Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Barbara Bush/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 16 October 2023 [1].

Barbara Bush

[edit]
Nominator(s): Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Barbara Bush is one of only two women in American history to be both the wife of a U.S. president and the mother of a U.S. president. One of the oldest women to hold the position, she was known for her non-threatening grandmotherly image that earned her some of the highest approval ratings of any contemporary U.S. first lady. She was the last of the first ladies from the Greatest Generation, and as such the last to live the traditional lifestyle of a housewife. Under this lifestyle, she underwent two periods of severe depression: once after the death of her young daughter Robin to leukemia, and once again when her husband's secretive work at the CIA left her in emotional isolation. She held a strong rivalry with her predecessor, Nancy Reagan, and her matronly image forever made her the comparison point for her politically active successor, Hillary Clinton. Besides her widely publicized work in promoting literacy, Bush was also involved in activism for AIDS patients. She died in 2018, shortly after leaving the Republican Party of which she was an icon for much of her life. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:16, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild, at what point am I able to get started on my next FAC? Right now I have two supports, but reviews by Bneu2013, Vaticidalprophet, and Eddie891 are teetering on the edge of completion (and I'm assuming you guys are set to support?). Normally I don't have an issue with waiting it out, but I'm getting the October jitters. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:23, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The coordinators would be happy to consider a request to start another FAC nomination once this one has a source review pass. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:13, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@FAC coordinators: The aforementioned source review is now completed and passed (and it's found a couple more supports in the last few days as well). Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:12, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, feel free to nominate another. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:25, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

CommentsSupport by Vacant0

[edit]

Saw the notice on WikiProject Politics. Will leave some comments. --Vacant0 (talk) 09:13, 26 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • Ref 135 is region-locked.
  • Ref 146 has Betsy as last name and Klein as first name. This should be swapped.
  • Ref 173 and 182 are dead URLs.
  • Ref 192 redirects to the website's main page. Is this ref really needed at all. Ref 191 backs this claim too.
  • Ref 193, 194, 195, and 196 are missing pages.
  • I see that you have linked Kate Andersen Brower. What about adding these author links: Michael Kilian (Chicago Tribune Ref 178), Carl Sferrazza Anthony (First Ladies), Maurine Beasley (First Ladies and the Press), Diana Carlin (Barbara Pierce Bush: Choosing a Complete Life), Susan Page (The Matriarch), Donnie Radcliffe (Simply Barbara Bush)?

Vacant0, I've made all suggested changes, including archive links for 135, 173, and 182. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 17:51, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look at the rest of the article soon. Vacant0 (talk) 20:02, 31 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Vacant0, there's still plenty of time on the FAC, but I thought I'd check in since it's been two weeks. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:19, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I’ll leave some comments early next week. Vacant0 (talk) 18:17, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Vacant0, just checking the status of this. Gog the Mild (talk) 11:49, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Was busy, I'll look into it now. Vacant0 (talk) 08:51, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Overall, the article is in a much better shape now than a month ago. I'll change my vote towards support, considering that I do not see any major issues that need fixing. Vacant0 (talk) 20:36, 25 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]
  • Suggest adding alt text
  • File:Barbara_Bush_portrait_1992_(cropped).jpg: source link is dead
  • File:Barbara_Bush_Signature.svg: can we be more specific about what this was based on?
  • /File:Barbara_Bush_on_her_and_her_husbands_relationship_with_Bill_Clinton.ogg: the source site includes a non-PD licensing statement - why is this believed to be PD?
  • File:George_and_Barbara_Bush_on_their_wedding_day_in_Rye,_New_York_-_NARA_-_186372.tif: why is this believed to be a US federal government work? Ditto File:George_H._Bush_family_on_the_campaign_trail.1970_(2832).jpg, File:Bush_Family_Photo_(Christmas_1979).jpg, File:President_George_H._W._Bush_and_First_Lady_Barbara_Bush_on_the_rocks_at_Walker's_Point,_Kennebunkport,_Maine.jpg
  • I'll get alt text on them as soon as the final images are settled
  • Added archive links for dead links
  • The only person who would know about the signature would be User:Connormah, who traced it 14 years ago
  • File:Barbara_Bush_on_her_and_her_husbands_relationship_with_Bill_Clinton.ogg is definitely under copyright. I've removed it from the article and nominated it for deletion at Commons
  • File:George and Barbara Bush on their wedding day in Rye, New York - NARA - 186372.tif was part of a cooperation project upload from the National Archives, and it seems all such images were tagged as government works. It's listed as "unrestricted" on the National Archives page. I'm not sure how this affects its licensing.
  • The other three images you listed here are from the George Bush Presidential Library. It's part of the National Archive, but copyright info is not provided for the specific images. I'll most likely replace these, but the National Archive is realistically the only place to find replacements, so I'd need to know the details of that first.
Nikkimaria, I've fixed a few things, and a few are unclear. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 21:26, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately their copyright statement isn't overly helpful for you: essentially if something is a federal government work it is free, but not everything they hold is a federal government work, and they can't generally confirm copyright status. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:25, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria That's unfortunate. I removed the four images you identified, and I added two new ones: one that was taken by the Department of Defense, and another that was taken by the White House's official photographer. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:34, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Nikkimaria, has that improved things? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, although now that we have a source for File:Entire_Bush_family.jpg it seems to have the same issue. Also still pending: alt text, dead source link on File:Barbara_Bush_speech_1999.png. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Images have been removed where the source could not be ascertained, and alt text has been added. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:13, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Support by Bneