at a minimum of 5,800 individuals, and co-author Gavin Naylor states that the population is likely 20,000. -> A bit awkward 'suggested' without 'that'. What about "A 2025 study estimated a minimum global population of 5,800 individuals,[1] with co-author Gavin Naylor suggesting the true figure may be closer to 20,000."
allows for the use of nets -> allows nets to be used

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

at the state level; some of which -> comma instead of semicolon

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The 2006 Consolidated Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery Management Plan manages Atlantic white sharks, while Pacific Fishery Management Council (under the West Coast HMS Fishery Management Plan) manages the species in the Pacific. -> long sentence, I would use summarty style to omit 'under the west coast HMS fishery management plan
waters up to offshore -> one citation might be enough, two should be enough. Mid-sentence citations can impede readability.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

include; its genetic isolation -> another incorrect semicolon. Can just be omitted.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An EU funded program -> an EU-funded program

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:40, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I was going over the article for a third read in the hope I could put down a support, but I think there's still issues that preclude me from supporting. I agree with UC that some of these issues might be better solved outside of the FAC process, so I'm afraid I'm landing on ~~oppose~~ to avoid a WP:FIXLOOP. The fact that the article is now being copy-edited by GOCE, something that should happen before an article ends up here, is not a great sign. Some of the comments from my first read are not resolved (e.g. clade is still unexplained), the lead still doesn't fully meet WP:EXPLAINLEAD with words like 'cephalopod', there's accessibility issues with WP:NOHIDE, and more instances of inelegant or overly complicated text I didn't spot before, like the quote that the species's genome shows "positive selection in key genes involved in the wound-healing process".

There's a lot to love about the article. Many subsections are now engaging and understandable. But I do think the evolutionary history section in particular is missing information and is difficult to parse.

In broad strokes, I would suggest:

Start with when the shark (teeth) appeared in the fossil record. Start simple. I think most people are interested in evolution, and want to understand at least the basics. Finish with the phylogeny (which also allows you to move the big images at the end of the section)

Thats not chronolofical accruate. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is likely the ancestral, unserrated population had already been regularly targeting marine mammals for millions of years -> Doesn't this contradict the last sentence of the previous paragraph?

No it doesn't. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Can we say "Fossil teeth from this period" instead of "Teeth from the same geologic layer". That clarifies what you're implying with geological layer
on molecular data -> this is genetic information right? Molecular is unclear.

Changed both. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Explicitly explain what serrations are for (eating more tough prey), isntead of implying it.

I've been told that they are for stablizing in dinosaurs, but the sources aren't clear. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised to see a 1996 study explicitly mentioned in the text. Surely we have better estimates now?

We do. I mentioned a 2024 article.

It might be nice to say more about the 2025 study, that is, that it's common to get different estimates in sharks using mitochondrial evidence and nuclear DNA evidence and that it is not clear why. The current text makes me want to know more.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Are you citing supplementary data for the 47.4 mya? I cannot find it easily in the source.

Removed,. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Give an introductory sentence to the paragraph about phylogenetics. Something like "Researchers use different types of DNA–mitochondrial DNA inhereted via the female line, the Y chromosome inhereted via the male line and the remaining nuclear DNA inhereted from both sexes–to study evolutionary classification between species. Does not have to talk about the different DNA types, but I found that interesting to read in the 2025 paper. Do start the paragraph less abruptly.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Almost 60% of the white shark's genome consists of repeated sequences. -> Why is this relevant?

Removed.

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

—Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:59, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Third read, hopefully third time's the charm

Finally thought of ways to make this sentence less awkward: "The white shark is one of the largest living shark and fish species, being smaller than the whale shark and basking shark." If you replace being with 'but' or 'though', the flow improves

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

White sharks inhabit tropical and temperate ocean waters around the world and can be found both along the coast and further out to sea -> Can be slightly more concise by saying "White sharks live in tropical and temperate oceans worldwide, near coasts and in the open sea"

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is also a prolific scavenger of whale carcasses. -> I would shorten this to "They also scavenge whale carcasses." for rythm.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this is correct, and I cannot find it in the two cited sources: "The scientific generic name, Carcharodon, is a portmanteau of two Ancient Greek words." A portmanteau mixes two words, whereas this seems like a standard Compound (linguistics). The sources don't use this linguistic term either, so you'll likely have to omit it to say "combines two Ancient Greek words"

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Does Laso-Jadart et al. (2025) have a philogenetic tree (cited in the right-hand tree)? I thought this was cited solely for the now removed detail around dating before. There was another study I did look at with this tree.

Removed. The cladograms weren't added by me. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

mother inherited -> maternally inherited or mother-inherited (etc). The adverb is more elegant imo

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOHIDE with the molecular clocks. They don't quite fit on the screen with Vector22, so you might need to show an example molecular clock instead of both. Putting one under the other would likely put undue weight on this topic

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

According to shark expert John Ernest Randall, --> This is a 2003 statement. The text now implies contradiction and I'm not sure the sources actually disagree. You could position this in time by adding "by 2003" after his name

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would replace 'state' with 'argued' as it's an educated guess that they can be longer

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Awkward phrasing: "A 2014 study of white shark catch records in the northwest Pacific concluded that the longest reliably measured shark was 6.02 m (19.8 ft) in total length and the heaviest weighed 2,530 kg (5,580 lb)" This could be something like "A 2014 study of catch records in the northwest Pacific found the longest reliably measured shark to be 6.02 m (19.8 ft) and the heaviest 2,530 kg (5,580 lb)"

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The front teeth are adapted for penetrating prey, while those located towards the back of the mouth, being more flattened at the sides and bent backwards, are designed for tearing -> overly wordy. Could it be something like "The front are adapted for penetrating prey, while the rear teeth, flattened at the sides and bent backwards, are designed for tearing?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Spiracles, extra breathing holes behind the eyes common in bottom-dwelling sharks, are reduced or absent in this species -> Do we know more about this since 1991? Do some have them but other don't? Or is it still unknown whether it's reduced or absent?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

... stores lipids, fatty acids, and oils -> Does this need 3 citations? WP:OVERCITATION can impede flow

I think all three are need.. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One study found that stomach temperatures ranged from 24.7–26.8 °C (76–80 °F) in waters 12.9–16.1 °C (55–61 °F) -> Why is this important? Is it a good indicator of sort of average temperature? If so, say so, now it feels a bit disjointed. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 13:14, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why would I need to state it? The researchers have used this as an indication of white shark temperature. I don't see the big deal.

at Guadalupe Island suggests --> suggested to keep tense consistent with previous sentences

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would relink the White shark cafe in each section, as it's a slightly odd phrase. Is it possible to hint upon second mention what this is? My guess was wrong; a fancy word for their diet.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Capitalise green status? It now sounds like green means it's doing well, instead of referring to a system. Perhaps repeat the abbreviation (IUNC Green Status) and explain the difference with the other metric?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

requiring a special permit for both -> Four citations, are they all necessary? The rest of the para is very readable, so not super concerned, but is it a bit much.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In September 2019, California governor Gavin Newsom signed Assembly Bill 2109 into law, banning the luring of white sharks using bait, chum, and decoys in California waters and prohibiting their usage within one nautical mile of any shoreline, pier, or jetty when a shark is present -> Do we need to know all these details like the month, the signer, the name of the bill? A bit more summary style would work better I'd say. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 14:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 00:17, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's all from me. I can definitely see myself scratching that oppose. I hope this will also address some of UC's comments around prose not being ready for FAC. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 14:04, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support now. The article has improved tremendously during the FAC. Thanks for bearing with me over these weeks. If you have another vital animal article, feel free to ping me during the PR stage and I'll do my best to provide feedback. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:21, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Will do. LittleJerry (talk) 17:24, 5 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I want to know too much about great white sharks, so I'll have a look through this. AxonsArachnida (talk) 06:11, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@LittleJerry Alright, that's every comment I can think of. Just ping me when you're done. AxonsArachnida (talk) 02:10, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"between 60 and 43 million years agao (mya)"-> "Ago" is misspelled.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"A 2025 study affirmed the existence of these three clades, but found"-> I don't think the comma is necessary?

I'd need a second opinion. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

")ne study found that stomach temperatures ranged from" -> "One".

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The author names in the synonym list could be linked.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Shark being baited in Guadalupe Island Biosphere Reserve, Mexico" image doesn't have alt text.

It does. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The species/genus name in references 8, 62, 73, 81, 118, 138 aren't italicised.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"These names are thought to refer to its white underside, which is noticeable in dead sharks lying upside down" -> You could just say "These names refer to its white underside, which is noticeable in dead sharks lying upside down"

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The white shark first unambiguously appears in the fossil record in the Pacific basin about 5 mya at the beginning of the Pliocene." I can't see where this is stated in either of your references.

Cite 21: "It gradually evolved from the non-serrated Carcharodon hastalis during the late Miocene, transitioning first into the finely serrated Carcharodon hubbelli approximately 8–7 Ma, then evolved into the coarsely serrated C. carcharias approximately 6–5 Ma" Thus the white shark was there by 5 mya. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Around 8 mya, a Pacific stock of C. hastalis evolved into C. hubbelli. This divergent lineage was characterized by a gradual development of serrations over the next few million years." I don't see where the reference says this. In the abstract it says "The recalibration of the absolute dates suggests that Carcharodon hubbelli sp. nov. is Late Miocene (6–8 Ma) in age". Unless I've missed something, you should include the full range.

Added. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Almost 60% of the white shark's relatively genome consists of repeated sequences. It has remained relatively stable in its evolution.". You could also mention the size of the genome here (4.63 Gbp).

~~Too techincal. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)~~[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 18:10, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"A 2024 study using non-sexual nuclear DNA, concluded that" You don't need to put "non-sexual".

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The datings by the 2024 study coincide with the Penultimate Glaciation" "Penultimate Glaciation" doesn't need to be capitalised.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"There is evidence that the species can change pigments like a chameleon, adding melanin to blotches of white" You should mention that this is on a time scale of months. I also wouldn't compare it to a chameleon.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Sizes of two white sharks sampled during a NOAA fisheries survey" You should link NOAA.

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You should link "John E. McCosker".

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

J. E. Randall is John Ernest Randall (and you can link them too).

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm hesitant same Frontiers is a dodgy journal publisher. LittleJerry (talk) 18:40, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"This classification has the qualifiers "Data Poor" and "Threatened Overseas". It also has the qualifier of "Conservation Dependent".

Added. LittleJerry (talk) 17:43, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 00:13, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"A 2018 study of sharks off eastern Australia and New Zealand found that juveniles had a survival rate of over 70%, while adults survived at a rate of over 90%" I'm a bit unclear on this. Is this a 70/90% chance of surviving one year? 70/90% chance of surviving the duration of the study?

The study doesn't make it clear. LittleJerry (talk) 23:01, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay I think I figured it out. They state that "ϕA" is annual adult survival, so I'm pretty sure that both percentages given are annual survival rather than over the period of the study.

Added. LittleJerry (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Added. LittleJerry (talk) 23:21, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

" Nemesis Lamna" species name is capitalised. AxonsArachnida (talk) 00:58, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the evolutionary tree with cytochrome b, for your date ranges you use hyphens instead of endashes. Ie "65‑46 mya". Is this just meant to be applied different in figures?

Fixed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article already mentions food (seals near shore, fish at the Cafe) or possibly mating (at the Cafe).

Added more. LittleJerry (talk) 17:55, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"White sharks display various surface behaviors. These include spyhopping (poking head out of surface) to observe an object above the water, as well as 'Repetitive Aerial Gaping' where a spyhopping shark repeatedly gapes its mouth while belly-up, possibly as a sign of frustration after missing a bait." This is fine, but I wanted to ask why you chose to describe these two behaviours in particular? The paper you cited has seven other behaviours.

These behaviors are too tedious to mention, like "lateral inspection of object". I also get into breaching below. LittleJerry (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Its massive, fatty liver can reach over a quarter of its body weight and provides buoyancy and stores energy. This sentence reads as a little awkward to me; it sounds a bit run-on-like. Perhaps you could reword it as something like this? {{green|Its massive, fatty liver can reach over a quarter of its body weight, providing buoyancy and storing energy.

Taxonomy and evolution->Fossil history

[edit]

This species had teeth alike to the modern white shark's, except that the cutting edges lacked serrations I don't believe that the word "alike" is used this way grammatically. I would swap for the word "similar" instead. Additionally, "expect for" is typically used rather than "except than". I would recommend this change: This species had teeth similar to the modern white shark's, except for their cutting edges, which lacked serrations
C. hastalis occupied a lower position in the food web compared to modern white sharks, and was probably fish-eating with some addition of marine mammals to its diet. The last part of this sentence is unclear. Did the shark mostly eat fish? What does "some addition" mean: is this in comparison to modern-day white sharks?
Around 8–6 mya, a Pacific stock of C. hastalis evolved into C. hubbelli. What does "stock" mean here? This is the first time you use the word, so I'd either explain the term or put a wikilink.
Teeth from the same strata may exhibit significant variation in serration development and morphology, which may be indicative of persistent interbreeding with C. hastalis for at least some time. Similar problem here: What does "strata" mean?

Taxonomy and evolution->Populations and genetic history

[edit]

Almost 60% of the white shark's 4.63 Gbp genome consists of repeated sequences. Since you only mention Gbp once, I would just write out the full name per MOS:ACRO1STUSE.
It has remained relatively stable in its evolution What is "it" and "its" referring to here? The genome? The repeated sequences? The shark?
A 2020 mitochondrial DNA study concluded that Mediterranean sharks show closer affinity with Australia/New Zealand and North-eastern Pacific sharks than with sharks from South Africa and the north-western Atlantic. A dash is not needed between "North" and Eastern/Western. Change to Northeastern Pacific sharks and Northwestern Atlantic.
...which diverged more recently around 100,000–200,000 in response to lowered sea levels. I'm assuming you mean 100,000-200,000 years ago?
Analysis of Y chromosome (father-inherited) haplotypes likewise found no clear geographic structure, consistent with recent fragmentation. What is a haplotype? Explain or Wikilink.

Appearance and anatomy->lead

[edit]

The white shark has a stocky, torpedo-shaped body with a short, cone-shaped snout. Its long gill slits do not reach around the head. It has a large triangular first dorsal fin, which partly lines up with the pectoral fins, and tiny second dorsal fin. The tail fin has two lobes of similar size and a single keel, and the anal fin is tiny. Wikilink to pectoral fins and caudal keel (yes I know these are links to sections of articles, but this is still useful to the reader).

Appearance and anatomy->size

[edit]

The white shark is considered one of the largest living sharks and fish, but is smaller than the whale shark and basking shark. Females measure on average 4.6–4.9 m (15–16 ft) in length and weigh 1,000–1,900 kg (2,200–4,200 lb) while the latter average 3.4–4.0 m (11–13 ft) in length and weigh 680–1,000 kg (1,500–2,200 lb). Females of what species? And who is "the latter" referring to? Also, does "the latter" refer to just females, or both females and males?

Appearance and anatomy->teeth and jaws

[edit]

Appearance and anatomy->internal physiology

[edit]

White sharks appear to have strong immune systems and can tolerate high amounts of toxic heavy metals in their blood, more so than other vertebrates. The article for toxic heavy metals says that the term is "misleading" and has no clear definition. What does it mean in the context of this article?
In addition, the species has an enlarged, thickened heart and its blood contains more red blood cells and hemoglobin than even most mammals and birds. Why "even" here? Do fish tend to have less red blood cells and hemoglobin than mammals and birds?

Distribution and habitat->lead

[edit]

A 2018 study indicated that white sharks will congregate in anticyclonic eddies in the open ocean. See WP:SEAOFBLUE. Also, possibly explain what these are? Particularly "eddies", because the technically complex article is not going to help a lay reader understand what they are.

I have no idea hown to explain them. LittleJerry (talk) 10:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Increased sightings of young sharks in areas they were not previously common, such as Monterey Bay on the central California coast, suggest climate change may be forcing juveniles towards the poles. Monterey Bay is not a polar region. Why does this indicate that climate change may be forcing juveniles towards the poles?

It says "TOWARDS" the poles, it doesn't say Monterey is a polar region.

Distribution and habitat->migration

[edit]

White sharks go on vast migrations in response to food availability, temperature changes and possibly to mate. "Food availability" and "temperature changes" are part of the list starting with "in response to", but "possibly to mate" is not. ("In response to food availability" and "in response to temperature changes" make grammatical sense, but "in response to possibly to mate" does not.) I'd recommend changing it to something like this: White sharks go on vast migrations in response to food availability and temperature changes, as well as possibly to mate.
In May 2024, a satellite tag was recovered from an Indonesian fisherman which was determined to have come from a subadult female white shark... What does "subadult" mean here? Is this equivalent to juvenile or does it have a more specific meaning?

between juvenile and adult. LittleJerry (talk) 10:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In the northeastern Pacific, white sharks travel between the coastal US and Mexico and the Hawaiian Archipelago; they feed along the coast mostly during fall and winter, and farther out to sea during spring and summer. Grammar is awkward here in terms of what "mostly" is referring to: mostly along the coast or mostly during fall/winter? If the former, I'd reword it as they mostly feed along the coast during fall and winter, and further out to sea during spring and summer.

Behavior and ecology->lead

[edit]

At nighttime, one individual was recorded swimming slowly in one direction along a current with its mouth open should either be "at night" or "during the nighttime"
By contrast, a 2019 study found that sharks around Neptune Islands gathered in non-random aggregations. Wikilink to Neptune Islands here.

Its already linked.

Behavior and ecology->diet and feeding

[edit]

Marine mammals preyed on include seals and cetaceans. They are also recorded to bite sea otters but do not usually consume them. The mammals or the sharks? (I know it's obvious from context, but grammatically it is not)
In 1984, Tricas and McCosker suggested that white sharks bite seals, release them and then wait for them to bleed to death before eating,[108] though this has been refuted. Use the full names of authors here. (I believe this is somewhere in the MOS but I can't seem to find it.)

Fixed all, expect for a few that were commented on. LittleJerry (talk) 10:26, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Might add more later... Shocksingularity (talk) 04:46, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I already left some comments before this was nominated at FAC (here). I won't have the time for a full review, but here some drive-by comments at least:

Footnote "a" misses the first word
Another name used for the white shark around this time was Lamia, first coined by Guillaume Rondelet in his 1554 book – according to the source, the name was not coined by Rondelet, but is actually a figure from Greek mythology (which should be mentioned, and linked). --Jens Lallensack (talk) 06:58, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed both. LittleJerry (talk) 19:29, 27 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

UndercoverClassicist and Femke, I made changes and a copyedit was done. Before I withdraw, are you willing to look one more time? LittleJerry (talk) 01:49, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll try to make some time later this weekend. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:16, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

UndercoverClassicist? LittleJerry (talk) 00:07, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've got a lot of open tasks and not a lot of time at the moment; I can't promise that I'll be able to do another full review of an article this size in the very near future. Having very quickly scanned the changes since 22 March (when I left my last comments), I can see improvement on many of the explanations, but wouldn't expect to overturn my earlier worries on prose quality, especially (where the problem was most pronounced) in the second half of the article. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:38, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a prose-review to give it an extra pair of eyes after the long back and forths and uncertainties above, source reviews aren't really my thing. FunkMonk (talk) 00:25, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. LittleJerry (talk) 00:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The name 'great white shark' likely comes from the white underside exposed on beached sharks" hard to see in a black and white photo, why not use a colour photo[36] if that's the point?

Removed. That image is not a white shark.

Strange, it was uploaded by Macrophyseter, but I see the teeth don't match. Perhaps a better photo can be found. FunkMonk (talk) 00:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why are the common names in italics?

A copyeditors did this in response to UC.

I still wonder why, but I guess it has been accepted by others. FunkMonk (talk) 00:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Footnote a needs a citation. Perhaps even a translation, if it's to be of any use.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"in Pierre Belon's 1553 book" why not name the book in-text as you do with the two others mentioned?

It was requested above. LittleJerry (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Then wording like "in a 1553 book by" would be less jarring. FunkMonk (talk) 00:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 17:58, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why random images in the cladogram? Either all or none. Seems more do exist.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 21:14, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Orca killing a juvenile white shark in the Gulf of California" Link orca in caption.

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"White shark in the Monterey Bay Aquarium in September 2006" Why do we need the month?

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The conservation section looks pretty empty, no interesting images to add?

Not enough of them. LittleJerry (talk) 17:33, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Photos of killed sharks, like this[37], could be relevant. FunkMonk (talk) 00:23, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Too many dead shark photos gets repetitive. LittleJerry (talk) 17:26, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Recent genetic evidence suggests these two sharks belong to separate divergent lineages." recent will mean little in some years, better to not use the word at all. "These two sharks" would be clearer as "these two populations" or such.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:24, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Its lack of serrations made it a less efficient predator of marine mammals, and consumption of them declined as it competed with the modern white shark.[19]" It reads a bit oddly when this is stated prior to the text about the white shark having evolved yet. Might flow better if you state that shark disappeared because of this competition after you mention the white shark descended from it.

Changed some. The text does stated earlier that "Nevertheless, paleontologists have traced the emergence of the white shark and its immediate ancestry to a large extinct shark known as Carcharodon hastalis."

"a tiny second dorsal fin. The tail fin has two lobes of similar size and a single ridge or keel, and the anal fin is tiny" Tiny sounds very informal and does not have a clear meaning, what do the sources say? Relatively small?

"Second dorsal and anal fins minute". LittleJerry (talk) 17:24, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"which are smaller than in other sharks" Again, what is meant by smaller? Relatively?

Done. LittleJerry (talk) 17:24, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"A complete female white shark specimen caught in the Mediterranean" why stress "complete"? It goes without saying if the opposite isn't stated.

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"with the tail fin in its depressed" What does that mean?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"A complete female white shark specimen caught in the Mediterranean and displayed in the Museum of Zoology in Lausanne, Switzerland, measured 5.83 m (19.1 ft) in total body length with the tail fin in its depressed position and is estimated to have weighed" this is already an extremely long, convoluted sentence, do we need to know the museum and where it is?

Changed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"The front are adapted for penetrating prey, while the rear teeth" confusing that you start with "the front" without mentioning teeth, and only mention teeth when you get to the rear teeth. I was unsure if it meant the front part of the teeth, so it would be clearer as "the front teeth are adapted for penetrating prey, while those at the rear" or some such.

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"An open mouth exposes roughly" since you state right after that these are the front most teeth, is that part needed? The teeth are there at the front even when the mouth is closed.

Removed. LittleJerry (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): -- Recon rabbit 19:17, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article describes the European rabbit, by far the most well-known species of rabbit around the world. Domesticated for food, fur, and as a pet, introduced to unsuspecting ecosystems to devastating effects, and endangered in its native Iberia, it's an animal recognizable in many shapes and sizes. I have been working on this for a long time and owe credit for much of the groundwork on this article to Mariomassone and Menah the Great, among others. This article has been through a good article review and I've sought out peer review a few times. Literature about this species is being published all the time, but a lot of that research belongs more in rabbit health or domestic rabbit than it does here. -- Recon rabbit 19:17, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

My pre-FAC comments all seem to be adressed. Really interesting article, well-written and written engagingly. A few additional comments:

Territoriality and aggression play a large part in the development of young and adolescent rabbits and help ensure survival of the population -> not intuitive to me. I see how aggression can be a good strategy for individuals, but why is it good for the species?
- After reading a few recent sources on this subject more in-depth I don't see much about the development of the young - I did add later on that those approaching sexual maturity are kicked out of the warren, and removed this sentence. -RR
Greater maternal investment may result in higher birth weights for bucks. Investment in pet food companies? I assume it means eating more?
- I can't find a way to make this make sense without it being an obvious statement ("when baby rabbits are fed more they grow up bigger?") so I have removed it for now.. -RR
4 more years - four more years
given that the rabbit doesnt occur in the US, consider omitting us-specific unit conversions.
- Why omit them? The rabbit is still known in the US in its domestic form, and non-US units are always placed first. -RR
It is unclear exactly what function a dewlap perform -> 2009 source. Still unclear?
- The purpose is elucidated, though all sources I could find about them are probably describing domestic rabbits, not wild ones. Species accounts and current papers I have access to don't have too many mentions. I responded to MPF about this below. -RR
Are there freely licensed recording of the sounds they make?
Captive-bred European rabbits may be fed on fodder consisting of furze and acorns, which leads to considerable weight gain - a 1910 source? Is that still the diet?
- Updated for 2024 - we don't need to use acorns anymore, now that all your nutrition comes in an alfalfa pellet. -RR
Like other lagomorphs -> like other rabbits and pikas, or explain if you're reusing the term multiple times
- Article no longer refers to lagomorphs in the body (only in the infobox) -RR
Both foxes and badgers dig out kittens from shallow burrows, with the latter predators being too slow to catch adult rabbits -> avoid 'the latter' and be concrete to avoid making the reader skip back to the start of the sentence.
- Reworded with semicolon, though I don't like this sentence very much -RR
I don't understand what honest signalling means and how it helps them escape
have faced subsequent downturns > subsequent is an unnecessary word
Humans likely began hunting rabbits as a food source, but further research is needed to verify this. -> we are 3 decades later. Is this now researched? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 20:52, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lepus_diazi_02_transparent.png: what is the author's date of death? Ditto File:Wild_animals_of_North_America,_intimate_studies_of_big_and_little_creatures_of_the_mammal_kingdom_(Page_511)_(Sylvilagus_palustris).jpg, File:Lepus_cuniculus_-_1700-1880_-_Print_-_Iconographia_Zoologica_-(white_background).jpg, File:Lepus_timidus_-_1700-1880_-_Print_-_Iconographia_Zoologica_-(white_background).jpg, File:O._c._cuniculus_skull_(dorsal).png, File:O._c._algirus_skull_(dorsal).png

I have addressed all of the image issues, but what is referred to by MOS:COLOUR? Should the colours in range maps with legends be made to match Wikipedia:WikiProject Maps/Conventions/Area maps? -- Recon rabbit 14:14, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The range maps should not rely solely on colour to convey meaning - they should be distinguishable either by shade, texture, or labelling. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:47, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to use a different texture to indicate the native range on maps and changed legends accordingly, though there is no legtab template as on Commons so it is not perfect. -- Recon rabbit 16:28, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria, new images have been since added to the article. All should have appropriate licenses, but File:Iberian Lynx cub carrying an Europian rabbit.jpg has a broken link that appears to be unrecoverable right now and File:Rabbit skins.jpg is only usable if the "taken circa 1905" is accurate, as attested to by Alamy and Getty Images. I have created an alternative map image (File:World-Oryctolagus-Pattern-Legend.svg that uses two different patterns for range identification, though I don't particularly like the checkerboard pattern; is there a better alternative? The recently promoted Tiger does not use any such techniques. -- Recon rabbit 17:14, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The alternative for the map would be to use a different technique, such as shading, to allow the ranges to be distinguishable.

File:Chaucer_Conyes.png: per the tag, the image description should identify steps taken to try to identify the author.

File:Rabbit_skins.jpg is missing details on first publication. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:38, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chaucer_Conyes.png: The author of the text is Chaucer, and I have written as much as I can about the identification provided by the source library (unknown scribe).

File:Rabbit_skins.jpg: Replaced with an image (File:Rabbit fence Cobar October 1905.jpg) that has author and publication details from NSW state library. -- Recon rabbit 14:03, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Nikkimaria, are all your concerns resolved now? FrB.TG (talk) 15:57, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:49, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A first batch: more to follow. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:25, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The European rabbit (Oryctolagus cuniculus) or coney is a species of rabbit native to the Iberian Peninsula (Spain, Portugal and Andorra) and southwestern France.: I think it's worth getting into the first sentence, or at very least the first paragraph, that European rabbits live in a much greater area than this -- perhaps something like "native to the Iberian Peninsula ... and subsequently introduced to much of northern Europe, southern Australia, and other regions worldwide"?
- The parentheticals make the first sentence read as rather long as it is, so I separated this out to a second sentence (subsequently...) -RR
It is the only domesticated species of rabbit, and all known breeds of rabbit are its descendants: we need of domestic rabbit or all known domestic breeds -- I appreciate it's repetitious, but the phrasing as written is open to misinterpretation: breed usually means "variety produced by humans via intentional breeding" but doesn't have to.
- I did not know that. Added -RR
Starting from the first century BCE, it has been introduced to at least 800 islands and every continent with the exception of Antarctica,: I can't see from the map or the text that we're counting North America here: most people would count that as a separate continent from South America.
- Despite all my searching I could not find a map that showed all of the locations that the rabbit has been introduced to. I am working from what IUCN produced in 2008 - their later assessments don't even have range maps. The only North American location that I am certain the European rabbit has invaded, based on literature, is Washington State on the San Juan islands. (I have a friend in Boise, Idaho who can confirm a population of feral rabbits there, but so far I haven't seen anyone writing about it. This can happen anywhere there are breeders.) -RR
Rabett itself is derived from the Middle Dutch robbe: can we say what robbe actually means -- just "rabbit", or is it more encompassing?
- Barrett-Hamilton et al., 1910 says "The source appears to be the Walloon form rabett, still in common use at Liege, from Middle Dutch robbe=a "rabet" with the suffix ett(Skeat)." This is in my opinion not very elucidating but I believe it just means "rabbit". -RR
Rabbit is also pronounced as "rabbidge", "rabbert" (North Devon) and "rappit" (Cheshire and Lancashire).: this is cited to a 1910 source: I live in Manchester and grew up in the West Country, and have never heard any of these pronunciations! I think you need to say "as late as the early C20th" or similar.
- Qualified with the age of the source, looking at modern dictionaries only one pronunciation is given (/ˈræbɪt/). -RR
Ælian: always written as Aelian: it's not normally treated as a digraph like in Æthelred the Unready.
Varo and Pliny: Varro. Can we introduce these people?
- Introduced as "Roman scholars" -RR
  - An improvement; I might be tempted to give a date ("Romans" existed from c. 750 BCE to c. 1453, depending on how you count it). Roman etymology is pretty much 100% bunk, but I don't know if this is really the place to point that out. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:38, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't see a non-awkward way to do it because of the positioning of these figures ("the first-century BCE/BC and CE/AD scholars Varro and Pliny"?) -- Recon rabbit 18:28, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"The Roman scholars Varro and Pliny, who wrote in the first centuries BC and AD respectively, [fancifully] connected it to cuneus"? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:35, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ballester and Quinn 2002: source link is dead.
- Fixed with an archive link -RR
Ancient Greek: ὀρυκτός (oryktos, 'burrowing'): don't use the langx template for this, as it adds an unwanted colon: instead, do something like "the Ancient Greek word {{lang|grc|ὀρυκτός}}".
has been hunted and raised as a food source since medieval times.: the Romans ate them too: see here and here. Our article on Cuniculture has quite a bit here, though the sources aren't great. It seems like rabbits may have been hunted since the Paleolithic: at any rate, we give the game away with Starting from the first century BCE, it has been introduced to at least 800 islands and every continent with the exception of Antarctica, -- people introduced them for 600 years or so before thinking to eat one?
- My intention there was "raised as food since medieval times", not describing the time frame of hunting, but it's better worded now (since they were raised in the first century too).
However, the species is listed as endangered by the International Union for Conservation of Nature: the infobox says "Near Threatened", which is two steps above "Endangered".
- Fixed this in the last section but forgot to do it at the top. -RR
it has faced population declines in its native range: decline, I think.
predators that rely intensely on the rabbit as food: just rely -- I don't think you can really "rely" on something if that reliance isn't a big deal.
native names in English or Celtic,: Celtic isn't a language; it's a language family. Suggest "the pre-English Celtic languages of the British Isles" -- but then is this really relevant here, since what's important is the language we're writing in (English), not the geographical origin of that language?
- Since Barrett-Hamilton et al., 1910 does not make the distinction until later (noting two post-Norman names for the rabbit in the Celtic languages Welsh and Irish), would it be appropriate to replace "Celtic" with "Welsh or Irish" in the first sentence? -RR
  - I think the second bit is the bigger problem: why does it matter that there's no native word in Welsh, versus (say) Polish? After all, the rabbit is no more native to Wales or Ireland than it is to Poland. Even then, the Celtic languages of the British Isles include, notably, Scottish Gaelic, Manx and Cornish. I assume the story is the same for them? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 17:54, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - Since the word that we're using throughout the article is the English "rabbit", I think I'll restrict the "native names" introduced to just English. I can add Spanish, French, and Portuguese names (liebre, ) if that makes sense for their "native range". -RR
according to Swedish zoologist Wilhelm Lilljeborg, who created the genus in 1874: according to is odd phrasing here -- sounds like it's debateable, when he was the one who came up with the name, so really ought to know what he is talking about.
the European rabbit's closest relatives are the hispid hare (Caprolagus hispidus), the riverine rabbit (Bunolagus monticularis), and the Amami rabbit (Pentalagus furnessi).: if I've understood the cladogram right, we're doing this in an odd order: Bunolagus is the closest relative, followed in order by Caprolagus and Pentalagus.
- Corrected, with a citation from 2016 (though I could have just as easily used Pereira 2019 if it's preferred). -RR
The range maps in the "subspecies" table miss out at least much of the respective ranges, as indicated by the text in the same cells. This doesn't seem ideal.
- I don't see a good solution for this. The only alternative is to use world maps (as is done in the infobox) and doing that for O. c. algirus would not be particularly useful because of how small the islands of its non-native range are. -RR
  - I think I'd start from the position that any map is meant to help clarify and inform: if there isn't a map which does that (as opposed to misleading the audience), then having no map is preferable. There are a few options: use slightly larger-scale maps (perhaps with small territories, such as islands, circled for visibility); remove the maps altogether and use a bulleted list; or some hybrid approach that makes clearer that the map is only part of the range. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:35, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
    - Following further confusion about what is accepted as "endemic" or "introduced" parts of the range (these maps weren't adapted from IUCN) both maps are removed in favor of simple descriptions of location. -- Recon rabbit 19:43, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
what are likely Neanderthal burial sites: the title of this paper puts "burial" in scare quotes, which is a clue -- it's very controversial whether Neanderthals intentionally buried their dead, as opposed to Neanderthal corpses ending up in places (like hollows in caves) where they are likely to become buried by natural processes.
- I wasn't aware of the controversy. I do not have access to the cited article for this fact, but it may not warrant inclusion since this is a single site and going in depth on Neanderthal funerals may be out of scope. -RR
  - If nothing else, if it's a single site, we can't use the plural sites. I haven't looked at the source itself but removing might be a good move, depending on how confident the "burial site" label actually is. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 07:40, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It was likely first brought to Britain by the Normans after the 1066 conquest of England, as no pre-Norman British allusions to the animal have been found.: this may not be true: at least one Roman rabbit has been found in England (see here and here as well. We might well be able to say that the Romans probably didn't bring many rabbits over, but that's not quite the same thing: there's also a debate here that needs some presentation. We also need to clarify that by allusions we mean literary/artistic mentions, rather than physical remains (of which some certainly exist).
- Qualified (re-evaluated) in the text, please let me know what you think. I didn't find very much about the topic in literature through Springer or Sage. -RR
connynge + erthe ('cony'+'earth'): space here or not? And doesn't coney have an E in it?
- Barrett-Hamilton 1910 uses both spellings of cony, but prefers without an e; for consistency I changed all mentions to coney since it appears at the first sentence. -RR
Originally assigned to the genus Lepus by Carl Linnaeus in 1758, the European rabbit was consigned to its own genus, Oryctolagus, in 1874 by Swedish zoologist Wilhelm Lilljeborg: Are we introducing people by nationality/profession or not? Linnaeus is famous in his field, but not that well known to non-specialist readers.
- Showing my bias here. Introduced properly now. -RR
on nuclear and mitochondrial gene analysis: suggest something like "analysis of nuclear and mitochondrial DNA" to be clear that "nuclear analysis" isn't a thing -- it sounds like something very different to what we mean!

Let's do a bit more:

Subspecies other than O. c. algirus and O. c. cuniculus have been recommended for abandonment: what does this mean? It sounds like someone advocates leaving your pet bunny by the side of the motorway if it's from the wrong subspecies? Not sure I'm keen on the passive, either. Who recommends this?
as they have very little evolutionary history: this can't be what you mean. All rabbits living at the same time have precisely as much evolutionary history as each other (more interesting things may have happened in one case than another, but that's different).
The subspecies O. c. habetensis, conmay have been introduced: error for may?
Who are/were the Phoenicians and when did they live?
- For all of the above: I thought that Ferrand (2008) had more support for this theory on importation of rabbits to Africa, but I am not finding support for it anywhere else. There is one PhD thesis that he cites about it. His statement is hard to corroborate - I have read that the Phoenicians spread rats throughout the Mediterranean on their ships, but I am less certain that "rabbits may have been introduced in North Africa by Phoenicians at the time of the first historical contacts established by navigating the Mediterranean". No other source mentions such a distribution and some place the rabbit's distribution throughout the region much later (Campbell 2014 attributes this lack of records to a confusion between records referring to "hares" which were already widespread and "rabbits"). I did a rewrite of that section that makes fewer assumptions. "Evolutionary history" was intended as "evolutionary scenarios" as in it doesn't make sense for algirus and cuniculus to have this clearly traced pattern of genetic divergence in different regions and the rest of the widespread subspecies having no such diversity. -- Recon rabbit 19:03, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There is no clear scenario for the divergent evolution of other subspecies besides O. c. algirus and O. c. cuniculus, evidenced by a lack of genetic diversity: I still don't understand this. Between them? Within each subspecies? Come to think of it, the first half is pretty unclear as well. Do we mean something like "it is considered unlikely that other subspecies besides ... have ever evolved, since... [some clearer explanation of how genetic diversity shows this]"?
Genetic studies undertaken in 2008, however, indicated only two extant subspecies, O. c. cuniculus and O. c. algirus, native to the Iberian Peninsula and parts of northern Africa, where most of the European rabbit's evolutionary history is centred; as of 2022, only these two subspecies are recognized: it feels like the weighting is wrong here. We started with six subspecies presented in a nice authoritative list, and then we've gone back and said "actually, we lied -- only the first two of these are real". I think it would be clearer to start with the two, and then saying that biologists previously identified six, but now think that there's no way that extra subspecies evolved from the two (for the genetic-diversity reasons mentioned above), so have decided that the rabbits they previously called brachyotus, cnossius, and habetensis are really just cuniculus, and the ones they previously called huxleyi are the same as algirius.
It looks pretty good, at least to my non-expert eyes. I'd have a few minor quibbles about various things, but it's probably best to handle those once it's pushed here to avoid making this review even more confusing and complicated by splitting it into two places. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:01, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've made the switch for the live article . -- Recon rabbit 12:37, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Do we need to do anything with the names kreyenbergi, vermicula and vernicularis here?
- I'm working on a rewrite of the above 3 points in a sandbox - this whole paragraph needs to be redone. kreyenbergi has its deal spelled out here, and in 1912 vermicula and vernicularis were described as nomina nuda. This should probably be the case for algirus honestly given how sparse it is but we have to deal with what the texts say. -RR
Introduced to the Azores, Madeira, and Canary Islands, the Balearic Islands, Corsica, Sardinia, and Sicily.: this is a compound list thanks to the and after Madeira, so we need a semicolon for every comma after Canary Islands.
The oldest known fossils of the currently living European rabbit species, Oryctolagus cuniculus, appeared in the Middle Pleistocene age in southern Spain: slight nit-pick: better to say that they date from then (we care about when the rabbit lived, not when the corpse became a fossil). Better nit-pick: can we put a date on the Middle Pleistocene?
- I wrote it out later for some reason. 0.6 Mya. Redone. -RR
I would spell out MYA on first use.
- Done (with the Ma template also). -RR
The first fossils assignable to the genus Oryctolagus appeared during the Miocene epoch: as above.
Glacial activity would confine European rabbit populations to the Iberian Peninsula and southern France by the Early Holocene epoch: ditto. I think this needs a bit more explanation (e.g. that and when glaciers spread over most of what is now northern and central Europe).
- I had trouble here... I was able to find information on widespread permafrost, but not what the specific glaciation event was. -RR
Adult European rabbits measure on average 40 centimetres (16 inches) in length, and typically weigh 1.2–2.0 kilograms (2.6–4.4 pounds).: it's a bit odd that we've got a single length figure but a large range of weights -- do we have 40cm long rabbits weighing 1.2kg and weighing 2kg?
- I updated that with 2016 numbers (in a 2026 work). Larger(?) ranges. -RR
Size and weight vary according to food and habitat quality, with rabbits living on light soil with nothing but grass to feed on being noticeably smaller than specimens living on highly cultivated farmlands with plenty of roots and clover: more readable and flows better as Size and weight vary according to food and habitat quality. Rabbits living on light soil with nothing but grass to feed on are noticeably smaller than specimens living on highly cultivated farmlands with plenty of roots and clover.
- I think I corrected this from another reviewer's comments as you were writing this! -RR
One large specimen, caught in February 1890 in Lichfield: I would clarify that Lichfield is in England.
The skull of the European rabbit displays a significant facial tilt of roughly 45° forward relative to the base of the skull at rest, which supports their means: agreement is off here.
their growth and use is correlated to that of the rest of the rabbit's body,: correlated with. The use of the rabbit's hind legs is correlated with the use of the rest of its body?
- I couldn't find explanation on this in the original source or elsewhere, this is removed and the paragraph expanded with a different, more recent source. -RR
The degree of territorial behaviour varies with habitat; for example, rabbits found in chalk grassland are more territorial than those found in regions with abundant shrubs: has anyone suggested why?
- This altered behaviour isn't mentioned often and the cited source doesn't provide a reason why it happens - might be best to exclude this for now. -RR
it typically only moves 25 m (82 ft): assuming the 25m is the original figure, I would round to 80: I don't think the source mean 25 as opposed to 24 or 26.
- Rounded with sig figs. -RR
Dominance hierarchies exist in parallel for both bucks and does: we haven't yet explained what these are: we previously said "males" and "females". I would be tempted to stick with that, but we should at least bracket on first mention.
- I added clarifications at the start of the section ("males, referred to as bucks...") and also added etymology to the relevant section before (copied from Rabbit). -RR
Introduced populations in the Southern Hemisphere experience breeding seasons during the other half of the calendar year: this is exactly the reason we have MOS:SEASON: we've previously said that the breeding season runs from autumn to spring. In the Northern Hemisphere, that's roughly September to May, but in the southern hemisphere, it's roughly March to October. What we currently have is ambiguous: do we mean that it's the other half of the months, or the opposite seasons? A rework is needed, I think.
Well, "from spring to autumn" would be the obvious misreading. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:55, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Right. I also meant "wasn't mentioned" above. I believe all of the above points have been answered now (is "During the Last Glacial Maximum," appropriate for one of the un-replied notes?). -- Recon rabbit 17:13, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
With a date, I assume? Would sound good to me in that case. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 16:12, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I've tried to give dates based on "by the start of the Early Holocene" but the texts have been reticent on providing concrete time periods for when the glaciers started and stopped affecting the rabbit populations. -RR

their mouths lack the bare-earth characteristic of burrow entrances: no hyphen here.
I notice that the "Communication" section has recently been orange-tagged. Can you think of what information might be missing here, bearing WP:DUEWEIGHT in mind?
- Mariomassone added that tag with a note about 'body language' not being covered in depth, which is a fair thing to note if it is present in literature. Right now there is only one sentence on non-verbal communication, but you can find all kinds of websites that say things like "what is my rabbit feeling based on its ears position?" I'll look into it. -RR
Grasslands in Doñana National Park,: I would give the country here.
It may live up to the treeline: it's not massively clear what this means: we're talking about altitude, I think?
- I removed this sentence - the intended meaning is "it will inhabit the entire grassland up to the point where it becomes forest", but it does not seem like a particularly helpful sentence and I don't have Harris and Yalden to refer back to (one of the few works that is heavily cited here I don't have access to). -RR
as long as the land is well-drained and shelter is available.: no hyphen.
Warrens tend to be larger and have more interconnected tunnels: to have.
The European rabbit's grazing habits tend to promote their ideal open habitat: singular/plural mismatch here.
- Changed to 'its'. Also made some changes in the Diet section. -RR

favouring the young, succulent leaves and shoots of the most nutritious species: might be tempted to cut succulent: it's not really our job to give tasting notes on grass, and this would avoid the misreading that we're talking about the leaves of succulent plants.
- That is... a weird descriptor that I left in. Reworded. -RR
In the region posterior to the colon in the hindgut, soft pellets (caecotropes) filled with protein-rich bacteria are formed: this could be clearer: perhaps "after passing it through the colon, the rabbit's digestive system forms it into soft pellets..."
- Passive voice is too much of a habit. Keeping "In the region..." but connected it differently. -RR
Brown rats can be a serious threat to kittens,: I would say "to rabbit kittens", as we've been talking about quite a few different species here.
- Clarified as "young rabbits" and added a more recent source on this. Surprisingly there are not many published works on rats attacking rabbits. -RR
During escape, the tail display may serve two functions: One, as an honest signal, it indicates to a predator that the rabbit would be costly to catch; two, it may help to confuse the predator: MOS:COLON has recently been updated to advise not using a capital letter after one, and I'm not convinced that we'd use one here even under the old system.
A study in Spain suggests it may avoid areas where the recent scat of predators which have eaten rabbit is detected: it's not a medical article, but there's some good sense in WP:MEDRS on things like this -- many studies don't replicate or otherwise turn out to have problems, so it's often unwise to put too much weight on them until they get picked up in review articles, books and so on. How confident are we that this one makes WP:DUEWEIGHT?
- I'm commenting this out; I wasn't able to find any reviews citing it. -RR
I don't really understand the bit about RHD. It sounds like the first bit we're talking about, which kills animals within 30 days, is the rarer but stronger strain?
- This had to be updated quite a bit, so it should be more straightforward now.
a common ancestor that obtained this trait roughly 8 million years : there's an external link on the 8, which doesn't seem to fit Wikipedia:External links: External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article.
- This is formed by Template:Ma, it also appears in the Fossils section earlier. I removed it for now. -RR
Are gene names italicised? We vary.
- I think the intention was for the CCRs to refer to the protein the gene encodes, but that doesn't make a lot of sense with the word "gene" right there. -RR
The gene IGKC1, responsible for the principal immunoglobulin light chain, shows high amino acid divergence between domesticated types and ferals derived from them. This divergence can be as high as 40%, and indicates high genetic diversity of populations surviving over evolutionary time scales.: is this bit really about diseases, parasites, or immunity? I'm not seeing it.
- It's more about evolution; I've moved it to earlier in the article. I don't remember the chain of events that resulted in this paragraph getting placed here, it was fairly early on. -- Recon rabbit 15:42, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These lines originated between 12,000 and 6.5 million years ago: this seems like a very wide range! Didn't we say earlier that The first fossils belonging to the genus Oryctolagus were found in Granada and date to 6 Mya? That doesn't seem to gel with a 6.5 mya date.
- This addition must have been from a very brief skim... The lines are described as emerging 2 million years ago, and more recent and useful information is described in the Fossil record section. -RR
Humans began hunting rabbits, hares and pikas in the Paleolithic period: when was that?
- Apparently, it's vaguely around 300,000 years ago, but I added a figure that's somewhere around the LGM. -RR
Rabbits were used for more than just their meat by early humans; archaeological studies have found that their bones were used in needles and tubular ornaments: I'm surprised not to see fur mentioned here.
- It isn't mentioned often. I added a source, but it seems to be speculation (presumably because the fur, unlike the bones, decays). -RR
This phrase closely resembles related modern Hebrew: I (אי) meaning island and shafan (שפן) meaning hyrax, plural shfaním (שפנים).: I'm not sure why this is relevant or important, if I'm honest.
Humans' relationship with the European rabbit was first recorded by the Phoenicians prior to 1000 BCE: I think we need something to say this is the first known trace, rather than definitively the first that existed.
which evolved in all the Iberian languages - into Castilian España: endash, not hyphen.
One theory states that the Romans converted the phrase i-Shaphan-ím,: I'm inherently very sceptical of "one theory states..." I'm even more suspicious as this all seems to be cited directly to the proponent of that theory (WP:DUEWEIGHT?). Brill's Etymological Dictionary of Latin doesn't seem to have proper nouns, but looking at the sources cited on Wiktionary, it seems the Phoenecian theory is a Roman one (and Roman ideas about etymology are pretty much 100% bunk), of which modern scholars are pretty sceptical.
On the same note -- what is Zoo Torah and what makes it a WP:HQRS?
I don't see Different views have been voiced on the precise meaning of shafan, but the balance of opinion appears to indicate that the hyrax is indeed the intended meaning in the cited source.
The Roman poet Catullus described the rabbit with the name cuniculus: we make it sound like this is Catullus's coinage, but I don't see any reason to believe this. It's found in Varro, as we noted above, who is Catullus's rough contemporary and hardly his most obvious acolyte.
This was a latinization of the Western Iberian word κόνικλος: capitalise Latinization. If the word is Iberian, why spell it in Greek letters?
They commonly called it "small hare" and "small digging hare", in contrast to the European hare, which is larger and does not make burrows.: what's the actual evidence here -- I've never seen either of these? It's cited to an 1861 source, which is an odd choice -- I assume there's some digital footprint for it? C19th scholars generally knew their philology but I'd like to see some receipts here.
One Portuguese folk tale concerns a spellbound prince that has been transformed into a rabbit; by the spell being broken, he is married to the princess of Naples.: this is cited to a collection of folk tales: WP:DUEWEIGHT and MOS:POPCULT would have some issues here.
Rabbits and their warrens were depicted in English manuscripts dating from the 13th century, and young "coneys" are depicted in the 14th-century poem Parlement of Foules by Geoffrey Chaucer. Even before the Middle Ages, the rabbit was recognized as a symbol of sexuality, spiritual purity, and cowardice, as written by Augustine of Hippo in North Africa between 397 and 400 CE: this is all cited to a blog. I don't see that any of it is objectionable, but we can surely do better.
Quite a few of the mentions in "in culture" are little more than "rabbits are mentioned in X", which breaks MOS:POPCULT.
Is Rabbits – The Animal Answer Guide (The Animal Answer Guides: Q&A for the Curious Naturalist really the best source for the religious symbolism of rabbits as regards classical reception in the Middle Ages?

I'll stop here for a bit -- I am starting to get a little worried by how frequently I'm running into issues, many of which seem like things I would expect to have seen addressed before an FAC run (low-quality sourcing and trivial pop culture references most prominently). There's still another couple of thousand words to go and it'll be very difficult work at this pace. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 20:31, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The section on culture was added very recently, as Mariomassone pointed out that the European rabbit has significant impact on the culture of humans and that wasn't really addressed before. Thus it had no prior review. I have struggled with finding reliable, useful sources on the rabbit as it appears in culture. Linguistic record is a section where I have the weakest background. I only really see the connection from the rabbit to the origin of Hispania as an especially useful thing to include, but the sources are not definitive in any way. They are questioning at best and point to Catullus inventing or borrowing a word from contemporaries and deriving the Phonecian etymology backwards. Did I fall into a trap assuming that because these were rather old cultural references that they wouldn't fall into WP:POPCULT? If it improves the article, both of these sections can be taken out as putting undue weight on uncertain information. -- Recon rabbit 15:09, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't take the sections out -- I think we do need something on the cultural importance of rabbits in Europe to satisfy comprehensiveness -- but some of the specific information needs reworking and perhaps trimming. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:34, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

If the 19th-century analysis of the linguistic record isn't useful, the reader is better served by looking at the Etymology section rather than the Linguistic record. I believe I found a better source for some items in P.M. Rogers et al but have removed most that appeared in one book (namely the paragraph about the Rabbit Test and cherry-picked mentions in manuscripts, folktales, and Shakespeare that are impossible to make comprehensive without an ever-expanding list). -- Recon rabbit 18:18, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"I would expect to have seen addressed before an FAC run" This article was already listed for PR and barely got any responses. This is the problem haven't been talking out. LittleJerry (talk) 17:44, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@LittleJerry, the pop-culture issues that are coming up now were added after the FAC had been going on for a week or so, so there wasn't much chance to get a review. I attribute the quality of that section to my haste in trying to put something together to close a gap. -- Recon rabbit 21:02, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

During the 1950s, the intentional introduction of a virus that causes myxomatosis provided some relief in Australia. I don't see why myxoma virus shouldn't be mentioned here.
Myxomatosis can also infect pet rabbits (the same species) is it necessary to mention 'same species' as its mentioned further up that the domestic rabbit is the domesticated form of the European rabbit?
strain of a second deadly rabbit virus, rabbit haemorrhagic disease (RHD)

RHD is a disease not a virus.

Lead

You don't need to wikilink Spain, Portugal, or France.

Subspecies

You don't need to wikilink Australia, New Zealand, Chile, or Africa.
You don't need to wikilink Portugal or Spain.

Description

"The skeleton and musculature of the European rabbit, like other leporids (rabbits and hares), are suited to survival..."

Reproduction and development

Recommend de-wikilinking the seasons, as those are exceedingly common words.
Are baby rabbits called "kits" or "kittens"?

Diet

"...creating a gradient of low vegetation and nutritional content closer to the burrow (where grazing is most intense) to high vegetation and available nutrition further away (where the rabbit is more exposed to predators and uses more energy to escape)" --> Recommend removing the parentheses and offsetting those phrases with commas instead.
"...for about 2 to 8 days"
"Like other lagomorphs..." What are lagomorphs?

Diseases, parasites and immunity

"...on the 11th or 12th day of infection"

Origins

I'm not sure the "Southern" in "Southern France" needs to be capitalized.
Photo caption: "Two rabbits on the steps of the Finnish National Opera in Helsinki"
- Done all of the above -RR

Linguistic record

"Hyraxes, like rabbits, are not rodents." --> This does not seem to be a relevant detail and could probably be deleted.
De-wikilink Greece and Italy.
"...because the species wasn't native to Greece and Italy (though it is present there nowadays)." --> Like above, recommend removing the parentheses and offsetting with a comma instead.

Domestication

"The European rabbit has been refined into a wide variety of breeds[1] during and since the emergence of animal fancy in the 19th century." --> Citations should occur only after punctuation marks or at the end of sentences, so that first citation (currently source no. 97) should move to the end of the sentence.

As an introduced species

"The first known mention of the rabbit as an invasive species (and possibly the first documented instance of an invasive species ever) was made in regard..." --> Recommend offsetting the phrase in parentheses with either commas or en-dashes.
De-wikilink Australia and New Zealand, and Ireland.
"...from the 11th through 13th centuries"
Again, de-wikilink New Zealand.
"Myxomatosis can also infect pet rabbits ~~(the same species)~~." --> That last element is unnecessary.
"RHD was also introduced—illegally—in New Zealand with less success due to improper timing." --> I would remove the dashes.
Dewikilink Chile and Ukraine.
"the early 20th century by Austrian nobleman Graf Malokhovsky," --> Recommend slightly rephrasing "the early 20th century by the Austrian nobleman, Graf Malokhovsky,"
Dewikilink Switzerland.
"...in 1894 or 1895"

User:Reconrabbit: Let me know when you've had a chance to examine my comments! Bgsu98 (Talk) 12:30, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98 ▪︎3 should be "...from the 11th to the 13th centuries" ("11th through 13th" is incomplete as it necessitates a later end time, except in American, which this page is not) - MPF (talk) 15:34, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, looking at it, "from the 11th–13th centuries" is perfectly OK as it is - MPF (talk) 16:58, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Bgsu98 I've looked at all of your comments and have made all of these changes. I would have liked to find a better solution to the mid-sentence footnote under Domestication as that source does not provide a timeline of the breeds' introduction, as does the reference that follows and was originally at the end of that sentence. -- Recon rabbit 14:33, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A full check-through for engvar consistent with the tag at the top of the page is needed. I spotted, and corrected, a few engvar errors, but could easily have missed some.
Images: Both the taxobox image, and the nominate subspecies in the subspecies section, show feral animals outside of the species' native range. These should be replaced with photos of native individuals if at all possible. - MPF (talk) 02:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry to be difficult, but I don't think this is a major consideration. MOS:IMAGEREL tells us to pick the image that most looks like the thing we're describing; MOS:IMAGEQUALITY to Use the best quality images available. Yes, if there are images of equal quality of rabbits in their native range, we might think about swapping them, but switching for an image of lower quality for that reason would be a mistake. I note that the infobox image in particular is a particularly good one, aesthetically and as an illustration. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 15:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think it's reasonable to have an image representative of the nominate subspecies in its native range, which I added in the subspecies table. There are many available on iNaturalist. I agree that the infobox image should remain. -- Recon rabbit 16:36, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@UndercoverClassicist @Reconrabbit thanks; but I'd disagree on the taxobox image, precisely because of the introductory sentence, "Due to their history of domestication, selective breeding, and introduction to non-native habitats, wild and domesticated European rabbits across the world can vary widely in size, shape, and colour" - a specimen from an introduced population is not fully representative of the species. It's like you wouldn't use a photo of a dog in the taxobox of wolf; even though it is the same species, it is not reliably representative of the natural wild form - MPF (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The infobox photo can replace the current image that provides heading for the section "In Australia and New Zealand". What do you think of this image of (probably) O. c. cuniculus in northeastern Spain? https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/49453023 -- Recon rabbit 17:26, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Reconrabbit thanks! Yes, that's a good idea on using the current box photo for the Au & NZ section. That one at iNat is a nicely focussed pic, but it is very small; I'd think there might be better? I'll take a look myself later - MPF (talk) 17:44, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Some more options: https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/235971415, https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/279456872, https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/271957949, https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/94969762 (kinda grainy). -- Recon rabbit 18:27, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
First one is the best; 3rd is OK but not really taxobox standard; 2nd and 4th are both very grainy, barely even worth uploading at Commons - MPF (talk) 21:11, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Dewlaps section needs some clarification / expansion; personally, I've never seen dewlaps on a wild rabbit, but they are large and obvious on domesticated rabbits. Are they present, but small and inconspicuous, on wild rabbits, or actually absent? In many birds, secondary sex characteristics (like bill knobs) are either absent, or very small, in wild populations, but highly exaggerated in domesticated breeds (compare e.g. wild Swan Goose with the domesticated variant). I'm guessing the same might apply with rabbits, but don't know - MPF (talk) 11:31, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I am finding trouble getting a hold of any literature that describes the dewlap in wild rabbits. Either it is not mentioned at all (species accounts by

Schai-Braun & Hackländer 2016, Delibes-Mateos et al 2018, Delibes-Mateos et al 2023) or describe it as "large and pendulous, more prominent in the female" (veterinary manuals and accounts obviously describing domesticated breeds). -- Recon rabbit 14:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I wonder if this whole Dewlaps subsection might be better moved to the Domestication section, then? - MPF (talk) 16:23, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it's really appropriate there. It is a component of their physiology. Maybe it could be moved entirely to domestic rabbit? -- Recon rabbit 20:49, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! That's probably a good idea at least until anyone can find some info on its absence / presence in wild populations - MPF (talk) 23:04, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

One more thing that's been niggling at me: under the Taxonomy section, we have "Populations considered native to North Africa, ..., were likely introduced by Phoenicians navigating the Mediterranean Sea; they are considered to be O. c. cuniculus ...., BUT the accepted southwestern Iberian subspecies is O. c. algirus Loche, 1858. If this isn't named after (and thus originally described from) Algeria, I'll be very surprised. If I'm right, we are either dealing with a widespread misapplication of Loche's name, or else the contention that North African rabbits are introduced from the nominate subspecies is wrong. It'll necessitate digging out Loche's protologue, which may not be easy to find. And even then, anything we say would strongly risk contravening WP:NOR . . . MPF (talk) 23:14, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ha! Yes, I'm right: Lapin d'Algérie Cuniculus algirus. Nothing to do with southwestern Iberia. Big can of worms to be opened! - MPF (talk) 00:09, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Frustratingly this article that discusses both subspecies tosses out "algirus is endemic to northern Africa" without explaining how that's possible. I could use this article along with the 2016 account to support a statement like "the endemic populations found in northern Morocco and Algeria pertain to algirus, while introduced populations in northern Africa previously considered as the subspecies O. c. habetensis are synonymous with cuniculus"? -- Recon rabbit 00:24, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The original account of Cuniculus algirus to which Loche's authority is given is fairly unhelpful: https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/41949401#page/43/mode/1up. It at least establishes that the Iberian rabbit (then the Algerian rabbit) lived in Algeria and was discovered by Victor Loche if nothing else. Schai-Braun & Hackländer write in 2016 that O. c. algirus is restricted to SW Iberian Peninsula, N Morocco, and N Algeria. The discrepancy in the described distribution probably comes from Fontanesi, Utzeri and Ribani 2021, which doesn't include Africa at all when describing subspecies and their invasion out of Iberia. I have added to the subspecies table the locations where huxleyi is found too. Just have to reconcile the above paragraph since I have not found a work that describes how habetensis is part of cuniculus but algirus is allowed to stay (or when its common name changed). -- Recon rabbit 00:13, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Good sleuthing! I'm not even convinced that Loche's name is validly published; there's no diagnosis or description to support his new name. All there is, is a citation of Lereboullet in Gervais's Histoire naturelle des mammifères, and all that has (here) is Le Lapin de l'Algérie a été décrit par M. Lereboullet comme avant aussi des caractères particuliers. ("The Rabbit of Algeria which is described by Mr. Lereboullet also has some particular characters."). Hardly saying how it can be distinguished! I'd like to hope that Loche deposited a type specimen in a museum which has subsequently been DNA-tested and found to match SW Iberian samples, but I won't hold my breath! Unfortunately doing any real work on all this would be original research not suited to wikipedia . . . - MPF (talk) 01:31, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I have made some changes based on UC's analysis. No comment on the subspecies name (besides that nearly everyone accepts it as "Iberian rabbit" now). -- Recon rabbit 19:45, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I emailed the author of a recent paper and actually heard back!!! They pointed me to this article: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12549-024-00605-6 -- Recon rabbit 10:30, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Nevermind, the email I got back was AI-generated. They actually cited a completely different article that supports a conclusion I hoped was true but apparently the article does not exist. -- Recon rabbit 16:31, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

"wild and domesticated European rabbits across the world" → "wild and domesticated European rabbits worldwide"
- A suggestion.
  - I changed it to "around the world" rather than "across", which I prefer here instead of "worldwide" -RR
"every continent with the exception of Antarctica" → "every continent except Antarctica"

MSincccc (talk) 17:40, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Naming and etymology

"old French" → "Old French"
"celtiberian" → "Celtiberian"
- I don't see this in lowercase anywhere -RR
Connil comes from the
- If you don't have any issues with a double space, it is fine. Else I just wanted to point out that there's a double space after "comes".
  - I don't mind fixing it -RR

Evolution

The following cladogram encompassing the known genera of rabbits and hares is based on work done by Matthee and colleagues in 2004 and clarifications from Abrantes and colleagues in 2011
- You could introduce "Mathee" and "Abrantes" on first mention.
  - I struggle to figure out how to do so... but tried rewording it anyway. -RR
Iberian Peninsula could be linked on first mention in the body (rather than on the second mention).
"Molecular studies confirm that the resemblance between the two is due to convergent evolution" → "Molecular studies confirm the resemblance is due to convergent evolution"
all of which were characteristics not seen in hares
- This portion could be rephrased/trimmed.

Description

Size and weight vary according to food and habitat quality, with rabbits living on light soil with nothing but grass to feed on being noticeably smaller than specimens living on highly cultivated farmlands with plenty of roots and clover.
- This sentence could be trimmed.
  - Split off the first third. -RR

MSincccc (talk) 04:38, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Life history and behaviour

"Nonverbal communication" → "Non-verbal communication"
"Male ranges tend to be larger than those held by females"

→ "Male ranges tend to be larger than those of females"

"Female home ranges have been observed as larger than those of males" → "Female home ranges have been observed to be larger than those of males"

MSincccc (talk) 09:03, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Held by is less clear than "of" , changed that. Was unaware of the oxford spelling there. Corrected all of these per your recommendations -- Recon rabbit 14:12, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ecology

"up to treeline" → "up to the treeline"
"pass down to the rectum" → "pass to the rectum"
"after which the eyelids swell, with the inflammation quickly spreading to the base of the ears, the forehead, and nose" → "after which the eyelids swell, and the inflammation quickly spreads..."
- You could rephrase it; I leave it to you.
During escape, the display of the tail can serve both to indicate the rabbit's ability to escape through honest signalling, which shows a potential predator that the rabbit would take a lot of energy to catch, and to potentially confuse a predator.
- You could split this sentence and/or rephrase it. It reads a bit too long at present.
"with death usually following on the 11th or 12th day of infection" → "with death usually following on day 11 or 12"

MSincccc (talk) 09:35, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ii've added all of these changes (and changed "dwell" to "live" in the first referenced sentence). I don't love the way I had to rewrite the section about honest signalling, if you have a better suggestion please offer it. -- Recon rabbit 16:17, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Reconrabbit Apologies for the delay. How about this: During escape, the tail display may serve two functions. One, as an honest signal, it indicates to a predator that the rabbit would be costly to catch. Two, it may help confuse the predator. MSincccc (talk) 12:55, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Human relationships with rabbits

"a term sometimes described as 'rabbit starvation'" → "sometimes termed 'rabbit starvation'"
- Might be 'termed as' but I am going with your wording -RR
"archaeological studies finding uses of their bones" → "archaeological studies have found that their bones were used"
- More idiomatic?
  - Changed along with the transition from ...besides their meat... -RR
Catullus used the name cuniculus (a latinization of the Western Iberian word κόνικλος[11] and the etymological origin of the Castilian name conejo, Portuguese coelho and Catalan conill,[115] and the English name coney[116]), and referenced its abundance in Celtiberia by calling this region cuniculosa, i.e. rabbit-ridden.
- It's a bit long and could be split. How about making use of an explanatory footnote?
  - I used an efn and clarified Catullus' nationality/profession. -RR
"is the only rabbit to" → "is the only rabbit species to"
The European rabbit has been refined into a wide variety of breeds during and since the emergence of animal fancy in the 19th century,[122][123] and several breeds are widely used in research; the European rabbit is one of the first mammals to have its whole genome sequenced, and it has been important in the field of immune system research.[124]
- This sentence could be split as well.
  - You're right. The addition on use in research doesn't need to be tacked on with a comma and semicolon. -RR
"used since ancient times in efforts to raise" → "used since ancient times to produce"
"third most popular house pet" → "third most popular pet"
- More standard?
  - Makes sense, pets are generally house pets. -RR
The European rabbit has been introduced as an exotic species into several environments, often with harmful results to vegetation and local wildlife, making it an invasive species.
- I would suggest avoiding repetition of "species".
  - Reworded (by removing "as an exotic species"). -RR
Though the European rabbit thrives in many of the locations where it was introduced, within its native range in Iberia, populations are dwindling.

Bottom line

@Reconrabbit I look forward to your response. A gentle ping, in case you missed my final batch. Best, MSincccc (talk) 15:49, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I did see your last batch, it's just taking me time to get to these last notes. Distracted. -- Recon rabbit 18:11, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, done. -- Recon rabbit 18:42, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I have no further suggestions.

I will support the nomination. MSincccc (talk) 05:29, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: This nomination has not seen any comments in the last nine days. MSincccc (talk) 14:26, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It does not have a source review yet, and image review has not been passed. -- Recon rabbit 14:04, 7 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"Lacher et al. 2016" throws an error message "harvnb error: no target: CITEREFLacherMurphyRoganSmith2016 (help)".
Some sources give pp and then only one page number.
I am not sure that I'd use The Guardian or Suomen Kuvalehti for a scientific question, better use the primary source if there is one.
What makes "Blázquez, José Maria (1975). La romanización. Ciclos y temas de la historia de España (in Spanish). Istmo S.A. ISBN 978-84-7090-068-6.", "López Seoane, V. (1861). Fáuna Mastológica de Galicia, ó historia natural de los mamíferos de este antiguo Reino, aplicada á la medicina, á la agricultura, á la industria, á las artes y al comercio [Mammalian Fauna of Galicia, or Natural History of the Mammals of this Ancient Kingdom, Applied to Medicine, Agriculture, Industry, the Arts, and Commerce] (in Spanish). Manuel Mirás.", "Savory, Theodore Horace (16 January 1962). "Naming the Living World" – via Google Books.", "Russo, Tom (12 July 2023). "Carnival company hands out rabbits, unaware of Greenfield ordinance". Greenfield Daily Reporter.", "Swenson, Haylie (28 April 2020). "Hares, conies, and rabbits: The hunted and the melancholy". Folger Shakespeare Library. Retrieved 31 March 2026." and https://fabclinicians.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Companion-Rabbit-Article.pdf a reliable source?
Matthee, Conrad A.; et al. (2004). is throwing an "unused" error. As is "Vennen, Kristine M.; Mitchell, Mark A. (1 January 2009). "Rabbits". In Mitchell, Mark A.; Tully, Thomas N"

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:37, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

- I am not getting that error, it may be having trouble calling Template:HMW Volume 6 correctly. This has happened before, but I don't know why that reference would fail and not Lagomorphs2018. I directly gave it the harvid parameter to try and fix it.
- Fixed.
- I have replaced or removed the Guardian and Suomen Kuvalehti sources with academic papers where appropriate. Addley 2019 could be kept as a supplement to Hatcher & Battey 2011, but it is out for now.
- I will explain my reasoning for using (or presumed reason if others added) the named sources below. I can see reasoning for replacing some more than others.
- Matthee 2004 has been superseded by Lopez-Seoane et al., 2019; removed. Vennen & Mitchell 2009 footnote was removed when the section on Dewlaps was migrated to the Domestic rabbit article.
Blázquez, José Maria (1975). La romanización. Ciclos y temas de la historia de España (in Spanish). Istmo S.A. ISBN 978-84-7090-068-6: Blázquez was an authority on the ancient history of Spain; this work and below were cited by Menah the Great, who I asked for page numbers, for the section on Roman history. I can look for more recent sources on the subject.
López Seoane, V. (1861). Fáuna Mastológica de Galicia, ó historia natural de los mamíferos de este antiguo Reino, aplicada á la medicina, á la agricultura, á la industria, á las artes y al comercio [Mammalian Fauna of Galicia, or Natural History of the Mammals of this Ancient Kingdom, Applied to Medicine, Agriculture, Industry, the Arts, and Commerce] (in Spanish). Manuel Mirás: See above.
Savory, Theodore Horace (16 January 1962). "Naming the Living World" – via Google Books.: Savory was an arachnologist and translator. This book was positively reviewed in The American Biology Teacher and Science.
Russo, Tom (12 July 2023). "Carnival company hands out rabbits, unaware of Greenfield ordinance". Greenfield Daily Reporter.: Removed this and the other associated citation; I don't see much in secondary sources describing carnival prizes as major sources of abandoned rabbits.
Swenson, Haylie (28 April 2020). "Hares, conies, and rabbits: The hunted and the melancholy". Folger Shakespeare Library. Retrieved 31 March 2026: While it is listed under "blogs", this is a secondary source that provides citations to literary references of rabbits, which are directly linked and confirm e.g. that Gascoigne did describe a method for hunting Conies with ferrets.
https://fabclinicians.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Companion-Rabbit-Article.pdf: This has been replaced with Delibes-Mateos et al., 2018. @Jo-Jo Eumerus: -- Recon rabbit 16:06, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I guess this is fine, then. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:12, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Phlsph7 (talk) 10:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cognitions are mental processes that deal with knowledge. They are a pervasive part of mental life, encompassing psychological activities that acquire, store, retrieve, transform, or apply information. This is a level-4 vital article with over 400,000 page views last year. Thanks to Magnesium Cube for the GA review and to Yesterday, all my dreams... for the peer review. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Connectionism models the mind as a complex network of nodes where information flows as nodes communicate with each other.

Definition

You could link "sensory information" on first mention in the body.
Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:22, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
This information is then transformed as different ideas are linked, resulting in the storage of information as memories and beliefs are formed.
cognition is not limited to humans and encompasses animal and artificial cognition

MSincccc (talk) 06:54, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Types of cognitive processes

This distinction rests on the idea that higher-order processes depend on basic processes and could not occur without them.
- Feels a bit redundant with both "depend on" and "could not occur without".
  It seems that FA reviewers think alike . I fixed it already in response to UndercoverClassicist. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"Data from these different modalities is integrated" → "Data from these different modalities are integrated"
Changed. I think either one works in this context. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"a cognitive process that was initially controlled can become automatic, thereby freeing up cognitive resources for other tasks." → "a process that was initially controlled can become automatic, freeing up resources for other activities."
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:43, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

MSincccc (talk) 16:36, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Development

Jean Piaget's theory divides
I will read through the Theories later, when I have the time.

MSincccc (talk) 16:41, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Non-human

Another often-studied capacity is the power to form and remember a spatial map of the environment.
expressed in the ability to understand a category and apply it to novel instances

MSincccc (talk) 13:23, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In various fields

MSincccc (talk) 08:39, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Theories (Classical computationalism)

"cognitions operate on strings to create new strings" → "cognitions operate on strings to create new ones"
"individual processes work similar to an electronic calculator" → "individual processes work similarly to an electronic calculator"
Done. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:47, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"The intermediary level involves the decomposition of the process into" → "The intermediary level decomposes the process into individual steps"
Simplified. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:47, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"mental states like beliefs and desires are realized through mentalese sentences" → "mental states like beliefs and desires are realized as mentalese sentences"

More to follow. MSincccc (talk) 16:03, 13 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Theories (Connectionism)

"The nodes are locally linked with each other"

→ "The nodes are locally linked to each other."

Theories (Representationalism and anti-representationalism)

"depict the state of the world" → "depict states of the world"
Both are possible, but I find the singular slightly clearer. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:22, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"arises from the interaction between an organism and its environment" → "arises from interaction between an organism and its environment"
Done. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:22, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"critical of the prioritization of internal representations" → "critical of prioritizing internal representations"

MSincccc (talk) 07:01, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Should it be "Anti-Representationalism" or is it intentionally misspelt? MSincccc (talk) 10:23, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nice catch. It turns out that it is a spelling mistake in the source. I fixed it. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:34, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Theories (Other theories)

"that the mind is entirely composed of modules" → "that the mind is entirely modular"
The term modular is often used in contexts where the parts can be swapped or rearranged. It might give a false impression in this context. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:55, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Its central idea is that representations of the environment can be more or less reliable and that the laws of probability theory describe how to integrate information and manage uncertainty.
"the brain creates and adjusts its internal representation of the environment by predicting what is going to happen, comparing the predictions to reality, and updating the internal representation accordingly" → "the brain predicts outcomes, checks them against reality, and updates its internal model" or similar versions.

Bottom line

Phlsph7 That should be all from me. I might return with a more suggestions later, if any, but the article is in good shape. MSincccc (talk) 15:07, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the helpful comments! Phlsph7 (talk) 18:55, 15 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck with Cognition. Hopefully, it won't meet the same fate as Rules of inference. I will support the nomination. Cheers. MSincccc (talk) 10:30, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have my fingers crossed. It was not quite enough for Rules of inference, but it's looking better here so far. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:01, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

At first glance, looks like another well-presented and clearly explained Phlsph7 article on the basics of philosophy. I don't really feel qualified to comment on most of the content, so will focus on clarity and any grammatical/MoS mistakes I can spot.

Hi UndercoverClassicist, thanks for leaving your comfort zone to review this article! Phlsph7 (talk) 18:22, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow. As ever, I'm enjoying it greatly: I apologise for the nit-pickiness of many of these, but I hope they're to the good of the article. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 21:18, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi UC, is there more to come from you? Gog the Mild (talk) 15:49, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Yup -- will take another look now.

often inspired by ideas from Vedic scriptures that were composed roughly between 1500–600 BCE: adding the date is a good move, but it's now wonky prose: were the ideas or the scriptures composed in that time?
Reformulated. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Sanskrit terms need to be in lang templates.
I used the transliteration template instead. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
In the "Development" section, we have a sort of chronology with Piaget, Vygotsky etc -- we should therefore put dates on them.
Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
learning that things continue to exist when not observed: say and/or link object permanence here?
Linked. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Does anybody actually take Piaget at his word any more? He's taught in teacher-training courses to this day, but the focus seems to be more like "Piaget had the right idea that children are not just small adults, and that really fundamental skills develop at different times" -- I don't think the rigid set of stages he proposed has any real currency these days? At the moment we give the impression that Piaget, Locke, Vygotsky, Karmiloff-Smith and Siegler are all equally current and valid.
Piaget's theory is discussed in virtually every textbook on developmental psychology, so I think we need to discuss it as well. We don't have too much space, so here may not be the right place to explain the different criticisms of each of these theories. I think the best we can do is to present the ideas as influential theories while leaving it open whether they are facts. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure that follows: Freud's theories are discussed in just about every textbook on psychology, and so we would need to discuss them, but we would also (as those textbooks do) make clear that they belong in the past. At the moment, we're not doing that. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:28, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I added a corresponding footnote. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Some influences to cognitive development: influences (up)on.
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Empiricists identify environment and experience as the main factors ... Nativists, by contrast, argue that the mind has innate knowledge of abstract patterns: this is another one that reads, to me, a bit like "round-earthers believe the earth is a sphere, while flat-earthers believe it's carried through space by a giant turtle".
That's probably true if you know what empiricism and nativism mean. This is the first time that they are mentioned in the article, so these short explanations may help make this abstract topic more accessible. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear (I'm not sure if I was): if one of these views is mainstream and the other is fringe, or one has much more scientific currency than the other, we shouldn't present them both as having equal weight. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:27, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Ah, I see. I think that neither is a fringe view. Which one is stronger probably depends on how exactly you define them. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:47, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
OK -- so would you say that empiricism and nativism are positions roughly evenly held between experts in the field? The issue here is WP:DUEWEIGHT. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 12:50, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
They are often presented roughly evenly in overview sources. For example, from Newcombe 2006: The central problem addressed by research on cognitive development is the issue posed philosophically as the opposition between nativism and empiricism. A wide variety of theories and research has addressed the question, and we have moved beyond the most extreme versions of the debate to consider more integrated and balanced solutions. Phlsph7 (talk) 13:22, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Can we get something in to the effect of that last bit -- that it's not really seen as a live either-or binary today? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:34, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I added a sentence to cover this point. Phlsph7 (talk) 16:47, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
apply it to novel cases not encountered before: you could cut novel here, as it means "not encountered before".
Removed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
When linking e.g. chimpanzees, you can avoid the redirect by writing [[chimpanzee]]s
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Beyond animal cognition, some researchers also examine plant cognition, such as plant communication. For instance, maple trees release airborne chemicals to warn nearby trees of a herbivore attack, helping them prepare defensive responses: I know we're not a reliable source, but see our article on the topic: The idea of plant cognition is a source of controversy and is rejected by the majority of plant scientists. Plant neurobiology has been criticized for misleading the public with false terminology. There is no scientific evidence that plants possess consciousness or are sentient.
I'm not sure how this article defines "plant cognition". Most of the sources of this claim seem to be primarily about plant consciousness. I would presume that plant consciousness is indeed a controversial topic. However, I think the fact that some (probably unconscious) information processing happens, undestood in a broad sense, is not particularly controversial. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:42, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should make that explicit: I know and you know that cognition != consciousness, but most readers will read "plant cognition" as "plants think" and therefore as "plants are conscious". Perhaps say something like "some researchers also examine plant cognition, meaning the ways in which plants process and respond to information about their environment", and then go on to explicitly say that the idea that plants are conscious is a fringe theory. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 10:25, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I added a short explanation of the definition and limits of plant cognition. Phlsph7 (talk) 13:11, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 13:36, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In aviation, for example, it helps monitor diverse metrics,: there must be a clearer way to say this. A more concrete example (e.g. the "terrain" warning?) might help.
Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Although mental activities mediate between stimuli and responses, they are not directly observable, which poses a methodological challenge for researchers: can I come back to the behaviourists here -- haven't we just (rightly) contradicted what we wrote earlier, that for these people environmental stimuli are directly processed and translated into behavior following stimulus–response patterns?
It seems we are in for another round of behaviorism. The point about the passage on anti-representationalism and behaviorism is that, whatever happens there internally, it does not involve the construction of an internal representation of the external environment. That should be compatible with the passage you mentioned. I added a short clarification to the behaviorism passage. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Early cognitive psychologists made extensive use of introspection: can we clarify "early": medieval? Babylonian?
I mentioned Wundt as an example instead. This part is covered in more detail in the 2nd paragraph of the history section. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
"neuroimaging" is mentioned in "Pyschology" but only linked in "Neuroscience". Might be better to shift the examples (and the image?) up there.
I moved the link but I kept the image and the explanation since the topic is more central to neuroscience. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cognitive scientists seek to coordinate experiments with theoretical models: this is a bit jargonistic.
Reformulated. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Similarly, cognitive anthropology examines the connection between culture and cognition, conceptualizing culture as a system of knowledge, beliefs, and values: this is a bit misleading: we make it sound like this definition is particular or peculiar to cognitive anthropology, when it's simply what "culture" means. We then have a problem shifting from the uncountable noun to the countable: It analyzes and compares cultures from this perspective.
This conception of culture focuses on cognitive aspects. There are also different conceptions in other fields that put more emphasis on practices or material conditions. I reformulated the countable use of "culture". Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It strikes me that "cognitive architecture" does not work the same way as "cognitive archaeology" (that bit of archaeology that is about cognition), or "cognitive biology" (that bit of biology that is about cognition), and yet is in a list with them -- I might be tempted to cut, explain or rework.
I agree. I removed it from the list since it is already explained elsewhere in the article. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
the relation between mind and matter: this is a nice phrase, but pretty unclear: the link is a bit of an Easter egg.
We could give a more in-depth explanation by going into the different theories, but my impression is that concision is better since the paragraph also needs to cover several other topics. I think the wikilink is close enough to be helpful. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:25, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would go more literal with something like "the mind and the body". Which matter are we talking about here, otherwise? UndercoverClassicist ^T·C 11:35, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Implemented. Phlsph7 (talk) 12:14, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am very sorry, but I did not do a proper peer review, because I did not want to be negative. I just made a couple of simple comment. This is a really complicated subject and with a 1000 apologies I should say that this article is nowhere near FA class although a lot of work has gone into it. I am sorry, that is all I can say. No further comments. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 02:12, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Yesterday, I'm sorry to hear your vague opinion, but there is not much I can do without a "specific rationale that can be addressed". Phlsph7 (talk) 09:47, 8 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Yesterday, all my dreams..., I'm very sorry as well, as this may sound rather blunt, and I hope this doesn't come across as sarcastic or ingenuine. However, you're (1) basically saying that this is "nowhere near FA class" without explaining why, and (2) in so doing, made several basic grammatical errors. I do not think this review is going to be helpful to the nominator. – Epicgenius (talk) 01:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Genius, first no need for you to be sorry. Blunt is my middle name and sarcasm is my profession, so we are in the same boat. I ONLY responded above because I was "thanked" for having done a peer review, which I had not done. If you know where my peer review is, please let me know, I would like to read it. Now, if I wanted to list all my concerns here, we would all have gray hair by the time I was half finished. The first article sentence flatly says that cognition is about knowledge. I wanted to scream. It has 3 sources but the article also talks about animals. Hello? What can I say... And the quicksand of consciousness is another issue. I will certainly not get involved in that discussion, andt I advise you not to. Twenty-five years ago David Chalmers was a bright, hopeful and energetic young man before he started walking down that path. He is still a bright fellow and knows more than then but it was obviously a hard journey. So do not go there. I will definitely say no more here. As for grammatical errors, no wway. Me make nevr no grammar or spel errors. Nevr. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 15:44, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here? Wikipedia:Peer review/Cognition/archive1

Animals don't have cognition? -- Recon rabbit 19:36, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I really want to stop, and will after this. But if that is a peer review, then I am Archimedes. I only commented on the choice of image and the complexity of the subject. Animals do have cognition, whatever it may be, but knowledge is a different game. And not all that deals with knowledge involves cognition... Knowledge involves information which involves entropy in some approaches. If you have a definition for information, publish it and be famous. Anyway, may be you all should start by reading this [38] which is not mentioned in the article. Yesterday, all my dreams... (talk) 22:37, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cognition is standardly characterized in terms of knowledge and information. Regarding personal opinions and fringe views, see WP:OR and WP:FRINGE. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:39, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As always, exciting to delve into these broad topics. A tough topic to describe, but I'm impressed with how you manage to make it understandable and to the point.

Hi Femke, nice that you found the time to review this article! Phlsph7 (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why is Cognitive Abilities Screening Instrument listed in see also? Seems too niche for this article
See below. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Similarly, cognitive holding seems undue, as Cognitive shuffle and cognitive liberty
You are probably right that they are borderline cases. I removed them. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Perception organizes sensory information, interpreting physical stimuli, such as light and sound, to construct a coherent experience of objects and events > Does 'organise sensory information' and 'interpreting physical stimuli' not express the same idea? Maybe that sentence can be slightly simplified.
Simplified. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Metacognition involves knowledge about knowledge or mental processes that monitor and regulate other mental processes. -> I don't fully understand what this sentence means.
I reformulated it and added a short example, but it's probably still challenging. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cognitive processes do not always function as they should and can lead to inaccuracies, either because of natural errors associated with cognitive biases or as a result of pathological impairments from cognitive disorders. -> I would put in a comma after should, because I was initially parsing this with a comma after function which is a confusing read.
Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For example, prosopagnosia is a perceptual disorder in which individuals lack the ability to recognize faces without impacting other visual abilities. --> I would add a comma after faces, as " without impacting other visual abilities." refers back to prosopagnosia. Or add 'without it affecting, or 'but without affecting. Not sure what the best wording was but it took me a couple rereads to understand. Or wording like "For example, prosopagnosia is a perceptual disorder in which individuals cannot recognize faces, even though their other visual abilities remain intact."
I went with something similar to your reformulation. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cognitive scientists typically rely on idealized models that consider the activation levels of and connections between nodes without modelling the neurophysiological mechanisms in the brain that underlie these operations. --> Quite a tough read. Is "Cognitive scientists often rely on idealized models that describe activation levels and connections between nodes rather than the underlying neurophysiological mechanisms in the brain." better?
I split the sentence into two. Have a look if this is better. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Will pick up from development later. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 19:42, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The different forms of memory play a central role in learning, which involves the acquisition of novel information, skills, or habits, as well as changes to existing structures --> Not sure what 'changes to existing structures' means. Can it be omitted?
The point is that learning is not only about acquiring new things but also about improving existing things. I reformulated that part, I hope it's clearer now. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cognitive development is most rapid during childhood. Some influences occur even before birth, due to factors like nutrition, maternal stress, and harmful substances like alcohol during pregnancy. --> these two sentences don't follow logically. The word 'even' sets up a contrast between the two sentences, but they talk about different things (speed of development vs impacts of cognition). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I rearranged the sentences to avoid the contrast and have a chronological order. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I may be overly allergic to WP:REFERS to construction, but I'd start the animal cognition sentence something like this: Animal cognition encompasses the processes by which animals acquire, process, and use information to guide flexible, goal-directed behavior.
I used something similar to your suggestion. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
no hyphen for tool-use, right? It's not an compound adjective.
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
These difficulties overlap with the problem of anthropocentrism or the tendency to see human cognition as exceptional and superior to that of other animals --> Not the most elegant to have difficulties and problem so close to each other. I still love a good m-dash, despite the curse of LLMs, and would reword the sentence like "These challenges relate closely to anthropocentrism—the tendency to regard human cognition as exceptional and superior to that of other animals." —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:48, 9 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, that's a good use case for em dash. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:18, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Will continue from artificial later.
phenomenal consciousness?
The difference between phenomenal consciousness and access consciousness is frequently discussed in the academic literature. You can thank Ned Block for that. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:07, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Education studies is the field of inquiry examining the nature, purposes, practices, and outcomes of education. > studies already implies 'field of inquiry'. I would simply say "Education studies examine .."
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The way CBT is explained omits any mention of the behavioural element
I added a short mention. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I meant in describing the therapy. The way it's explained here makes it seem like CBT is only cognitive therapy. For some forms of CBT (e.g. Cognitive behavioral therapy for insomnia), the stronger part of the evidence is for the behavioural interventions, such as 'leave your bed when you can't fall asleep within 20 minutes', or start going to bed later to avoid lying awake. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:46, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I included modifications of maladaptive behavior in the last sentence on the therapy. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:37, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Should Eleanor Rosch be mentioned in the history section? Or Anne Treisman, given Donald Broadbent is mentioned?
I guess we could mention them but I'm not sure that it's necessary. I looked up three overview source (Smith 2001, Solso & MacLin 2000, Thagard 2023): they don't mention them. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

With a recent source not including them, I'm happy. I'm always a bit hesitant to trust sources from ~2000, as they might not give due credit to female pioneers. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Note two is not quite clear: What about something like "Tip-of-the-tongue states exemplify this distinction; the first stage of meaning identification succeeds, while the second stage of phonological retrieval fails". That gives space to explain phonological rtrieval. Or is there a plain Eglish way to say this? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:43, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I implemented a slight variation of your suggestion. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like an interesting article. Sorry if I repeat any of the suggestions mentioned above, I only skimmed through them. Be warned that I am a bit of a nitpicker, don't take it too much to heart!

Hello Shocksingularity and thanks for reviewing the article! Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Researchers discuss diverse theories of the nature of cognition. This is kind of awkward, because it sounds like you're just trying to avoid starting the sentence with "there are". I would consider just simplifying to There are many different theories on the nature of cognition or something along those lines.
That was pretty much the point, but I guess it's a question of stylistic preference. I changed it to something closer to your suggestion. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Cognitions are a pervasive part of mental life "Mental life" is a bit awkward wording, in my opinion. Could you change it to something like Cognitions are a pervasive psychological process or Cognitions are a pervasive part of daily life?
The expression is common in psychology and philosophy without really being a technical term. Maybe we could use "daily life", but it seems to imply a narrowing to everyday routines. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thought is a paradigmatic form of cognition. I think that a lot of readers might trip over the word "paradigmatic" here. I would suggest you use a more common word.
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
However, cognition is not limited to abstract reasoning You say this after mentioning thought. Does this mean that thought is a form of abstract reasoning? If so, say that.
Thought includes abstract reasoning but is not limited to it. People often associated thought with abstract reasoning, which is why I found the contrast helpful. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Types of cognitive processes->Perception and attention

[edit]

[[File:Simplified model of perception and memory.svg]] Alt text is needed for this image per WP:ACCIM.
It has an alt text, but it was a little short, so I expanded it. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
These signals are processed in various brain regions to construct a coherent experience of distinct objects and events while situating them in a spatial-temporal framework. Wikilinking to spacetime seems weird here, considering that spacetime is a physics topic and cognition is a psychology topic. Is there any articles you could link to that relate to the psychological experience of space and time?
I get your point, but I don't know about a fitting alternative article. I decided instead to just link the expression "spatial-temporal" so that readers unfamiliar with the term have something to click on without implying that the article also covers the part about the psychological framework. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Certain cognitive processes are responsible for detecting basic features in sensory data, such as edges, colors, and pitches, while others process spatial location. Which ones?
They are called "edge detection", "color processing", and so on. Adding the terms may sound repetitive, and discussing the specific brain areas responsible for each one may be too specific. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Although sensory data is a central factor of perceptual experience, it is not the only factor, and various other forms of information influence the underlying cognitive operations. For instance, memories from earlier experiences determine which objects are experienced as familiar. Other factors include the expectations, goals, background knowledge, and belief system of the individual. You could wikilink and/or mention bottom-up and top-down approaches here. (Or a better article if there's one specifically for psychology; I couldn't find any.)
It would be nice to have an article on these relations, but I'm not sure that we do. Bottom-up and top-down approaches is already linked in the subsection on language. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Attention is a central aspect of mental processes that focuses cognitive resources on certain stimuli or features. Again, what mental processes?
This is covered in the last sentence of the paragraph. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Types of cognitive processes->Thinking

[edit]

To assess the probability of an outcome, people use various heuristics, such as the representativeness heuristic, the availability heuristic, and anchoring. Maybe give a brief description of what each of these are?
Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:17, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Types of cognitive processes->Language

[edit]

The Whorfian hypothesis and the thesis of linguistic relativity propose pervasive influences... According to the wikilinked article, both of these are the same thing. I would just mention the latter: The theory of linguistic relativity proposes...
One of our sources explicitly distinguishes the two, so I thought it better to mention both. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Along the same lines: This hypothesis is controversial, and it's the only hypothesis mentioned in this section. I would consider moving it to the "theories" section so as not to accidentally give it WP:UNDUEWEIGHT.
If we were to move it to the theories section, we would probably have to start a new paragraph for it. It's not clear that this would reduce its weight since it's currently only mentioned in a single sentence in the middle of a paragraph. It should be mentioned somewhere and it seems to fit best here. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
...the identification of an abstract semantic representation of the intended concept... It is not super clear what this phrase means or is trying to describe.
I tried to simplify it. It's hopefully clearer this way. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Types of cognitive processes->Others

[edit]

To be honest, I feel like the title of this section is a bit misleading? It is not really "other types of cognitive processes", it is more of "other ways to categorize cognitive processes". For example, the beginning of this section says: Cognitive processes can be conscious or unconscious. Conscious processes, such as attentively solving a math problem step by step or recalling a vivid memory, involve active awareness. The given examples are demonstrating previously-mentioned cognitive processes (attention/problem-solving and recall respectively). I'm not exactly sure what I'd change the section title to right now, but I don't think that just "Others" is the best title for the section.
I don't think that the current organization implies that the discussed processes are mutually exclusive. Do you think that the title "Other classifications" would be better? Phlsph7 (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Phenomenal consciousness involves a qualitative experience of mental phenomena, whereas access consciousness is an awareness of information that is available for use but not actively experienced at the moment. Consider italicizing new terms when you introduce them, per MOS:TECHNICAL (which, ironically, uses the exact same example). It took me a couple of rereads to realize that "access consciousness" was a whole term in and of itself rather than just some really weird grammar.
I added italics. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cognitive processes do not always function as they should, and can lead to inaccuracies, either because of natural errors associated with cognitive biases or as a result of pathological impairments from cognitive disorders. The topic of the article you wikilink to (neurocognitive disorder, redirected from cognitive disorders) seems to be different than what you are describing in this article. According to that article, neurocognitive disorders are defined by deficits in cognitive ability that are acquired (as opposed to developmental), typically represent decline, and may have an underlying brain pathology. It seems like in the cognition article, you define them as any disorder that affects cognition, regardless whether it meets those specific requirements. Consider using a different term or removing the Wikilink.
The sentence you quoted from Cognition does not really define "cognitive disorder". Roughly simplified, it says "if something goes wrong it may be because of something else or because of a cognitive disorder". This should be compatible with the sentence from the article Neurocognitive disorder. As a sidenote: I'm not sure that the definition in neurocognitive disorder is generally accepted for the term "cognitive disorder". For example, that definition would probably exclude the down syndrome, but https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12103642/ characterizes it as a cognitive disorder. I removed the wikilink. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
For example, prosopagnosia is a perceptual disorder in which individuals cannot recognize faces, although their other visual abilities remain intact. I myself have prosopagnosia so I will note two things: 1. Prosopagnosia doesn't necessarily mean that you can't recognize faces altogether, and 2. you don't have to have perfect vision to have the disorder. I would change this to something like For example, prosopagnosia is a perceptual disorder in which individuals struggle to recognize faces, although their other visual abilities remain unaffected.
Thanks for the clarification, I implemented your suggestion. Phlsph7 (talk) 14:02, 17 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In its classical form, it argues that the brain represents information through strings of symbols. Consider wikilinking to string (computer science) here.
Added. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Theories extend this symbol-based approach with more sophisticated devices of knowledge representation, such as semantic nets, schemata, and frames, to explain how the mind handles complex data involving many entities and relations. Possibly give a brief explanation of what semantic nets, schemata, and frames are.
They are all approaches to knowledge representation, but their differences are not that straightforward. They are not essential here and explaining them may distract from the discussion of classical computationalism. They are wikilinked, so the curious reader can get more information. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Another difference is the connectionist focus on non-symbolic processes: the activations of individual nodes perform computations without the use of symbols. Slightly awkward grammar here, consider changing to: Another difference is that connnectionism focuses on non-symbolic processes...
Changed. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Representations can take various forms, such as symbols, images, and concepts, as well as subsymbolic patterns used to model higher-level structures. What are "subsymbolic patterns"?
In this context, subsymbolic means more or less the same as non-symbolic, which is explained in the previous subsection. I changed it to non-symbolic to avoid introducing a new term. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
According to the default-interventionist model, the automatic system generates impressions while the controlled system monitors them and intervenes if it detects problems. Explain what impressions are
I replaced the term with intuitive judgments, which should be clearer. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Early cognitive psychologists made extensive use of introspection, in which researchers examine and reflect on their own experiences to understand mental processes. Consider explaining why introspection is not used so much anymore.
I think this is because of a combination of several factors rather than a single reason, so the explanation may be not simple enough for a short comment. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
To bridge disciplinary and methodological divides... Divides between what? The different fields?
Clarified. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Cognitive scientists seek to coordinate empirical experiments with theoretical models to produce testable theories that link the different levels.} You don't need both "empirical" and "experiments".
Simplified. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, I think it looks good! I'm leaning towards a "support" vote right now, but ping me when you've considered my new comments and I'll give a final verdict. Shocksingularity (talk) 21:10, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Shocksingularity, Thanks for all the thoughtful suggestions, I hope I didn't miss any! Phlsph7 (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Another of these broad concept articles. Standard disclaimer that I can't tell "comprehensiveness" for topics this broad. I must once again note that since Google Books links work selectively by region and search history, we can't link to it on the basis of "for this editor this page works". Is it just me or are there even fewer non-Western sources than usual? I am kinda unsure if Journal of Intelligence is a reliable source, MDPI has a dodgy reputation. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:03, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The page preview links are primarily included for helping with WP:Verifiability; curious readers may be interested in our earlier discussions of the pros and cons in other FA reviews. For some of the non-Western sources, see Khatoon 2012, Mesquita 2012, Baptista et al. 2017, Jiajia & Haosheng 2022, Ardila 2018, Fang, Hassan & Horng 2026, Sahay 2024, Dumont 2008, and Gomez Martinez 2017. I replaced the MDPI-source with a better alternative. Thanks for another broad-concept article source review! Phlsph7 (talk) 10:42, 28 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@FAC coordinators: May I start another nomination? This one has three supports, received image and source reviews, and is over 3 weeks old. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:19, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You may. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:00, 30 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As always, these are suggestions, not demands; feel free to disagree with justification. I don't have much knowledge of the topic, so this might be a little superficial.

Hi AirshipJungleman29 and thanks for your comments! Phlsph7 (talk) 10:01, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The history section is a bit oddly located in "In other fields". Minor errors: Aquinas is normally said to have been born in 1225; "Noam Chomsky (1928–present)" is a bit unusual, perhaps "Noam Chomsky (b. 1928) is better?
Implemented. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:01, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The article is well-cited, but perhaps a little less than I would have thought for its size. Many paragraphs have as little as one bundled citation, which seems to usually cite a couple of textbooks. Textbooks are good, per WP:USETERTIARY, at determining weight and balance, but in most cases secondary sources are definitively superior (WP:TERTIARYNOT, under "Better sources available"). In addition, textbooks of the sort cited tend to imply a single monolithic view, even when some sources disagree. See next point.
I think the article has a good mix of secondary and tertiary sources. Compared to articles on more narrow topics, you are probably right that this article has more tertiary sources than them. One reason is that this is a broad-concept article on a topic with a wide scope. The main difficulty with this type of topic is to provide a wide and balanced overview rather than delve into intricate scholarly debates on specific details, which are usually better suited for child articles. If there are specific passages where you think tertiary sources are inappropriate, we can assess and possible adjust their sourcing. By the way, the cited sources for the next point (plant cognition) are not tertiary. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:02, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Intrigued by the bit on plant cognition. The linked article says "The idea of plant cognition is a source of controversy and is rejected by the majority of plant scientists." By comparison, this article's "The extent of the cognitive capacities of plants is disputed and researchers are typically skeptical about the presence of higher functions like consciousness." seems quite less decisive. Is plant communication a subset of plant intelligence, as this article presents it, or something different?
For the claim in the linked article, most of its sources are primarily about plant consciousness. I agree regarding plant consciousness: this is indeed a controversial topic. If you define cognition as essentially conscious, it would also apply to plant cognition. However, this is not the standard definition. Defined broadly as a possible unconscious from of information processing underlying flexible responses, cognition in a minimal sense is not generally rejected. Plant communication is discussed as a form of cognition in Segundo-Ortin & Calvo 2022. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:01, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Are there any other parts of the article where theories are presented as the majority viewpoint, but actually are heavily disputed? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:26, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I usually try follow WP:PROPORTION and give a balanced overview where the main views are presented based on the weight they get in reliable sources. Phlsph7 (talk) 10:01, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the curlew sandpiper, a small migratory shorebird found across Eurasia. This article is pretty short, but I'm pretty sure it covers all that needs be be covered. (I'm using American goldfinch and cactus wren as reference.) This is my first FAC, after working on an assortment of articles on various other birds from around the world, namely the rock wren, American crow, and brown cacholote, all of which I brought to GA status. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

File:Curlew_sandpiper_rangemap.svg: see MOS:COLOUR

@Nikkimaria details added at Commons now - MPF (talk) 00:42, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The curlew sandpiper is a small wader, 18–23 cm (7–9 in) in length, 44–117 g (1.6–4.1 oz) in weight,[10] and a wingspan of 38–46 cm (15–18 in) - change to something like "in weight, and has a wingspan of"

My preference: "The curlew sandpiper is a small wader, 18–23 cm long and with a wingspan of 38–46 cm, and weighing 44–117 g" - MPF (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first suggestion is better a it avoids a double and. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:15, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The first-time breeders plumage is similar to the adult summer plumage - Missing an apostrophe, should be breeder's

Better: "The first-summer breeding plumage is similar to the adult summer plumage, but with some retained winter feathers" - MPF (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Occuring from January to May, the spring moult is a partial moult, with only the body feathers are replaced, not flight feathers - Occurring is missing an r and maybe change "with only the body feathers are replaced" to something like "where only the body feathers are replaced" or something else more grammatically correct
The post-juvenile moult... is a partial to incomplete moult, with the body feathers and some flight feathers are replaced - Similar issue to above with "are replaced"
the Arctic fox would hunt Arctic-breeding waders including the instead - I assume you're missing "curlew sandpiper" between "the" and "instead"
In Langebaan Lagoon of South Africa, where curlew sandpiper are the most numerous - change to something like "where curlew sandpipers are the most numerous" or "where the curlew sandpiper is the most numerous"

My suggestion: "In South Africa, they are particularly numerous at Langebaan Lagoon, ..." - MPF (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They have an vast extent of occurrence - change to "a vast"

Better: "They have a very large area of occurrence" - MPF (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

BirdLife International, which provides the ICUN conservation status for birds - I assume it should be "IUCN"
as over the span of 15 years, the population has declined and estimated 30 to 49% - change "and estimated" to "an estimated"
While in breeding plumage, curlew sandpiper can be confused with red knot breeding plumage, as both are reddish on the belly - missing a "the" and a little awkward to compare a bird directly to plumage, so maybe something like "While in breeding plumage, the curlew sandpiper can be confused with the red knot, as both are reddish on the belly"

Sorry, I'd disagree here (strongly!); don't add those "the"s, they make it look very klunky - MPF (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The female moves around an area about a few hectares large - A little awkwardly phrased, I'd suggest something like "The female moves around an area of about a few hectares" or "a few hectares in size"

I'd suggest simpler "The female moves around an area of about a few hectares" - MPF (talk) 00:25, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

consisted of the male lowering his head and neck parallel to the ground and pulled back towards his body - change "pulled" to "pulling"
Stopping chase at the boundaries of their territory, suggesting awareness of their neighbor's territory - Maybe change to "They stop the chase"

That's all I have to say. Congrats on your first FAC nom! If you're interested, I also have an open FAC if you'd like to review it. If not, no worries. Ping me when you have addressed the issues above. -- Zoo Blazer 06:01, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@ZooBlazer I think I've addressed all the issues listed, let me know if there's any other concerns. Thanks! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 23:46, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. I am happy to support -- Zoo Blazer 18:05, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting - File:325 - CURLEW SANDPIPER (6-17-2016) barrow, alaska -03 copy.jpg says it's from northern Alaska, which isn't shown as part of the bird's range on the map. Was this a vagrant, or is the range in the Arctic broader than shown on the map?

An area of irregular range occupancy; see the Holmes & Pitelka (1964) reference - MPF (talk) 00:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

More pressing on the verification front is the lack of page numbers or pages for journal and book sources. I would highly recommend using SFNs or a similar system to break down page ranges. To give an example, Cactus wren uses RPs for this, while Saxaul sparrow uses SFNs (I find the latter preferable but ultimately up to you).
The final paragraph of "Description" is cited to dozens of pages across six different books. This can surely be reduced to prevent overciting.
Dates are given inconsistently. Sometimes its a full date down to the day, sometimes it's just a year, sometimes it's a month and a year. I would just keep all the dates for the citations as a year, as it isn't really as useful to know what month or day an academic text was published.
I recommend linking to archive.org when a link is avaliable, as it is for Handbook of the Birds of Europe
citing "britishbirds.co.uk" sounds a lot sketchier than listing and linking to the website as its full name, British Birds
Be consistent on how you capitalize sources, even if the source capitalizes them differently. Tomkovich & Soloviev should be "Site Fidelity in High Arctic Breeding Waders", for example, while "Birds of the western Palearctic" should be "Birds of the Western Palearctic".
Be consistent about which format you give ISBNs in. I spot some old ISBN-10s in there.
You wikilink to one or two journals, but not most of them. Be consistent one way or another about this.
You give ISSNs for some journals, but not all. Be consistent about this.
You give the translations of the names for some foreign-language books and articles, but not all.
In Langebaan Lagoon of South Africa, where curlew sandpiper are the most numerous this is an ambiguous sentence. Is this the most numerous site for curlew sandpipers in the world, or are they the most numerous bird found in this lagoon?

See my suggestion above - MPF (talk) 00:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think theres' a lot more info you can milk out of the IUCN red list page, with the "in detail" sections.
Some of the external links seem like articles that should either be cited or removed if they aren't used.
The first half of the article has many images, but the second half has almost nothing. Surely there's pictures to illustrate mating and feeding behavior for instance.
Footnotes need citations.

This might seem like a lot but all in all this is very good work for your first FAC! I think this is all fixable with only a bit of elbow grease. Let me know when you want me to take another look. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 06:04, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MPF: For The final paragraph of "Description" is cited to dozens of pages across six different books. This can surely be reduced to prevent overciting, could you break the citations up in half, one for the ruff and one for the buff-breasted? Thanks in advance.

I'll see what I can do; been thinking I might drop the Buff-breasted Sandpiper bit altogether, it's not the most important of comparisons - MPF (talk) 00:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've cleaned up a lot of the sources, hopefully I'll be able to get more done tomorrow, including converting all the citations to Holmes & Pitelka 1964 to sfn. There aren't a lot of images on commons of the curlew sandpiper breeding/nesting, since they mostly do that in the Siberian arctics. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 23:45, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No worries if the pictures aren't extant. I assumed you've checked INaturalist? Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 03:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked on iNaturalist for a file that I think illustrates the curlew sandpiper's breeding range pretty well (link). That's the only photo of curlew sandpiper in their breeding range that is high quality enough on iNaturalist so hopefully I'll be able to get a free file for this.

I've also converted all the Holmes & Pitelka 1964 to sfns, so that should be a bit better. I'll take a look at the IUCN page next. Thanks for the patience, I was pretty busy over the weekend. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:26, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Such a cute bird! Really lovely photos you've selected.

The first paragraph is overly technical. We do not need details about the history of classification in the first sentence (or even in the lead). Omitting those details also means you do not have to explain jargon like genus. Similarly, the word monotypic does not belong per WP:EXPLAINLEAD, as words in the lead typically need to be understandable on sight. The detail on forming hybrids could also be omitted.

Be consistent in using it vs they
peachy-buff? Is there a plain English way of saying buff? If not, link to wiktionary or a glossary
wing covert feathers?
trilling calls?
link clutch
precopulatory - redundant with copulation later, which isa simpler version of that word
grammar: They occasionally hybridises
the stilt sandpiper (Calidris himantopus) - single common name is enough, you already indicate they share a genus
Conversion to US units is optional for scientific articles. My preference is to omit to make the prose more engaging, but I know opinions differ.
tarsi?
primaries?
grammar: The post-juvenile moult, which occurs from October to December (and can finish as late as April), is a partial to incomplete moult, with the body feathers and some flight feathers are replaced.
Is there a recording available with a suitable license somewhere?
"Curlew sandpipers show little fidelity to breeding sites, making it hard to predict where a specimen overwinters based on its breeding site; however, the reverse is not as true: adults tend to prefer overwintering in the same regions and resting at stopovers at the same points, and males are more faithful to their sites compared to females." The reverse of what? Should the first bit of the sentence say juvenile? The sentence is quite long. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
The conservation section starts quite abruptly. The red list page described the threats in more detail. You could use that source to provide an introductory sentence
The sentence about climate change is quite long. Can it be split or condensed? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I see User:MPF has removed explanations for jargon in quite a few places. I see where they're coming from, as the explanations where quite wordy and glossing terms does not make for elegant text. Are there more elegant ways to explain these terms? Which ones can be replaced by plain English? Which ones can be explained by giving hints (like how you explain the jargon for the opposite of albino with a picture)? Which ones can be explained as part of a sentence? A few glosses are okay of course, but the article has so much jargon that it can't work everywhere. I'm assuming that the "broadest likely audience" includes lay people, as it's a bird with a large-scale population. Is that your interpretation of WP:MTAU too? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:06, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Section-targeted links to List of terms used in bird topography is how I've seen it done on some other species pages. Unfortunately, that page is incomplete and with some odd onward links that need clearing up, e.g. the link for scapular feathers leads to the article scapula, a page almost entirely about the human shoulder blade bone . . . - MPF (talk) 11:52, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Linking is at the bottom of the explanation pyramid: it can work for jargon like 'rufous', 'genus', 'plumage' where we expect a large share of the readers to be familiar with the terms already. Or for bits of the article we expect is only of interest to academics. I imagine the description of the bird is of interest to a wide audience however. It's a last resort, as it requires readers to leave the page they're trying to understand. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 12:31, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Femke @MPF I've thought of a few approaches that don't require significant prose refactoring, I'd like both of your thoughts:
Liberal use of {{efn}}s to explain stuff. I'd prefer this, since MTAU#Explain new concepts says to provide concrete examples/analogies; and putting those in the prose would clutter up the text too much.

Alternatively, using the {{tooltip}} template to define stuff. Not too keen on this since it doesn't display on mobile.

Having a preface to the "Description" section providing a short definition for all the terms used. Probably a MOS violation in numerous ways, but what do I know? I've only been here for 6 months...

Any suggestions are welcome. Thanks in advance. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 19:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
" ... their heads in the water to clean them. Likewise, they mainly roost in large mixed-species flocks on sandspits, ... " I don't what the word 'likewise' does there, it can likely be omitted. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:18, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Their breeding plumage is much more striking, with the entire front side tinted a deep rufous, with the tint being stronger in males -- more elegant as "Their breeding plumage is much more striking, with the entire front tinted a deep rufous, more intense in males."? —Femke 🐦 (talk) 09:51, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of drive-by comments on the above. First, I agree that conversion to US units are optional for scientific articles (and I say that as somebody who grew up speaking gallons, inches and pounds. People just need to learn how to deal with the units that the vast majority of the world uses. And I'm not a fan of {{efn}}. It's really no better than a link to another article; in both cases, they need to click on something which takes them away from what they're reading now. As for tooltips, yuk. It's not what people expect and there's no visual hint to let them know it even exists. And if, as you say, it doesn't work on mobile, that's a hard fail for me. A majority of our readers are on mobile. For most terms, all you need is a couple of words in parentheses. It's really not that disruptive. Certainly less disruptive than repeating every length and weight in a different unit system. RoySmith (talk) 02:12, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Glossing (putting an explanation between brackets) is certainly the way to go for all the instances where you cannot explain things more elegantly. Leaving out the jargon comes first, and if you can hint clearly, that can be very elegant too. For instance, the sentence with the 'vagrant' can be reworded as "The curlew sandpiper rarely appears in North America, and when it does, it is usually seen along the Atlantic coast.", where you link 'rarely appears' to vagrant. One possible solution for the description section is to find a diagram of a bird which points to the key jargon if that's available and matches how you describe the elements. You can create some space for an image by slightly expanding the lead, for instance with the size of the bird and facts about the flock size. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 08:04, 5 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Good find on the image. I wonder if you can make a version for this article where you photoshop out the elements that you don't discuss in the article. If you remove the remiges, the other text becomes legible; the font is too small now. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 21:16, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A few comments; I fear the page has become worse in the last couple of days, verging on "TLDR":

Far too much use of "the".
Singular, countable, non-proper nouns generally require an article. For example, in the sentence "The bird eats a worm", "the" and "a" are not stylistic additions but compulsory grammatical elements. In some cases where you removed "the", it was needed. Most of these seem to have been fixed, but please don't remove them again. – Michael Aurel (talk) 00:52, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Aurel I'd disagree; it is not always normal in ornithological or other similar scientific literature. "Curlew Sandpiper often form mixed flocks with Dunlin, Sanderling, Little Stint, Ringed Plover and other similar small waders" is perfectly normal grammar; conversely, "The Curlew Sandpiper often form mixed flocks with the Dunlin, the Sanderling, the Little Stint, the Ringed Plover and other similar small waders" is just plain weird. - MPF (talk) 01:29, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think we might have a few things mixed up here. Your second sentence is ungrammatical because of a plurality clash ("the curlew sandpiper" is singular, but "form" takes plural nouns), not the use of "the", stylistically awkward as it may be. In your first sentence, you treat "curlew sandpiper" as plural; this may well be acceptable, but it's a slightly different issue, as I was talking about singular nouns. For example, you changed "The dunlin also looks similar" to "Dunlin also looks similar", which isn't grammatical. (I would, by the way, write the sentence you've provided as "Curlew sandpipers often form mixed flocks with dunlins, sanderlings, little stints, ringed plovers, and other similar small waders".)

In any case, my main goal was to make sure the nominator wasn't receiving too much mixed advice: I added some "the"s, you removed some, and an earlier reviewer suggested adding some, which you protested, all of which could be understandably confusing for a first-time nominator. If you'd like to continue this conversation (I would be happy to), the talk page is probably the best place. – Michael Aurel (talk) 10:23, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Michael Aurel (keeping it here for the continuity!) A tricky one! Though I'd say "Curlew Sandpiper often forms mixed flocks with Dunlin, Sanderling, Little Stint, Ringed Plover and other similar small waders" is equally acceptable English usage. Of your version, "dunlins" (at least in UK English; but that is the engvar relevant here) is verging on as unusual/quaint as "grouses" or "sheeps" or "deers"; it usually does not have a plural -s; the others, not taking an -s is variable, some people do, some don't; "I counted 25 Ringed Plover on the beach today" is quite common, but so is "I counted 25 Ringed Plovers on the beach today".

What would you say of "Body size close to Dunlin C. alpina but silhouette more attenuated" or "longer-billed and relatively longer-legged than Knot C. canutus."? Or "Normally separable in flight from all congeners except White-rumped Sandpiper C. fscicollis by broad white band above tail."? MPF (talk) 23:35, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I do think there's a worthwhile discussion in all this, but it's a bit off-topic for this FAC page. When I have a moment, I'll restart this discussion in a more appropriate location, and ping you. – Michael Aurel (talk) 13:13, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation of feather tracts, etc., is not necessary; instead link terms like scapulars to the feathers page where they are explained.
All the citations to Mlodinow|Medrano|2023: I'd strongly recommend removing these, as they are in some peculiar foreign language. Replace them with details from Cramp BWP, which is 100% reliable, and very well-written.
Watch out for creeping Americanisation of spellings; this must be avoided!

I've started on some cleanup, but it's 2 am now so the rest will have to wait - MPF (talk) 02:01, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Mlodinow & Medrano 2023 is also reliable, see Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 471#Birds of the World. It's the worldwide, digitized version of Birds of North America. It does require a paid subscription, but they do provide short introductions, see here. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 02:56, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It may be reliable, but the language (particularly in respect of moulting) is totally impenetrable (see my previous note on the GA review here), and inappropriate US-POV-pushing for an Old World species. In the Pontoppidan and Blasius Merrem citations, there are translations "|quote=Knuſſel, Calidris. Schnabel walzenförmig, gegen die Spitze hin dicker, glatt. Mittlere und äuſsere Zehe etwas verbunden. Tringa calidris, arenaria u. a.|trans-quote=Knussel, Calidris. Beak cylindrical, becoming thicker toward the tip, smooth. Middle and outer toes somewhat connected. Tringa calidris, arenaria and others." If we are going to have citations from Mlodinow & Medrano, they also need translating from their weird jargon into English, if a translation can be found, if anyone has a clue what they mean, so e.g. "Sfn|Mlodinow|Medrano|2023|loc=Plumages, Molts, and Structure § Second and Definitive Prebasic Molts |trans= Plumages, Moults, and Structure § moults from second-winter and adult winter to summer plumage" [?; possibly!]. But is that the correct translation? Does anybody know? "Prebasic" isn't even a word, it doesn't exist in the OED (I just looked up), so how can it be translated? That's why I'm suggesting changing to BWP; it is clear and easily understood, so anyone wanting to check what is written here can compare it with the original; that is not feasible with the Mlodinow & Medrano stuff - MPF (talk) 11:24, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Prebasic does exist in Collins dictionary and this glossary. I'm not sure what you mean by translated as the original seems to be in English there too? You seem to be asking a lot in terms of work (replacing a very up-to-date reliable source), for what I consider unclear gain. Might it be worthwhile asking for a third opinion from one of our more experienced bird editors (I'm not one). —Femke 🐦 (talk) 11:41, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps @Jimfbleak can suggest ideas, he's a very experienced birder. See also this paper Moult terminology: Let's make it simpler! (free access), which points out that this American terminology system is completely unknown outside a very small section of "ivory tower" bird people in the USA, so not appropriate for a global audience - MPF (talk) 12:03, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'd argue that it's probably entirely unnecessary to "translate"(explain the meaning) of the Birds of the World section headers, as if you have access (I or Jimfbleak can provide as PDFs, since we both have subscriptions) the meaning of each of the moult stages are adequately explained. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:55, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSK I'm not thinking so much of myself, as Wikipedia's target casual readers, who will [a] most likely be from within the range of the species, and [b] not have access to the paywalled site. If they read a part of the text in regular English and then look at the reference, they see unfamiliar American jargon in the sfn quote which bears no visible relationship to the text in the page: they will think "How do they get this from that? There's no match!". That's why I'd very much rather change to citing BWP, which has all the same information, but presented in a manner which directly matches what we have here, and will be familar to a far greater readership - MPF (talk) 22:56, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This goes beyond the FAC criteria. Typically, readers do not really click on citations. A good portion or readers will be unfamiliar with the US and UK jargon alike anyway. —Femke 🐦 (talk) 07:48, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Also, could you explain the reasoning of using "it" instead of "their" in the lead? Thanks in advance. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 02:58, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Because we are speaking of the species as a single unit; that's normal: "The curlew sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea) is a small wader first described in 1763 by Erik Pontoppidan in the genus Tringa before being moved to their current genus, Calidris, in 1804 by Blasius Merrem. They are ..." in the second sentence is a sudden change in plurality; it would only work if the page started "Curlew sandpipers are small waders....". - MPF (talk) 10:28, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Femke@MPF Hopefully I managed to change everything to singular instead of plural when referring to curlew sandpipers. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:25, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

- Just noticed a fairly major error (sort-of thought of it before, but hadn't checked properly until now): when Blasius Merrem described the new genus Calidris in 1804, he didn't include Curlew Sandpiper in his new genus. Unfortunately, finding out who was the first author to explicity use the combination Calidris ferruginea won't be easy; this sort of information isn't well documented (it's not like in botany, where the revising author is a required citation as well as the original author) - MPF (talk) 18:06, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

- The text doesn't say that Merrem moved it, just that it was later transferred, OK as it stands, and a major task to find who actually transferred it, so I wouldn't bother Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:59, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  It did as the text was before I changed it last night (which I didn't feel constrained about, as it was uncontroversial; previous wording was "before being moved to its current genus, Calidris, in 1804 by Blasius Merrem") - MPF (talk) 14:05, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  @Jimfbleak I think I may have found it; surprisingly recent, as Pontoppidan's Tringa ferruginea was long overlooked with older works using Pallas's Scolopax testacea. It's (probably) in Stresemann, E. (1941). Calidris ferruginea (Pontoppidan) statt Calidris testacea (Pallas). Ornithologische Monatsberichte 49: 21. Regrettably "This item is not available online due to copyright restrictions"🤬 And with it being a German journal published in 1941, it won't be available as hard copy in any UK library, either. - MPF (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
  @Jimfbleak @MSK this has been a really fascinating rabbithole to dive into! There are plenty of earlier references (example) to Calidris ferruginea ... but (Brünnich, 1764), not (Pontoppidan, 1763), so a later homonym, even though used for the same species, Curlew Sandpiper. Then this in Witherby's A practical handbook of British birds (1924), which rejects C. ferruginea (Brünnich, 1764) in favour of C. testacea (Pallas, 1764) because of this homonymy, with C. ferruginea (Pontoppidan, 1763) disregarded as "considered indeterminate .... (Hartert however disagreeing)". Looks like Hartert's disagreement with the consensus was eventually verified by Stresemann, leading to the installation of Pontoppidan's name as valid in the inaccessible 1941 Ornithologische Monatsberichte paper. - MPF (talk) 22:19, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MPF: have you tried Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request? It's amazing what people can access. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:27, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest I was surprised that this article seemed to have sailed through GA, let alone be nominated here, despite multiple grammatical errors (notably random switching from "it" to "they") and missing words. I started fixing some of these, but got bored. However, a first FAC is never easy, so I'll do what I can. MSK I have paid access to Cornell Birds of the World, and if you email me I'll send copies of any sections you need, the plumage and moult section in particular might be helpful. The Cornell map doesn't show or mention breeding in Alaska or elsewhere in N America. I'll comment as I go Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:24, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not a fan of the bullet-pointed sections, an FA is supposed to show a high standard of writing which lists don't fulfil, particularly inappropriate for territorial behaviour.

Your text is comprehensive, but you say nothing about predation, which obviously occurs. I appreciate why, since you are unlikely to find a source saying X eats curlew sandpipers, but you can fudge a bit, as I did in Ruff (bird) Nesting and survival section.

Cornell has Females cooperated to spot, warn of, and mob potential predators. Additionally, these aggregations sometimes involved families of other species, including Ruddy Turnstone (Arenaria interpres), Little Stint (Calidris minuta), and Sanderling (Calidris alba)., worth mentioning? here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:32, 28 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your map is fine, perhaps provide links to the sources on the Commons page?

I'd move "Similar species" to immediately follow the rest of the plumage description, rather than having vocalisations in between. Personally, I don't normally bother with images of similar species, but I doubt that there's a guideline on that.

The captions contain a number of imperative statements that are instructions to the reader, beginning "Note...". These are generally to be avoided, per MOS:NOTE. Instead of captions of the form "A bird. Note x.", you could use "A bird, showing x" or similar. William Avery (talk) 13:57, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'll start with a positive: I like that you used the term "formally described" the first time instead of just "described" as many species articles use. The full term makes it clear to the reader that this is not the common-language usage of "describe" which it might otherwise appear to be.
Many readers will not be familiar with the "Calidris × cooperi" usage for a genetic cross. You do link "hybridises, but that's far enough away from the "x" usage that its not obvious they're connected. Not to mention that the linked-to Hybrid (biology) doesn't explain the "x" nomenclature; it just uses it a couple of times, assuming the reader already knows what it means. So that needs a little clarification.
There's a few words that need explaining per MOS:TECHNICAL: tarsus, coverts, crest, rectices, primaries, secondaries, scapulars, tertials, rufous, nape, beach wrack.
- MSK you fixed a few of these, but also missed a bunch: coverts, rectrices, etc. Please make sure all of those have some in-line explanation.
a distinctively white supercilium ("eyebrow") No need to put "eyebrow" in quotes.
- MSK You still have a few of these: "knee" and "ankle" for example. See WP:SCAREQUOTES.
  I'm pretty sure in this case it should be fine, since what is called the "knee" is not actually the knee, so I am actually intending to indicate that the writer is distancing themself from the otherwise common interpretation of the quoted expression, and the those are words to watch, not words to avoid. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 23:23, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
grey-brown lores (between the base of the bill and the eyes) should be "the feathers between the base ..."
the body feathers are largely or completely replaced, but few if any flight feathers are replaced Maybe this is OK, but some readers might wonder what "flight feathers" are. Would is be correct to say "wing feathers", as a more obvious opposite to "body feathers"?
I agree with William Avery about your use of "note" in captions.
File:Calidris ferruginea in flight - Paolo Zucca - 228168944.png is not a great photo. Is there a better one which could be swapped in here? If not, then at least a closer crop would probably be useful.
Only the male sings ... Calls are uttered by both genders explain how a song differs from a call. Is it just that calls are shorter? If so, state that.
The dunlin also looks similar, but ... You've already discussed the dunlin in the previous paragraph. Could these be consolidated?
The "Distribution and habitat" section needs a map. I know you've got one in the infobox, but it would be more useful if it was in this section, adjacent to the text which discusses it.
The curlew sandpiper shows little fidelity to nesting sites can you be more specific about what "fidelity to nesting sites" means? For example, some birds (Ospreys being the example I'm most familiar with) return to the same exact nest they built the previous year. So does a lack of fidelity mean they come back to the same general area but build a new nest, or that they come back to a totally different location?
It practices preening and bathing and have been observed scratching its head with its claws and dipping its head in the water to clean it "has been observed", perhaps?
Territories are 1.6–4.0 hectares (4.0–9.9 acres) in size No need for "in size"; that's just fluff that adds no information.
A male would perform aerial displays and "whine" drop the quotes.

That's it for me for a first reading. Overall, I think this is in pretty good shape. RoySmith (talk) 17:05, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by image comment - I might return with a fuller review, but at first glance, the huge galleries seem unusual, see WP:galleries, especially since there are comparatively few photos of the article's subject itself. No more photos of behaviour and other relevant aspects? Could the galleries be made less dominating by for example using right or left aligned multiple image templates instead? FunkMonk (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I mostly agree with Monk about the images of other species. I don't think that comparison photos are necessarily a problem but now that Monk has mentioned it, yeah, there do seem to be a lot of them. There's a fine line between "This is what X is" and "How to tell X from Y". The latter is more appropriate for a birding guide, but that's not what we are per WP:NOTHOWTO. The use of "note" in the image captions is related to this. RoySmith (talk) 17:44, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith this is the only other freely licensed photo on Flickr I could find of the curlew sandpiper's wings, perhaps it might be better? I've removed the "Calidris x cooper" and other scientific names, since they don't add much to the article.

@RoySmith @William Avery I should have removed all the instances of MOS:NOTE.

@RoySmith @FunkMonk I've removed some of the unnecessary images, hopefully it's better now. When I get home I'll try to mess around with the galleries to try and make them smaller.

Thank you all for the reviews! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:16, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've found a couple more photos of the curlew sandpiper in flight on iNaturalist that are freely licensed and better then the current one, let me know which one is the best.

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/331094277
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/230345099
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/57619100 - though there are 2 other non-curlew sandpipers
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/154901555 - not in flight, but wingstripes are very visible
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/187164429 - about the same res as the original, but wingstripes are more prominent

I've looked through all the CC-BY photos of the curlew sandpiper so if you want to search on your own filter the other freely usable licenses. monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:28, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I just searched through BY-SA and CC0, found these photos:

https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/141492937 - amazing photo, but bird itself is pretty low-res
https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/183637718 - higher res, but is a front-on view and wingstripe is a bit harder to see.

monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:34, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think the photo of the group could certainly work, and one in flight that shows the plumage well. There are also free images and even videos on Flickr showing various behaviours:[39] FunkMonk (talk) 09:51, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see I dropped this one on the floor a while ago and never came back, for which I apologise. I really don't have any other issues so I'll add my support and trust that you'll work through AryKun's problems to his satisfaction. RoySmith (talk) 12:26, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Generalissima: I have made the citations much more consistent, and I've used the IUCN source a bit more; your concerns should all be addressed (nil the final paragraph of Description/Similar species, as I don't have access to those books.)

@Femke and RoySmith: I've done a lot of work trying to MTAU, hopefully your concerns should all be addressed. For Femke, I've also went and removed all the convert templates, since this bird is native to the Old World and thus shouldn't really need imperial units anyways. RoySmith, I've also removed all the scientific names from the hybrids part in Taxonomy, as they really don't add anything to the article.

@Jimfbleak: I've tried to expand the predation section, I found one source mentioning that they are hunted by the parasitic jaeger and the rufous-breasted sparrowhawk, and another source discussing the predators of Arctic-breeding waters as well. I've removed all of the bullet lists from the prose. All your issues should be fixed now.

Misc:

Corrected spellings to British English
Fixed the they/it inconsistency
Added alt text to all the images

monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:27, 10 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@MSK: Parasitic jaegers and rufous-breasted sparrowhawks have been observed preying upon curlew sandpipers. "Parasitic jaeger" reads oddly in a British English text, and I'd make it clear that the hawk is on the wintering grounds, perhaps something like Arctic skuas and, in the African wintering areas, rufous-breasted sparrowhawks... Otherwise, now ready to Support Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:24, 11 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Done monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 20:35, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@RoySmith @Generalissima Your comments should all be addressed, if I could nudge you to support that would be great! Thanks in advance. m s k 19:46, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The Feeding and diet section needs work.

Large flocks only occur outside the breeding areas
Like many other Scolopacidae, curlew sandpipers feed by touch. They probe mud or soft sand in marshy areas with their long bills. This is an important method of foraging and should be mentioned in the article.
Other than insects, outside the breeding season curlew sandpipers eat polychaete worms (bristle worms), small molluscs, crustaceans etc.
Feeding at night is very poorly documented in the literature and is doubtful. It is mentioned by Mlodinow & Medrano (2023) but not by BWP.
- The only primary source on nocturnal feeding that I can find is a passing reference in a half page 1981 article by Peter Dann here: Dann, P. (1981). "Resource allocation among 3 congeneric species of sandpiper" (PDF). Stilt. 1: 3..
- "although the frequency at which it forages at night decreases as the time for northwards migration approaches." I think this misrepresents the primary source which is: Puttick, G.M. (1979). "Foraging behaviour and activity budgets of Curlew Sandpipers". Ardea. 67: 111–122.. Puttick checked for night feeding but didn't observe this behaviour - even though the birds were soon expected to migrate and would need to build up reserves. He was questioning whether night feeding ever occurs.
- An article specifically on night feeding by waders here: Rohweder, D.A.; Baverstock, P.R. (1996). "Preliminary investigation of nocturnal habitat use by migratory waders (Order Charadriformes) in northern New South Wales". Wildlife Research. 23: 169–184. doi:10.1071/WR9960169. only contains the sentence "The numbers of terek sandpiper (Xenus cinereus) and curlew sandpiper (Calidris ferruginea) decreased on sandy mudflats at night although where these birds went is unknown."
- In Dann's much longer 1999 article on foraging by curlew sandpipers he doesn't mention nocturnal feeding: Dann, Peter (1999). "Foraging behaviour and diets of red-necked stints and curlew sandpipers in south-eastern Australia". Wildlife Research. 27 (1): 61–68. doi:10.1071/WR98050. - Aa77zz (talk) 11:30, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the part about feeding at night; I hopefully will get around to fixing up the Feeding and diet section when I get home in a couple of hours. Thank you for the comments! monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 21:10, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

3 days late but I finally got around to fixing up the Feeding and diet section; that should be

Done monkey_smashing^keyboards (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aa77zz, how is this looking now? Gog the Mild (talk) 12:47, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder if https://www.discoverwildlife.com/animal-facts/birds/do-birds-have-knees is the best source we can use for such an explanation. Same question for https://www.allaboutbirds.org/news/how-do-birds-survive-the-winter/ but in my experience this kind of information is really hard to source and kinda banal, so I guess it's OK. Everything else seems fine; as per usual, I think identifiers in citations are a job for the bots not human editors. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:29, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

A first-year breeder does not migrate, instead remaining in its overwintering range throughout breeding season – So first-years breed? That is not mentioned in the main text.
Oops! "Yearling bird" is used later in the text so I used that instead.

The juvenile plumage is strikingly different – More striking than the difference between breeding and non breeding adults? Or what does the "striking" imply here?
Don't know why I used striking here, removed.

The curlew sandpiper is a monotypic taxon, meaning that it has no recognised subspecies. – We should not introduce technical terms just to teach them. You could simply write "There are no recognised subspecies".
Done.

and a tarsus (the joint between the "knee" and the "ankle"[a]) – the tarsus is not a joint. It should also link to the Glossary of bird terms (like this: {{birdgloss|tarsus}}), as the article tarsus (skeleton) is about human anatomy and not helpful.
Never knew about this template, seems useful! Also fixed the misnomer.

dark brown irises – Link iris
Done.

especially on the top of the head – Why is this linked to an article about crests? Does this bird have a crest? Do you maybe wanted to link to crown?
Done.

Need to link "rump" (birdgloss, again)
Done.

The pre-breeding moult – This is quite technical. Anyways, I would first add a general sentence introducing the different moults, then discuss each of them.
I added an explanatory sentence to the first paragraph, hopefully it is enough.

Occurring from January to May, the pre-breeding moult is partial – Contradicts previous sentence that states it is a full moult.
The previous sentence is a typo, I meant to write "post-breeding moult"

Returning breeders are sexually dimorphic – So that means that in secondary plumage, they are not sexually dimorphic? Term could be explained too.
Reworded. Definitive plumages are identical in both sexes.

Link/explain "crown"
Replaced with "top of the head" like earlier.

except with the rust-coloured tinting being almost completely solid – What does "solid" mean? Uniform?
Replaced with "opaque".

The juvenile looks similar to the adult non-breeding plumage – This contradicts the lead which says that the juvenile is "strikingly different".
Done.

has a less visible eyebrows – singular/plural mismatch
Done.

which is similar in colour and build, though it is darker, larger, and has a shorter bill – The image caption mentions the yellowish legs; therefore it is not similar in color!?
Done.

where the severe climate with harsh cold winds and short growing period prevent – "prevents"
Done.

overwinters in coastal South Asia as well as Southeast Asia – Is an "also" missing, since it does not only overwinter in Asia?
Done.

Its behaviour is similar to that of other waders: walking, running, and wading – That's a strange sentence. Behaviours are not restricted to just these three, very general ones. These are just modes of locomotion.
Done.

sandspits – should that be "sandpits"?
Nope, see Merriam-Webster. I will try to MTAU for this later.

The aerial chase closely resembles territorial conflicts – I think this is poor wording (maybe "resembles chases during territorial conflicts")
Done.

repeating the pressing motion from earlier. – What pressing motion?
I was probably looking at the source when I wrote that, reworded.

The precopulatory display precedes copulation – That's a tautology. Why not just "Before copulation, …"?
This was a stylistic choice to stick to the names Holmes & Pitelka gave to each breeding display, though if you'd prefer it I can also reword it to your suggestion.

Hi Jens, courtesy ping, see above. Cheers. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:45, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

So sorry for the delay, I was extremely busy in real life. Back to work now … --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

On average, the nestling weighs 8.2 g, with a bill length of 10.8 mm, a tarsus length of 23.2 mm (0.91 in), and a wingspan of 17 mm. – You sometimes provide unit conversions, sometimes don't (here, the inconsistency is even within a single sentence). Make sure that's consistent. As this is a science article, I think you are not required to provide conversions per the MOS, so it might be up to you if you give them or not.
Done, though I'm pretty sure this is the only case of a convert template being used.

A male would perform aerial displays. Also in the next three sentences. I do not understand why you use "would" here, when you don't do that in other sections. Why not just "A male performs aerial displays"?
Done
He would restrict his activity to his own territory, which meant stopping his chase at the territorial boundaries, suggesting awareness of his neighbour's territory. – Maybe simpler "He stops his chases at the territorial boundary, suggesting awareness of his neighbour's territory"? More concise without lost information?
Done, used your suggestion
The aggressive ground display has only been observed once in a 1964 study, and consisted of the male lowering his head and neck parallel to the ground and pulled back towards his body, and fanning his tail before running towards the invading bird. – That implies that this behaviour has never been observed since 1964. However, since the source is from 1964, it cannot possibly cover that fact.
Done, removed the part about the "only once"
It eats insects and other small invertebrates such as crabs, molluscs, and worms, supplemented with various seeds. – "It" is still the female? Or does the sentence apply to both male and female?
Done, moved the sentence for less ambiguity
Image caption Smooth cordgrass: Instead of just the name of the plant, I would briefly state the relevance of the plant to the bird.
Done
invasive species – link in lead. Since it's only the Smooth cordgrass, I would mention that directly in the lead, too.
Done? Didn't link invasive species but linked smooth cordgrass in the lead
Another major factor in habitat loss may also be the invasive smooth cordgrass – Does the "may" mean that it is not certain that the cordgrass is a major factor? If so, you should add the same ambiguity to the lead as well.
Done, removed the "may," as the source is definitive in saying that the smooth cordgrass has caused habitat loss.
After breeding season, it migrates south throughout Europe and Asia to spend the winter, mainly in Africa but also along the coasts of Australasia and Southeast Asia; occupying tidal mudflats and saltpans. – Not sure the ; works here. Maybe just use a comma instead?
Done
That the reproductive success of this species is strongly related to the population of lemmings is very interesting. Maybe that could be added to the lead?
Done
That's it from me. Leaning support assuming the above will be addressed. --Jens Lallensack (talk) 19:42, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@Jens Lallensack: should be done now. m s k 21:01, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This version

3 OK
4 OK
5 OK
7 Where is that said?
9 I oh so hate photo PDFs.
11 Which page?
19 Not sure which section this is?
21 Not sure which section this is?
26 Not sure which section this is?
28 Can't access any of this.
29 Not sure which section this is?
33 OK
35 OK
48 This needs a page number.
53 Doesn't mention "warbling", at times the formulations are quite similar to the sauce.
63 Not sure which section this is?
64 OK
68 Not sure which section this is?
75 The source says peregrine falcon.
80 Not sure which section this is?

Might take a while to get back here, just as a heads up. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 12:25, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For source 7, on the very large table on page 13, near the bottom. For the Birds of the World source, it's closed access with a free preview, but I will send you a PDF. For source 28 you'll have to ask MPF, I don't have access to those either. Source 53, "warbling" is a synonym for "twittering" that is also more common, so I used that instead. I was trying to stick to the source's formatting, but if it is too close, I can re-write that section. For source 75, that was an error on my part, fixed. Thanks in advance. m s k 17:14, 8 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

19 seems to involve more feathers than our article says. 26 doesn't mention white spots/tufts or returning breeders? 63 doesn't imply that mixed species flocks are the norm. 80 is fine, wonder if linking intertidal would be warranted. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:30, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Should be done. m s k 20:00, 10 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think so, yes. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 09:37, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have had a look at this article from the point of view of a non-specialist reader. The prose is great, apart from the repeated use of the term "yearling bird", which is somewhat guessable from context but would be better glossed or replaced.

The article seems to at least touch on, and in most cases give detailed discussion to, most subjects I would consider necessary for a bird article: classification (including evolutionary descent and subspecies, or here lack of) and nomenclature; measurements, sounds, and visual description; geographic distribution, migration, and habitat; the processes of breeding and maturation; feeding; and conservation and population. I particularly like the use of galleries, which here seem very appropriate to demonstrate plumage variations and comparisons to other similar-looking birds. The only thing I'm wondering re. comprehensiveness is if it has ever been hunted or had significance in any cultures over its wide migration span?

If the above (minor) points could be adjusted or replied to, I think I will be very willing to lend my support to this article's promotion. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:03, 22 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

First sentence seems to end a bit abruptly to me, and I wonder if wader is too jargon-y to be the first descriptor used in the article.
Lengthened the sentence, though I disagree that "wader" is jargony, as it is standard in British english.
"After breeding season" lacking "the".
Done
"it migrates south...Southeast Asia" Poorly worded and confusing. "migrates south throughout Europe and Asia" seems to imply that it overwinters in those continents, but is then immediately followed by "mainly in Africa[...]Australasia and Southeast Asia". Also, what about the wintering populations in South Asia and Arabia?
Reworded the entire thing, should be much more consise now.
"; occupying tidal mudflats and saltpans." Ungrammatical, semi-colons are not used before sentence fragments.
Done
"with the areas near the head and breast being brighter" Body does not say this and I think you mean to say lighter in any case?
Done
"with a creamy-coloured streaking" Don't think that the article is needed here.
"fully fledge at around 14–20 days" 'around' is superfluous when a range is already mentioned.
Some significant systematic history mentioned by BOW and IUCN Red List page is omitted in the article, concerning both the generic placement and the priority of the specific epithet.
I'd expect the coverage of phylogenetic relationships to be more comprehensive than just the immediate sister taxon for an FA (especially since it's given by BOW and cited in-article).
Also mentions probable hybrids with dunlin and white-rumped sandpiper.
"is a small wader...in length and...in weight" reads weirdly to me.
"around 70–75 km/h" Convert template.
"60°–70°" I think only one degree symbol is needed?
You provide somewhat incongruous definitions of precocial in the lead and body; "relatively mature and mobile" and "almost fully independent" are not the same thing. I'd go with the former in both places, since wader chicks are not superprecocial in the manner of megapodes or the like.
"A male would perform" Entire paragraph seems weird because it reads like there's only one male that used to do ts?
"sometimes mixed-species " BOW says often, different nuances to those descriptors.
"Her diet is also different, preferring to eat larger prey" Needs to be reworded, currently ungrammatical.
"The juvenile...breeding season" massive run-on sentence and additionally ungrammatical.
"Its lifespan and breeding success are not well researched" BOW straight-up does not say this; it says nothing about lifespan and says "the annual breeding success...has not been directly measured", not that is is poorly-researched.
Why no mentions of the extensive population estimates in BOW?
Documented predation by black falcon.
Interspecific aggression in wader flocks along the Vistula.
Possible impact of heavy metal pollution on the species.
Schekkerman et al. seems like it could be used for some information on the impact of weather on survival, no? See also this.
Roberts' Birds of Southern Africa p. 246 has some interesting notes on foraging behaviour.
Auks should be capitalized in the title of the HBW ref (no. 10).
Ref 75 needs to be formatted better; italicize specific name and change the website name to the actual name instead of the url.
IOC reference is very outdated, needs to be updated to either 15.2 or AviList (not sure what WP:BIRDS has currently adopted).
Is the further reading source actually relevant? It's like half a page about this species and it's both outdated and not particularly interesting/novel info.
All-in-all, not really at FA level yet, not-insignificant issues with prose and comprehensiveness here. I will have to preliminarily oppose pending responses. I've pointed out the explicitly ungrammatical or misleading portions of the text, but even parts that aren't out-and-out incorrect don't have the polished text I'd expect from an FA; could do with a c/e from GOCE imo.
The article's comprehensive enough for a GA, but lacks quite a bit of info I'd expect for an FA. A bit concerning since it only took me about half an hour of digging to find sources with that missing information, so there might be more information worth including out there.
Some of the pop science sources are not quite HQRS, but fine in context since scholarly sources rarely mention such general knowledge. Will try and do a comprehensive source check soon when I have time. AryKun (talk) 20:48, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:35, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It's early 2009. The world is barely starting to recover from last year's financial meltdown. Despite your wealth and success, you feel trapped in an industry that relies on squeezing designers and customers in an endless cycle of consumption, an ouroboros forever eating its own tail. Do you throw up your hands and quit? No. You're Alexander McQueen: you commit the sackable offense better known as The Horn of Plenty.

I return to FAC with one of McQueen's wildest shows, a no-holds-barred satire of fashion that combined haute couture and trash. Monstrous, bizarre, and magnificent, it divided critics; I hope it will be intriguing but perhaps less polarising to reviewers here. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:35, 19 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am reviewing this because, according to [40], PMC has a review-to-nomination ratio greater than 5.0. Thank you for reviewing articles.

"In 1992, he graduated with his master's degree in fashion design from Central Saint Martins (CSM), a London art school." I am confused as to why this is relevant to this article, and wonder if it can be removed as too much information and off-topic.
- ~~This is standard background for this series of articles and serves to contextualize the length of his career and the period in which he was working~~ Actually, no, on reflection I went back and trimmed this a little.
"From 1996 to October 2001, McQueen was – in addition to his responsibilities for his own label – head designer at French fashion house Givenchy, replacing John Galliano" This also seems like too much information and irrelevant to this article.
- It's specifically relevant because McQueen's time at Givenchy fed his rage at the industry and his sale to Gucci, and his replacing Galliano was a major factor in McQueen's weird rival-obsession with him, which is discussed in two separate places later in the article
In the third paragraph of "Background", I do not think the article needs the specifics of the different themes of specific works. Rather, the parargaph can summarise the information by stating in a sentence the themes that McQueen explored in the past (without mentioning specific themes to runways).
- Again, disagree - the point is that this disillusionment with fashion was a major recurring theme in his career. Notice especially how, in 1997, a mere five years after his first collection in 1992, he's presenting a collection about how much being a designer sucks

This article is not about the themes of this work throughout his career: its about a specific collection. While the context of this collection within McQueen's career is important, the context of the other collections is less important. As someone who has little knowledge of McQueen, I was confused as to why all of this information was here and how it related to the collection, even after reading the article. It seems like overarching themes of McQueen's collections are getting WP:COATRACKed here and would be a better fit in the McQueen article. Z1720 (talk) 05:17, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the scope of the article, as I am the one who wrote it. The purpose of the background section is to contextualize the subject. In this case, it establishes that McQueen has done this kind of thing throughout his career, so the reader should view this as typical of him (it also helps build the web, providing useful links to readers who may be interested in other similar McQueen collections). I have provided this type of thematic information in all my previous McQueen FAs, such as Voss (collection), which uses that paragraph practically verbatim, so consensus from previous practice suggests that it is accepted as useful, even if not to you.

"Sarah Mower from Vogue described "heated arguments" breaking out after the show, and Times ." I think this might be an incomplete thought.
- Yup, this is an editing fuck-up, I've removed it as I couldn't figure out what I was trying to say.
The "Reception" section falls into the "X says Y" sentence pattern. I do not think the amount of quotes are necessary, and that this section can combine critic opinions that are similar. WP:RECEPTION has some suggestions on how to avoid this.
- Do you have any specific suggestions for changes? It's difficult to action such a broad criticism.

WP:RECEPTION has excellent suggestions on how to summarise quotes and merge commentary. If I was editing this section, I would start by removing most of the quotes and summarising their commentary instead. Specifically, remove "Mower called McQueen "the last designer standing who is brave or foolhardy enough" to present a collection so polarising" as the first paragraph already establishes that the collection is polarizing. This is not just a "remove one sentence" concern: this involves some wholesale rethinking of how this section is rewritten, which will take some time. Z1720 (talk) 05:17, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It comes off as pretty condescending to re-link the page you already linked in your previous comment, as if I cannot read and have no familiarity with writing reception sections at the FAC level. I have built the section in the same manner that I have done for all previous McQueen FAs, using a combination of summary and quotation.
Your sole actionable suggestion is to remove Mower's quote, which I will not be doing. It establishes not just that the collection is polarizing, but that Mower has singled McQueen out as the only designer in the industry who would present such a polarizing collection, as well as highlighting that he may be alternately seen as brave or as foolish for doing so.

The "Analysis" falls into a similar X said Y structure as "Reception" and could probably be improved upon.
- Again, do you have any specific suggestions for changes?

See above: the section does not need a sentence to describe what each person said about the collection. The reader also doesn't need to know which specific authors gave specific statements: if the reader is interested, they can look at the inline citation and find out who the author is. Most of those names can be removed. Z1720 (talk) 05:17, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is completely against the standard practice of attributing quotes and opinions to authors in the text, and I will not be removing this information. These are not objective facts that can be presented in wikivoice, they are subjective opinions and analyses that should be attributed to the author. Again, this section is constructed in the same style that previous McQueen FAs are built in.

"McQueen's following collection, Plato's Atlantis, featured another extreme platform shoe," I am struggling to understand what this paragraph has to do with this collection. A more explicit explanation is needed.
- I've revised this paragraph to add more about the throughline of the digital prints and trimmed some detail about the armadillos (although they remain present as it shows how McQueen continued to experiment with extreme platform shoes, taking them to an even more extreme level than he had in Horn of Plenty)

Those are my thoughts on the prose. Please ping me upon response. Z1720 (talk) 02:50, 20 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720, sorry about taking so long to respond, with apologies I've pushed back against a few things and am looking for more detail on others. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 16:48, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, second ping as it's been a week. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:00, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I understand your position, even if I don't agree with it. I'll stop my review here without a declaration, and see what other reviewers say about this. Z1720 (talk) 18:23, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry PM, but I am afraid that I agree with Z1720 in pretty much everything they have written. I won't risk accusations of condescension by over-repeating what they have said, but the large number of unnecessary quotes IMO is inconsistent with MOS:QUOTE and the extended passages along the lines of A said this, B wrote that, C wrote the other, D opined something else does not meet FAC criterion 1a; ie, it is not engaging. Z1720's suggestions as to how the issues they identify might be addressed also seem on the money to me. For the record - recusing to comment and possibly opine. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:41, 29 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Gog. This is the exact same style of reception and analysis sections that I've used in previous McQueen FAs. For example, just to grab my three most recent, Scanners (collection), Voss (collection), and What a Merry-Go-Round all use this style and passed without issue. You didn't recuse to review at these but you did promote (and in some cases leave drive-by comments), so presumably you read them over and had no issues or you would have said as much. Can you clarify what you feel the difference is that makes the writing in those articles acceptable but problematic here? ♠PMC♠ (talk) 22:43, 31 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No. I would prefer you to take my and Z1720's comments on their merits and focus on this article. In passing, Wikipedia articles themselves are not reliable sources, FAC assessment recognises no (or few) precedents, and the primary role of a coordinator closing an article is to judge consensus - not to decide if they agree with it. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:44, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy to act on any actionable comments from you, Z1720, or anyone else, but simply saying the entire thing is not good is not helpful or actionable feedback. Even a clarification on what you feel this article does poorly compared to others would be helpful guidance. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:01, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Premeditated Chaos: I highly recommend that you read WP:RECEPTION. The essay includes examples of what the "X says Y" prose looks like, and how to reformat it. Here are some examples of how this could happen in the article:

Currently, the artilce says: "Moore appreciated McQueen "making fun of his own compulsion for extreme runway drama" while making a grand statement about fashion.[116] At the Toronto Star, David Graham felt the show was a "disquieting" indictment of the excesses of fashion, particularly in a time of economic crisis.[125] Wilson appreciated the "challenging" concept, but questioned whether McQueen was being hypocritical by drawing so extensively on fashion history while also dismissing it. In his opinion, the breadth of referencing meant that some elements were "lost or obscured"[19]." All three sentences are formatted in a "X says Y" format: a person is named, then a quote of what they said follows. Readers do not care what David Graham at the Toronto Star says because they don't know who he is or what this publication is. Ditto for Wilson or Moore: they just want to know what the critics said. If a reader truly wants to know which critics expressed which opinions, they can look at the citation where the author's name is given. These sentences could be merged together to say something like, "Reviewers stated that McQueen was critiquing the extreme runway drama excesses of fashion,[116][125] though questioned whether McQueen was being hypocritical by drawing so extensively on fashion history while also dismissing it, and that the referencing causing some elements to become lost or obscured."[19]
Another example, from "Designs and show": "A number of reviewers regarded The Horn of Plenty as an overall success. Miles Socha at Women's Wear Daily called it a "full-strength, hard-core McQueen experience".[50] Another reviewer there felt it was a daring expression of rage.[115] Hilary Alexander at The Independent was enthused about the entire show, especially the variety of materials and attention to detail.[94] Booth Moore, writing at the Los Angeles Times, was intrigued by McQueen being in "high-camp mode".[116] Although broadly positive in their reviews, Suzy Menkes of the International Herald Tribune and Liz Jones of the Daily Mail had reservations about the collection. Menkes highlighted the oversized knitted items as highly imaginative, while Jones called it a "timely reminder" of fashion's ability to be provocative and novel.[117][118]" This has lots of X says Y after the first sentence. Instead, this could be "Many reviewers regarded The Horn of Plenty as an overall success,[50] describing it as provocative, novel,[117][118] and a daring expression of rage.[115] They positively commented on the variety of materials and attention to detail,[94] highlighting designs such as oversized knitted items as highly imaginative.[116][117][118]" After removing each reviewer's name, there is more space in the paragraph to either expand upon the information and add more information about what was said about the collection or merge it with another paragraph to make it more concise.

I hope the above helps, and I really suggest reading WP:RECEPTION as it explains how to do this better than what I described above. Z1720 (talk) 04:03, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think I would have to disagree quite strongly with removing critics and/or publication names. We're giving expert's opinions, so we should be attaching those opinions clearly (ie. inline) to the people who have them. I've seen too many cases of readers adding ^[who?] templates to sentences that say "critics said" or "many reviewers regarded" to think that this article would remain tag free for long. - SchroCat (talk) 09:22, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think it is a stretch to call most of the named individuals experts, especially when they are not notable enough to be redlinked for potential Wiki-articles. If editors add "who" templates, they can be pinged on the talk page for discussion. Not every expert needs to be removed: the occasional X says Y statement is helpful, but in my opinion the current prose is overusing this sentence structure to the article's detriment. Z1720 (talk) 13:49, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They're fashion editors, which makes them experts, I think. I'm not sure the lack of a redlink is indicative of not being notable enough for having their names mentioned. The structure is a different point, but however the text is written, the names should be inline to identify who holds the opinions. - SchroCat (talk) 14:05, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for intruding on this discussion, but I agree with SchroCat. There is value in keeping these names in the prose. Like SchroCat has already said above, these are fashion journalists and editors (and by extension experts in their fields), and it is always helpful to clearly attribute this type of information in the prose, so readers can more clearly understand and track who is saying what. And someone can be an expert in their field and not be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Aoba47 (talk) 15:10, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An interested reader can track who is saying what from the inline citation. The name usually does not need to be in the prose. Z1720 (talk) 15:33, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In my opinion, this likely comes down to personal preference. And yes, while the inline citation is there, some readers may be unfamiliar with this type of thing and not know how to access them to find this information. It makes me think of MOS:NOFORCELINK in a sense. Why force readers to navigate to a citation when this information can be clearly attributed in the prose? We may think that inline citations are easy and obvious, but we are all experienced Wikipedia editors, and newer readers or those with less experience may think differently. Again, I can understand preferring a different style or approach for this type of section, but this more so seems to be about personal preference. WP:RECEPTION is an essay, not a policy. While it is a very useful resource (and I have cited it and used it myself), it is important to make the distinction and keep that in mind. Aoba47 (talk) 15:54, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It also comes down to FA criteria 1a. "well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard" and #4, "It stays focused on the main topic without going into unnecessary detail and uses summary style where appropriate". Listing non-notable people and quoting each of their opinions does not, in my opinion, use engaging prose or use summary style. WP:DETAIL talks about how readers need information on the topic's important points. Listing the names of non-notable reviewers isn't focused on the topic: saying what reviewers said, and grouping them together when appropriate, is in greater adherence to WP:DETAIL. It is OK to consolidate reviews if they are saying the same thing, which is what I observe when reviewing the article. Z1720 (talk) 16:59, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Again, this comes down to one's opinion about what makes engaging prose and what is unnecessary detail. In my opinion, engaging prose is highly subjective. I do not believe there is one clear objective way of handling. What may seem engaging to you may not seem as engaging to me and vice versa.

For instance, I disagree about removing publication names from the prose. I view that information as notable and as important context for readers. I am not well-informed in fashion. But, I know in music, there is a difference in how a Pitchfork review is seen versus one from Rolling Stone or Billboard. I would argue that stripping away everything to just reference generic critics makes the prose less engaging (and again, that is just my opinion).

That being said, I would be more than happy to reread the article and to see what could be condensed and consolidated if @Premeditated Chaos: would like for me to do so. I would think that there could be some sort of compromise or meeting in the middle about this. Aoba47 (talk) 17:19, 6 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Z1720, I appreciate that you have provided some specific feedback, albeit limited. As I've mentioned above, I find your insistent recommendation that I read WP:RECEPTION to be condescending. I have read it, I have told you I have read it, and I do not need to be reminded to read it again, please and thank you.

I have always been told that it's essential to attribute opinions to the person who wrote them, in order to provide the reader the full context for any given quote. Readers should not have to check references for useful information, it should be provided to them in the article. You may not think a reader would find this information useful, but I can think of several instances where a reader might wish to have such context: comparing opinions that come from tabloids vs more reputable papers; British critics versus Americans and others; opinions of women critics vs men. Perhaps someone is interested in chasing a particular reviewer through a series of related articles. It doesn't matter, our job is to provide it. And of course, just because no one has written an article about a person yet doesn't mean they're not important in their field or even notable - every subject is a redlink until someone writes it.

I will attempt to condense the reception section. SchroCat has done some legwork for me there, which I am enormously grateful for - but the idea that I must remove all context for any quoted opinions is your personal preference and not in line with existing best practice. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:34, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Premeditated Chaos: For clarification, I don't think all quotes must be removed. Instead, quotes should be used sparingly to highlight specific aspects. For example, in "Critical reviews" section of Flight Pattern, I used quotes when a source was the only place where an aspect was commented on. The X said Y format was also used a couple times, but I merged prose when multiple sources were stating similar things. I don't think I used any quotes in "Themes and analysis" as I didn't think they were necessary. As for feeling condescended, if you indicated that you read RECEPTION already, I would not have re-suggested it. Instead, you posted that you wanted a reviewer to spend hours preparing actionable items for your article; I only did two examples because I avoid re-writing content for articles that I am reviewing, as I want to work on my own articles of interest. I'm happy to take another look at the article, but I don't think it's advisable for me to spend hours reviewing or re-reviewing an article if my comments are going to be taken as condescending. Please let me know if you would like me to take a look or leave the review as-is. Z1720 (talk) 15:46, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720, given that I'd already mentioned I felt it was condescending to repeat your link to RECEPTION way back when I originally replied to your comments a month ago, it does come off as rude to do it again, not only in your reply but in your edit summary.

I'm sorry that you take it as demanding for me to request specific feedback; typically that is the kind of feedback I have received (and given) at previous FACs so your refusal to provide any came as a surprise. I was not expecting line-by-line analysis, but at the very least some specific suggestions to guide me in making changes would have been reasonable - "paragraph X is the most in need of revising, paragraph Y is mostly fine but could lose Z", etc. I certainly wasn't expecting you to do rewrites for me. I'm not sure where you got that impression from. If you didn't know what I was looking for, perhaps you could have clarified instead of point-blank refusing to provide anything further, and we might not have gotten to this point.

Per my outdented message below, which you may not have seen as you didn't reply to it, I have made changes in line with your recommendations. I hope you would at least read the Reception and Analysis sections over to see if the changes are satisfactory. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 18:12, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Further to the above, I have used Schro's work as a base, and have further revised both Reception and Analysis to trim many quotes entirely, or reduce others in length. I have retained the names/publications of the commentators, as noted. Not going to double ping Z1720 since I already pinged them just above, but courtesy ping to Gog the Mild to see if this is satisfactory. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 05:00, 9 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Do you have any further input on the article? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 13:17, 19 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David and apologies for the delayed response. It is much improved - thanks PMC - to the extent that I am content to duck back out of the discussion. I am recused so it is your call, but I would suggest getting a sign off from Z1720, if only from an abundance of caution. Gog the Mild (talk) 19:17, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Image review (mostly checking if these are all from countries with freedom of panorama, lol)

File:Feather dress from Horn of Plenty by Alexander McQueen at Savage Beauty.jpg - Good
File:McQueen, Musée des beaux-arts - 49.jpg - good
File:Bird jacket by Alexander McQueen (51531).jpg - good
File:Dior denver art1.jpg - good
File:Suit by Coco Chanel, c. 1955, wool, silk - Musée de la mode - Montreal, Canada - DSC07028.jpg- good
File:Givency, vestito corto e cappello, indossato da audrey hepburn in colazone da tiffany, 1961.jpg - good
File:Vinyl dress from Horn of Plenty by Alexander McQueen at Savage Beauty.jpg - good
File:Lee Alexander McQueen & Ann Ray - Rendez-Vous 61.jpg -good (thanks elli)
File:Karlie kloss in horn of plenty closeup.jpg - fair use attribution fine
File:McQueen, Musée des beaux-arts - 48.jpg - good (love this one)
File:House of McQueen exhibition 2025 11.jpg - goodFile:Lee Alexander McQueen & Ann Ray - Rendez-Vous 35.jpg - good
File:House of McQueen exhibition 2025 49.jpg - good
File:Lee Alexander McQueen & Ann Ray - Rendez-Vous 70.jpg - good

All seems fine to me. All images are appropriate and compliment the article. Prose review to come.

Prose thoughts:

Misogyny may be worth linking in the lede.
Background very solid.
cinemaphile may be worth Wiktionary linking
There's generally very few things to note across this. The linking I think is ultimately up to personal preference so I'm happy to support on prose. Generalissima (talk) (it/she) 13:29, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Very sorry, I totally missed these notes! I've linked per your suggestions, and thanks muchly for the comments and image review :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:00, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think that it may be worthwhile to link fashion photography for "mid-century fashion photography" in both the lead and in the body of the article, as I could see some readers not be as familiar with this type of photography, and the article does include several visual representations of fashion photography from this time period, so it would be a helpful resource for people.
I think that it would be helpful to link "sackable" in this quote, "a sackable offense", as it is more of a slang word or regional variation that some readers may be unfamiliar with. Maybe a link to the Wikitionary entry could be useful here?

Done both

Thank you! Aoba47 (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies in advance, as I could be overthinking this, but I wonder if it would be useful to clarify that Jack the Ripper Stalks His Victims was McQueen's thesis collection for his master's degree? It would clarify why only a year is listed for this, and not the year and season, and I do think that it would be helpful to include how McQueen pulled from even his work at fashion school for this collection. I believe that would add an additional layer to this reference.
Have swapped from "first collection" to "thesis collection", does that work?
I think that is a great change. I just find it helpful to clarify these things, even if most readers will probably not really notice this. Aoba47 (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies if I had already asked this in a previous FAC. I noticed that there are some citations that are not in numeric order. I do not believe that this is required for a FAC or is discussed in the MOS, but I was curious about the rationale for this? Just to be clear, I am not saying that this needs to be changed, but it was something that caught my attention while reading through the article, so I thought that I should raise this point here for further discussion if necessary.

I'm just a VE-using slob lol. I think I've got them all right now

I love using the visual editor too, so I get that. I just know that some editors purposefully place citations in a particular order (and not in a numeric order), so I was not sure if that was the case here. Thank you for addressing this. Aoba47 (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question about the linking for this part, "expensive non-renewable specialist materials". Why not link directly to the non-renewable resource article, as those seem to be the type of resources being discussed here? I was just curious on why the renewable resource article was chosen for the link instead.

I just didn't realize we had that article

I can understand that, particularly for more basic or broader concepts and ideas like this, as there are instances in which they have an article and instances in which they were deleted or redirect in favor of something else (like a Wikitionary entry). Aoba47 (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I could be majorly overthinking this one, so apologies in advance. I am uncertain about the contrast being posed in this sentence: Despite the theme of trash and waste, the collection heavily references the natural world with animal prints and real furs. This seems to place trash and waste as antithetical to the natural world, when I am not necessarily true that is the case, as trash and waste do exist in nature. Maybe, it would be more beneficial to have some sort of qualifier in front of "trash and waste" to specify that this is specifically referencing what is being done by humans?

I couldn't think of a way to word this elegantly so I've just removed this bit altogether

I have a question about "committed suicide". I know that language around suicide is very touchy for obvious reasons, and this is discussed in MOS:SUICIDE. I know that this phrasing is not banned or discouraged, but I was curious about your rationale for this word choice?

Thank you for the response (and for the links to the discussions). I can see both sides to this (and frankly, I am not sure what language I would use in this context myself), and I appreciate hearing your rationale for this word choice. It does make sense to me. Aoba47 (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It probably is notable, I just didn't redlink it

Do we have any information on why McQueen dedicated this collection to his mother?

No, but he was a big ol' momma's boy and he dedicated a few to her :)

I do have a question about the critical reaction and response to the make-up style used for this collection. I was wondering if any of the critics brought up anything to how the make-up, particularly the overdrawn lips, could be connected with racial stereotyping and tropes?

Not that I saw, but that would've been quite juicy criticism. I have to assume that the context of it being a mockery of fashion and beauty (and the pale face makeup) made people think more of plastic surgery and porn stars, rather than blackface.

I had a feeling that was the case, but I just wanted to double-check to make sure. I think that the overall styling and context for the collection and runway helped to avoid this type of criticism (or to push it in a different direction). It just was something that came to my mind when I saw the Karlie Kloss image, but I am an American, so I fully recognize that I come from this from a different angle and with different baggage. On a somewhat related note, I do love the Kloss image, and it really does add so much to the article. Aoba47 (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

For this part, "actually depicts a silhouette of a scene", do we have any further information about this "scene", as it is rather vague in its current wording?

I just double checked the source and it says "actually it is a whole scene painted in the style of Victorian silhouettes", but doesn't bother to say what of

That is fair. It is a shame that the source does not go into further detail, but I have run into this type of issue many times before (and I am sure that I will continue to do so lol). Thank you for looking into this. Aoba47 (talk) 16:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The article mentions that the show closes with a flatlining heart monitor, but I was wondering if there was any coverage about the soundtrack used for the rest of the show? Earlier in the article, it is briefly mentioned that the soundtrack is one of the elements that references previous collections, but I was curious if there was more information on this. Apologies if I had missed this.

Unfortunately no! There are plenty of previous articles where specific tracks get name-dropped, but not a one here.

I have not read up to this part yet, but I do see an error message for Citation 153. It says the following: Cite error: The named reference FOOTNOTE was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

Ohh, lord, I've done something here. Okay. I fixed it. Sfnms look so sleek when Airshipjungleman29 does them but I always make a hash of them :P

I have made some incredibly silly errors with citations, so I can completely relate to this lol. Other editors really do make these more technical aspects seem so simple lol. Aoba47 (talk) 16:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies for jumping down to citations. I just noticed a few things after seeing the above error message. This is not a requirement by any means, but I would recommend archiving online citations as link rot and death can be a real headache. I have had to deal with that lately when so many Vibe articles were removed (and all of the magazines were taken off Google Books for whatever reasons).

Don't apologize my dude :) That being said, IAbot has been very dysfunctional for the last year or so, and since anything that gets linked from Wikipedia does get prioritized for archiving on IA, I'm going to leave it for now.

That makes sense. It is a shame that IAbot has been so dysfunctional for a while now. I remember when it was such a great and reliable tool in the past. I was not aware about Wikipedia citations getting prioritized for archiving on IA. That does makes sense, but it is good to know for the future. Aoba47 (talk) 16:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I would also make sure that the linking for works/websites and publishers are consistent throughout. There are some spots where items are not linked, like with Elle in Citation in Citation 157 or Variety in Citation 158.
This is likely a matter of personal preference, but I think that it is helpful to clarify in the template when a citation is for Newspapers.com. I just find it helpful to let readers know the full context of a source rather than potentially surprising them when they click on a link.

This is a lot of work for not that much material benefit to the reader, so I think I'm going to pass here since the clippings should all be accessible

That is fair. It would be a lot of work for something that is not fully necessary and would likely not even be noticed by a majority of readers anyway, so that does make sense to me. Aoba47 (talk) 16:08, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that these comments are helpful. Apologies again, as some of these may just be overthinking things. I have read up to the "Reception" section, and I am really enjoying the article so far. I think that the background information is helpful here, as this collection is referential to McQueen's past work, and it is nice to have it here rather than making readers click on to links or navigate to different articles to find this information. However, that is just my opinion. Once my comments are addressed, I will continue to read through the article. I hope that you are having a wonderful week so far! Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 19:39, 2 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aoba! I've replied all above, as usual I think you're asking the kinds of questions readers would, and I appreciate it. Especially thanks for catching the fucked up reference :) Looking forward to your second half! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:00, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I am glad that I could help. I can't take too much credit for the reference. I think that I must have something set-up on end because the error message was made really big and bold for me lol. I am looking forward to finish my review. I hope that you have a great rest of your week and an amazing weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 16:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just as clarification (since I am referencing citations and citation numbers in this set of comments), I am working off of this version of the article.

Is the WWD acronym for Women's Wear Daily necessary? I do not see that acronym being used in the article, outside of its original introduction, but please let me know if I am just overlooking something incredibly obvious.

Oh nope I think the re-use was edited out at some point

I had a feeling that was the case, but I just wanted to make sure. Thank you!

I think that bourgeoisie may be worth linking, just to help readers who may be less than certain about the word and its meaning. I feel like since a word like escapism is linked later on, a link for this would seem beneficial.

I've linked it to wiktionary since it glosses the specific usage

Thank you. As I say in a response below, I just forget about linking to the wiktionary, and interwiki linking in general This is the better way of addressing this. Aoba47 (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Is the following part necessary, his former employer Givenchy and sometime-rival John Galliano? Galliano was already introduced in a previous section. I can see keeping this, as it has been a while in the article since Galliano was discussed, so it may be helpful for readers who jump around to different sections. This is more so another one that I was curious on the rationale for and not necessarily asking for an immediate change or edit.

Yes, basically because it's quite far down the article from there

I would recommend linking diss. Even though the word has been around for a while now, it is still slang, and it is still conceivable that some readers may be unfamiliar with it and its meaning in this context.

Mmmm...since "diss" isn't quite the same as a "diss track", I've gone with the wiktionary link again

Citations 11 and 57 require a subscription to access, at least on my end. It may be worthwhile to mark this in the citation, but I can also understand if that is something that is not entirely necessary too. This is more so something that I noticed, so I thought I should bring it to your attention.

Eh, same with the Newspapers.com thing, this feels like work without much benefit

Citation 45 is no longer live, at least on my end. When I attempt to access it, I get a 404 error message. Thankfully, the citation was archived on IA, and here is the archived link for that source. I am oddly enough getting the 404 error message for two other Women's Wear Daily sources (Citations 8 and 14). Citation 8 already has an archived link, but here is an archived link for Citation 14. That link actually has a byline for Citation 14 (James Fallon), so I would recommend adding that.

WWD must have wonked their URLs, I've fixed these all now

It is strange because some of them WWD URLs had this issue, while others were just fine. I guess that is just the nature of URLs and websites in general. Thank you for fixing this. Aoba47 (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Non-English sources should be English translations for their titles. So, Citations 111 and 126 should have translations for their titles. I would double-check to make sure that this is done for any other instance of this.

Vanessa Friedman should be linked in Citation 119. I believe that the authors are linked in the other citations, when applicable of course, but this may also be worthwhile to double-check as well.

The live link for Citation 170 goes to a different article than the one being cited. The archived link, however, does go to the correct article.

How bizarre! Since it was only used for the V&A date, I've just gone and swapped it out entirely for a ref to a book that gives the date

I have had similar instances happen in the past, in which a URL was used for an entirely new/different article, but that has been quite rare in my experience and it is always really weird whenever I run into this. Thank you for handling this. I think swapping it out was the better way of addressing this. Aoba47 (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looping back to earlier in the article, I am wondering if a link for hobo ("hobo couture") and camp ("high-camp mode") would be helpful. This should be the last of my random link suggestions lol.

Mmmmmm I'm gonna skip "hobo" since that's a common word, but I'll do camp

That should be everything from me. I hope that these comments are helpful. Please let me know if you have any questions about any of this. Thank you for your wonderful work on this article. As always, best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 18:21, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

All done, thanks for your second look, cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 04:14, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing everything and for your patience with my review. I really enjoyed this article, but I do have a bias as I think that trashion, and the use and reference to trash in art in general, is quite interesting. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. I hope that you have a wonderful weekend and an even better March! Aoba47 (talk) 18:12, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few very minor tweaks throughout (here), mostly relating to page/pages. As for the rest:

"published a photo book documenting the collection's creation in 2013": technically you've written that the collection was created in 2013, not that the book was published then
I don't think "fully-feathered" should be hyphenated (per MOS:HYPHEN)
"percent" to "per cent" (BrEng)
"made of trash": -> "made of rubbish" (BrEng)
trash-as-couture – ditto
"A number of": some reviewers have an issue with this phrase (I'm less concerned – it's clear from context), but maybe best to avoid with "Several" or similar
'it was a "a powerful comment': Double a

That's my lot. As readable and excellent as the previous articles on McQueen. - SchroCat (talk) 15:20, 16 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Schro, thanks as always for your comments. I've made the above changes except the "a number of" thing - I junked one of those, but kept the rest. Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:46, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Where did you get the claim that lacquered silks (like Xiangyunsha silk) are non-renewable? At first blush, and after a quick consult with other sources, which I'd probably trust for textile properties more than fashion publications and a biography, [41] I'm not sure that's an accurate descriptor; did McQueen perceive the fabric as coming from a non-renewable source? Have we run into the silk-satin confusion?

Hm. I think I was taking too much from Waplington's comment in The Cut: "There was a kind of tongue-in-cheek element to the whole thing, though, because Lee wasn’t actually using renewables in his work." I've revised that bit down into to Analysis and stuck to the original wording about the irony of using expensive materials to look like garbage.

Also, "actual feathers" - I think you can trim this to just "feathers", unless the source goes into a lot of depth about the feathers being real. Saying that they're actual feathers implies that there's something distinctive about it when, in fact, that's just the vast majority of fashion or craft feathers -- and those which are fake are very obviously so. It turns out that making artificial feathers is very hard, and there's no point when you can just harvest them from the 48 billion birds killed a year for meat. GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🧸 23:07, 18 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, GreenLipstickLesbian. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 03:02, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No, thank you for even bothering to look at them, @Premeditated Chaos! Good luck with the rest of the process; I'm not going to pretend to be nearly qualified or competent enough to give a meaningful official support (tm), but I looked through the rest of the article (thoroughly enjoyable read, btw) and nothing jumps out at me as weird or obviously wrong. (Though maybe it could benefit from a wikilink to yashmak?) GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🧸 04:55, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, there is one in the first instance at "Many designs were revisions of earlier ideas, while other items, like a chainmail yashmak..." but I can dupe link the second instance if you want. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 14:11, 19 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Ooops, no, that's on me - I have the memory falsely ascribed the goldfish. And I'll leave duplicate links up to you; I tend to favour them (see: goldfish memory), but I fear I favour them to a point where the MOS adherents get a nervous twitch when they read anything I've written. And FA is the land of the MOS adherents, so you should probably listen to them over me.

GreenLipstickLesbian 💌🧸 05:45, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

They're allowed as long as there's sufficient distance, so I'll throw it in. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:52, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source and image review

[edit]

Sources look generally reliable. A few spotchecks showed nothing awry. Citations 157 and 158 (Bailey and Tangcay) have CS1 errors because the archive link is the deprecated archive.today. Otherwise, all good with formatting, although I am wondering at the singular use of {{sfnm}}.

Oop, I've pulled the archive.today links now. Sfnm is so fiddly (for me anyway) that I generally only break it out when I have 4 sfn refs for one sentence, which is the case there. I will lose my hair if I try to do them for the whole article. I could...un-sfnm it, I suppose, I'll just have to figure out which author I can toss.

Thanks Airship, always appreciate seeing you at my FACs :) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 07:36, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pass the image and source review. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:28, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nominator(s): Olliefant (she/her) 05:46, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The series finale of the sitcom Community, I cowrote this with a now retired editor a few years back and got it to GA. I've been mulling over this one for a while, epecially after my first FAC crashed and burned, but I think this one should go better. You know what they say, third times the charm. Olliefant (she/her) 05:46, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here'll be some comments from me! Love this show so I gotta contribute somehow. Arconning (talk) 07:10, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Arconning: done all below Olliefant (she/her) 16:02, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support Arconning (talk) 06:20, 22 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"series creator Dan Harmon and Chris McKenna", specify McKenna's role.
"...Shirley, Elroy and a third black character.", capitalize "Black"
"Ben Chang, Dean Pelton, and Annie Edison respectively.", "Ben Chang, Dean Pelton, and Annie Edison, respectively."
"That one that Jim does is adlibbed.", wikilink adlibbed and add a sic template.
"Additionally, Justin Roiland—who worked with Harmon on the animate sitcom Rick and Morty", "animated"
"Harmon does the voice over", either use "voice-over" or "voiceover"
" The episode makes a references to "Basic Intergluteal Numismatics" (2014),", " The episode makes a reference to "Basic Intergluteal Numismatics" (2014),"
Dan Harmon is wikilinked in the body multiple times, wikilink just the first instance within the body and in a caption of an image.

File:Emotional Consequences of Broadcast Television.jpg - Fair Use
File:Dan Harmon (14790686643).jpg - CC BY-SA 2.0
Both of the images are relevant, have proper captioning, and are licensed properly.

Seeing this here was a really nice surprise, Ollie! Comments to come, but ping me if I haven’t started it up by Friday :p Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 17:25, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Some pre-review comments: Plot is over 400 words, and there is a typo with "Six Seasons anf a Finale". There is also a lot of direct quoting, and some of the sourcing doesn’t look the strongest (ScreenRant? Den Of Geek?), I’m only checking the prose but the source issues would need to be addressed for a source review. Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 22:50, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

The plot is 396 words when excluding names. I don't see a problem with Den of Geek, the Screen Rant source however was written by [Alex Welch] who has a fairly extensive resume Olliefant (she/her) 23:54, 17 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just realized I forgot to fully review this! I apologize, I went through the article again and it seems almost all of my concerns I would’ve had have been mentioned by others and changed by you, so I’m happy to offer my Support for the prose and accessibility. Crystal Drawers 🍌 ^{(wanna talk?)} 23:19, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Few comments from a fan (and who needs some Community content to hold me over til the movie).

Link series finale somewhere in the lead Done
"As another school year ends, Frankie (Paget Brewster) disbands the Save Greendale Committee for the summer." - there's no context for this if you don't know the show's sixth season. Not sure if you need a background section, but some context would be good for readers unfamiliar with the show (who might happen to come across the article). For instance, the article never once explains that Greendale is a community college. Also, was it disbanded for the summer or for good? I thought the point of them disbanding was that Greendale was saved.

Tweaked

"At Britta's (Gillian Jacobs) bar" - does Britta own it? Or just the bar she works at? It's been a while since I've watched the last season.

Dropped the "Britta's" part

"Jeff imagines himself strangling many clones of Abed." - how relevant is this to the plot? Because it's immediately followed with "Jeff imagines raising a child with Annie". Or perhaps combine both of them?

Just cut it since it was a throw away gag

"Harmon does the voiceover in the episode's end tag. Harmon's performance is uncredited" - instead of starting two sentences with the same last name, could you merge these sentences? Done
Regarding the profanity, were both instances "fuck"? I'm guessing so based on " it's weird to have two "fucks" on that one", but that could mean Britta said "fuck" twice, and Jim might've said a different curse word.

Reworded

"Network restrictions on profanity did not apply as the season was produced by Yahoo! Screen.[15][13] " - can you make sure all references are in order? Not a necessity but it's nice to have them in order. Done

The article is decent but feels on the short side. That's why I think some "background" could be helpful, or at least a bit more detail to provide context. I see there was a comment above (by Crystal Drawers) about the length of the plot, so it doesn't need much, just a bit more in case someone wasn't familiar with the show. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 19:30, 21 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: done all Olliefant (she/her) 22:25, 23 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Minor quibble, but the lead part where you added - "The series revolves around a group of friends, as they work to improve Greendale Community College." - this is only true about the last season that they're trying to improve the college. The rest of the seasons is about the friends attending the college. Further, I don't feel there's enough context for the "Save Greendale Committee" being disbanded, which is the major plot thread for the last season. The only reason I'm making a bit of a stink about it is that the article is on the short side, and it is a series finale. I compared it to another featured article finales, namely Goodbyeee, which has a background section. That could be useful for establishing who the characters are. Namely, the plot section starting with "Frankie (Paget Brewster) disbands the Save Greendale Committee" has no context. People who watched Community on air (but not Yahoo) would have no idea who Frankie even is, or why there was that committee. Also one other random note, but by calling the character just "Dean Pelton", people might assume it's a guy named "Dean", and not the Dean of the college (at least until you clarify that by calling him "the Dean"). These aren't huge issues, but it would help make the article feel more finished, especially for someone who might be vaguely aware of the show but not the finale. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:58, 24 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: tweaked the prose somewhat, let me know what you think Olliefant (she/her) 16:09, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

There's still the issue that the plot part sounds like it comes out of nowhere. Even if you're a little familiar with the show, who is Frankie, and what is the committee? I believe the committee was started in the season 6 premier, so adding that bit would help serve as connecting material. Also, there's two spots with the Dean that need to be fixed.

"Jeff then suggests they all become teachers, with himself as the Dean and Dean Pelton as a trainee Dean"

"Dean Pelton" in the Production part.

Sorry to make a stink over these small parts, but the article isn't very long, so the small issues stand out. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:11, 26 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tweaked it some more, I added wikilinks to character names, full explanations can't really be included due to the 400 word limit on plot wiki links Olliefant (she/her) 06:33, 27 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support - thanks for your work. Part of me wishes there was more of an "analysis" of the episode's role as a series finale, instead of just focusing on the episode alone. Perhaps when/if the movie comes out, there will be, but I can't ask for sources that don't exist. The article should represent available sources and be comprehensive, and it does do that. My only other small note is that the plot could probably just be one paragraph instead of five short ones, but that's really minor, and I can't find any reasons for opposing. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 18:14, 1 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Saving my spot for later. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:54, 3 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

-"and a third Black character" Who is this?

No one, its a throwaway gag, he sits in the corner and doesn't have any lines

-"Chang creates Ice Cube Head, who eats phones and zaps people with his powers." Clarify if this is in real life or just a concept. Done

-"Vicki, Garrett, Leonard, Todd, Dave, and the new tech billionaire Scrunch." Are these all secondary characters from previous episodes of the show? Is it possible to link these characters if so?

Opted to link List of Community characters#Recurring characters as some didn't have dedicated sections

-"features Joel McHale, Gillian Jacobs, Danny Pudi, Ken Jeong, Jim Rash, and Alison Brie as Jeff Winger, Britta Perry, Abed Nadir, Ben Chang, Craig Pelton, and Annie Edison, respectively" Is Alison Brie playing all of these characters? The phrasing is a bit confusing and would make more sense if the actors and characters were kept together. Done

-Can it be listed who Yvette Nicole Brown's character is at some point? Done

-Who is the Ass Crack Bandit? They are not elaborated on before their mention in Analysis. Done

It could've been anyone of us

-Would it be possible to include a TV ratings box per other similar TV episode articles? It feels odd this doesn't have one given the number of high profile sources reviewing this.

It was release on streaming so the viewership info for this, and the rest of season six, are unknown

-Praised is used a lot in the last paragraph, I'd suggest cutting down by one or two uses if possible. Done

-Why are low quality sources like Screen Rant and The Daily Beast being used?

The Screen Rant writer is Alex Welch who has fairly extensive credits outside of SR. The Daily Beast source I think is fine as its not being used for BLP statements and was written by Chancellor Agard who has a fairly extensive portfolio outside of the site

-Citation 18 seems to be missing a lot of information.

I added Gillian Jacobs' name, I don't know what else should be added

That's all from me. I'm going at this from the lens of someone unfamiliar with Community, so I'm missing a good deal of context. I feel I understood most of it, but the above should help with clarity and understanding. Overall pretty solid, once the above are addressed I'm happy to support. Ping me if I can clarify anything. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 02:56, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: done/responded to all Olliefant (she/her) 03:49, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

-For 18, is it possible to include info on the DVD it was released on?

-For the box, I meant something similar to what is used at various TV episode articles (For example, something like Knock Knock (Doctor Who) having the little "professional ratings" box that includes ratings from reviewers in reception).

Otherwise I believe all is addressed. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 04:04, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I checked I don't think enough critics gave scores to justify the use of a box Olliefant (she/her) 04:30, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Support then, I believe all my issues have been addressed. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 06:03, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, this is the "You can excuse racism?" show? Lol XD I've known about than meme for years. Might be worth to watch it after all this time. Anyhow, these are my comments. Since I know that you're not a fan of "Background" sections, I'm not going to suggest that and will try to work around that. Still, a few clarifications here and there are needed.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:39, 4 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

I don't think the inclusion of "United States" in the lede's first paragraph is necessary. It might be better to just say "series finale of the American sitcom Community". Done
"the sixth season follows them" feels a bit abrupt as a sentence following a comma. Maybe something like "and the sixth season follows" or "with the sixth season following" would work? Done
Wait, if it's called the "Greendale Community College", why is it referred to as a school?

I'm confused what you mean by this?

Isn't school referring to grades 1 through 12, and college for bachelor's degrees and whatnot?--PanagiotisZois (talk) 11:36, 6 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Both Elementary and University are schools

I checked, and turns out that universities/colleges can be referred to as schools. The more you know.--PanagiotisZois (talk) 09:54, 7 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In "In the episode, the group", you can include the episode's title; partly to avoid repetition of the word "episode". Done
1. Same goes for the start of the next paragraph. Done

Plot

"At a bar, the characters imagine various 'season seven' scenarios set around the study table". Does this mean that they are sitting at a study table at the bar, or something else like their scenarios all taking place in the same location; the study table?

tweaked it

You bring up that Pelton is the college's dean, but don't mention what role the other characters have. Like, "struggles to articulate his pitch with Shirley, Elroy". Who are Shirley and Elroy?

None of their roles are particulary notable

"Jeff is about to leave in anger". Is a reason provided in the episode about his anger?

He's not angry he's bored, this was a mistake on my part

"Frankie is interrupted in a boring pitch where Chang farts" is confusing.

Cut it as its mainly a throwaway gag

"Jeff then suggests they all become teachers". Aren't they all already teachers?

"At the study room" is abrupt. Did the group disperse or something in the previous scene, and it changes to Jeff here?

It just cuts to him there, I slightly tweaked the wording

"the characters picturing their idyllic season seven". Not necessarily something that needs clarification, but I'm assuming they're all imagining the pitches they discussed earlier, correct?

Not really, we don't see any of them Abed says something like "image your own season seven but don't cut to it"

Analysis

In which season do we find the episodes from 2011 and 12?
Who is the Ass Crack Bandit?

Its unknown, I don't think I can make it anymore clear

"but the actors' contracts". Done
"Yahoo! also expressed". The "also" isn't needed. Done
"which shut down in 2016 with Community". Missing comma after 2016. Done

Critical reception

"Critics praised the episode for its tone feeling". A comma is missing near the last word. Donevf
Screen Rant isn't considered a reliable source, given that it's Valnet.

The Screen Rant writer is Alex Welch who has fairly extensive credits outside of SR.

"praising the episode on its acting and emotion". Repetition of "episode". Done
"it did not seem like Harmon and McKenna were particularly hopeful of a continuation of the series". Is this stated in the episode itself?

"if this ends up being the final time we see these characters" could be paraphrased.

It could but there isn't too many quotes used

"due to its frequent use of meta humor in the episode". No need for "in the episode".

The series is known for meta humor so I think its justified

"Writing for Time" is repetitive of the previous sentence's beginning. Done
1. Same for Paste. Done
"Both writing for Den of Geek". Use of "Both" is unnecessary. Done
"comparing it to the first part of the season five finale, "Basic Story", which he heavily criticized" could probably reworked a bit. Given his praise for the episode, when one reads this sentence, it seems like he's drawing a parallel to "Basic Story" and its use of meta plot. But then the sentence shows he disliked that other episode. I think this part would work better as "Mater praised the episode's meta plot, favorably comparing it to the first part of the season five finale, "Basic Story". In contrast to "Basic Story"'s use of a meta plot, which he described as "obnoxiously smug", Mater viewed "Emotional Consequences of Broadcast Television" as more self-critical and acknowledging of Community's faults". Done
Doesn't Harrison have an opinion on the episode? Done
One criticism I have about this section is that while for the most part it is well-written and doesn't need much work, there's not really much of a thematic flow of information; nor are any topic sentences present. If possible, separating the sources by something like one paragraph being mostly about sources describing the episode as among the best or a fitting series finale, then discussing the episode's meta humour/plot, and then the characters' personalities and relationships, would be nice. Or something akin to that.

Support--PanagiotisZois (talk) 00:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Great to see this episode worked on up to FAC. Unfortunately, I do not have time for a full review, but I have a few comments:

I originally added the fire drill sentence from the director commentary a few years ago. It's been a 5 years since I have listened to it, but I am pretty sure it contains more production info.
Worth adding images of director Rob Schrab and co-writer Chris McKenna (writer) as they have freely available images on Commons?
Probably better to include the release via Yahoo Screen in the production than the reception.

Regards Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 02:55, 14 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I implemented the second two suggestions, I can not for the first as I do not have access to the DVD commentary as the Community box set doesnt have commentary for season six Olliefant (she/her) 22:35, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for addressing the second two suggestions. Apologies for the delay in responding. Is there anyway you can try accessing the source by contacting other editors in the related Wikiprojects or Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request or otherwise? I did try searching for the source myself as I no longer have personal access to it. It is available on the Blu-Ray version. Because it really is a critical source for writing the production section in ensuring the article meets 1.b and 1.c (comprehensive and well-researched). Spy-cicle💥 ^Talk? 16:32, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, the commetatires are decent sources of trivia but not really anything particularly in depth Olliefant (she/her) 22:02, 11 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Z1720

[edit]

Version reviewed

I made some edits while checking. Feel free to revert if not helpful.
Recommend archiving sources, perhaps using IA Bot, though it has to be done when it is not busy.
Ref 3: Add "Writers Guild of America West" to the website name instead of the URL.
Ref 9: Published on May 31, 2015. Date should be added to the ref
Ref 15: published on Jan 3, 2014.
Ref 17: source says it was published June 2, 2015, though I don't have access to the full source (due to a paywall)
Ref 31: There are three authors of that source and Darren Franich wrote the blurb for this episode's entry on the list.
Ref 34: Could not find the author's name in the source.
Sepinwall and Poniewozik are the only authors wikilinked in the refs. Either every author with a wikilink should be linked, or none of them should be.

Source check: checked 8, 9, 12, 16, 20, 22, 23, 24, 33, 34. No concerns.

Please ping when ready for a response. Z1720 (talk) 18:18, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: done all, AFAIK every author with an article is wikilinked Olliefant (she/her) 22:44, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I have a decent number of edits to this page, but I haven't been particularly involved in improving this article to GA/FA status.

"As another school year ends... As the group makes summer plans..." – bit repetitive to use the same sentence opening back-to-back
"questions whether there will be a seventh season" – I suggest "questions whether they will return for another year" to better reflect in-universe events
"The service shut down in 2016..." – as written, this sentence is irrelevant to this episode
"most prominently," – remove this comma
"first and only time TV-MA was used" – TV-MA is jargon, try to avoid it (also, this claim isn't directly supported by citations)
"Yahoo!" should always just be "Yahoo" for consistency
Use {{"'}} for ""Basic Story"'s"
You list the year of broadcast for episodes in the Analysis section, but not the Reception section; I think you should remove them everywhere for consistency (seasons are enough to date the episodes)
"the tenth-best episode" → "Community's tenth-best episode" for clarity as to the grouping

— RunningTiger123 (talk) 05:04, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@RunningTiger123: done all Olliefant (she/her) 06:31, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I made a minor tweak, otherwise support as is. RunningTiger123 (talk) 21:25, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

These seem to be mostly magazine and news sources, where one wonders about "high quality" but I guess unless someone pushes the issue it's fine. Formatting seems consistent. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Which ones do you question the quality of? I've addressed a few questionable sources above (namely Screen Rant and The Daily Beast Olliefant (she/her) 02:56, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This wasn't an observation about specific sources, sorry. Here's a bit of background on the issue. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 11:45, 25 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I see that FrB.TG has asked for a spotcheck. Noting here that for once, I am going to punt this one to someone else. It isn't good when one person is doing it all the time. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:34, 26 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Shouldn't the critical reception come before the analysis section? You first establish how the world reacted to the work before diving deep into the DNA of the work itself.
The critical reception section currently feels formulaic due to the repetitive 'A said B' structure. To create a more engaging narrative, I recommend thematic synthesis: group the critiques by topic (e.g., performance, direction, or pacing) rather than by reviewer. This will allow for a clearer comparison of viewpoints and help the reader identify the consensus or points of contention more efficiently. See WP:RECEPTION for more details. FrB.TG (talk) 21:09, 26 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Olliefant ? Gog the Mild (talk) 19:02, 3 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh my bad, I've been busy recently and this slipped my mind. I'll get to this when I have a chance (hopefully with a day or so?) Olliefant (she/her) 03:02, 4 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

*Cough!* Gog the Mild (talk) 19:31, 12 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

so sorry about the delay, give me two more days and if I can't finish it by then then fail it Olliefant (she/her) 01:53, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild and FrB.TG: done. Olliefant (she/her) 06:07, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi FrB.TG. You happy? And who's closing this? :-) Gog the Mild (talk) 20:01, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild, I think at this point it's best that I recuse given my involvement as a reviewer.

Regarding my comments, the introductory lines Olliefant has added to each paragraph are a great improvement though most of the sentences still follow a repetitive 'Critic A of B said' pattern. I'd try leading with the critique itself or grouping similar feedback together through paraphrasing, if possible (beware of WP:SYNTH though). It would make the writing feel much more dynamic. Also, my first point seems to remain unadressed. FrB.TG (talk) 20:18, 13 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: I've made a few tweaks and shuffled things around a bit, as for your first point. The vast majority of articles on episodes place reception last. Usual order is plot > production > analysis > broadcast info > reception though not all articles have all of them (this one doesn't have a broadcast section since it released on streaming) Olliefant (she/her) 07:40, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Going to chime in here as someone who frequently incorporates Analysis sections into their episode articles; it seems to be standard procedure to put Analysis after Production and before Release or Reception. Really, it’s more of a companion to the Plot section than anything, since the section serves to offer commentary on the episode’s contents and narrative, not add further critical reception, which is what Reception is for. Crystal Drawers 🎖️ ^{(wanna talk?)} 12:24, 14 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid the section still relies heavily on the "A said B" structure and lacks a cohesive narrative flow, often feeling like a list of bullet points turned into paragraphs. For example, consider this paragraph.

The episode’s use of self-referential humor was the most widely praised element. Stedman described the episode as “unapologetically meta” and praised the comedy.[33] Time's James Poniewozik relished the episode's concept for its imaginative meta humor.[34] Darren Franich of Entertainment Weekly cited the end tag as a highlight of the meta elements of both the episode and Community overall. He found the episode to be a funny deconstruction of the series.[2] In a separate Den of Geek review, Joe Mater praised the plot favorably comparing it to the plotline of the season five finale, "Basic Story", which he described as "obnoxiously smug", Mater viewed "Emotional Consequences of Broadcast Television" as more self-critical and acknowledging of Community's faults.[35] Poniewozik described the series as both its "best critic" and "best defender".[34]

Nearly every sentence follows the "[Writer] of [Publication] said [Quote]" formula here. You even have the opportunity to group the reviews about the critics liking the meta-humor instead of repetitively listing them individually. Please note that the paragraph I highlighted is just an example of the repetitive structure. It applies to pretty much the entire section at the moment.
""Emotional Consequences of Broadcast Television" received critical acclaim, with critics praising its tone, humor, and plot, and many finding it a perfect ending for the series." Repetition of critic.
Joshua Alston of The A.V. Club, who graded the episode an "A" rating, labeling the acting and emotion as high points, noting how the pitches worked well at showing off the characters' differences. This sentence is a fragment. It's a long string of descriptors, but it lacks a main verb (the action). Because you used "who graded" and "labeling," the sentence never actually completes its thought.
Alex Welch of Screen Rant highlighted the pitches as funny and revealing of the characters' psychology, the cameos, and the "emotionally cathartic" moment of Jeff standing alone at the study group table. This suffers from faulty parallelism. You are listing three things that Alex Welch highlighted, but they aren't phrased in the same way, which makes the sentence feel clunky.
These two books [42] [43] discuss the episode. Have you considered using them in the article?

I'm afraid I have to ~~oppose~~ this nomination on criterion 1a. FrB.TG (talk) 22:18, 17 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: I did a little more shuffling and combined a few lines. I tried to use the opening paragraph to knock out some of the author introductions, to avoid the "X's Y" format. I think I've kept it to a minimum while still preserving thoughts that the individual critics give. I considered using those books, but I can't access them, from the overview it doesn't seem any more detailed than the reviews used in the article Olliefant (she/her) 03:19, 18 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better. Two more comments below.

"Both Alston and Poniewozik found the pitches to do an exceptional job at keeping characterization consistent,[35] which Alston finding the episode doing a good job at undoing the flanderization they had undergone." - "which Alston finding the episode doing a good job" doesn't sound right.
"Sepinwall noted that given cast's other commitments, a continuation was unlikely..." (till the end of the paragraph) - I'm not sure this is the right section for discussing the characters' future in possible sequels. FrB.TG (talk) 21:40, 20 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]
@FrB.TG: Rewrote the first, as for the second. I made a minor tweak, but I think the text is relevent as it talks about the future of the series in relation to the episode Olliefant (she/her) 03:37, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I’ve struck my oppose now. I won’t support because I haven’t reviewed the article in full. FrB.TG (talk) 12:58, 21 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies to all. I indicated on this page that this article had been promoted. I am unsure how that happened - I had some sort of blip. With the nominator yet to have an article promoted at FAC it needs a sourcing spot check (which has been requested) before being considered for closure. And I didn't follow through with any of the post-promotion "paperwork", so it seems that I didn't think it had been promoted. I have removed the "promoted" template so the bot doesn't get confused and again apologies for the hiccup. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:29, 25 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hurricane Camille/archive1

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates - Wikipedia

Source and image review

Source review – Pending

Spotchecks – Pending

Image review by JacobTheRox

PharyngealImplosive7

Meteorological setup

Impacts and aftermath

Image review by JacobTheRox

Copyvio from Watagwaan

Image review by JacobTheRox

Source review - pass

Support from Whonting

Support from Tim riley

Source review by Aza24 – Pending

Spotchecks – Pending

Source review – Pending

Support from Hawkeye7

Source review by Aza24 – Pending

Spotchecks – Pending

Source and image review

Image review - pass

Support from YuniToumei (source review)

Support from OceanHok

Source review by Aza24 – Pending

Spotchecks – Pending

Maculosae tegmine lyncis

Support from GGOTCC

Image and source review

Image and accessibility review - pass

Support by ZKang123

Observational evidence

Source and image review and spotcheck

Taxonomy and evolution->Fossil history

Taxonomy and evolution->Populations and genetic history

Appearance and anatomy->lead

Appearance and anatomy->size

Appearance and anatomy->teeth and jaws

Appearance and anatomy->internal physiology

Distribution and habitat->lead

Distribution and habitat->migration

Behavior and ecology->lead

Behavior and ecology->diet and feeding

Types of cognitive processes->Perception and attention

Types of cognitive processes->Thinking

Types of cognitive processes->Language

Types of cognitive processes->Others

Source and image review

Source review by Z1720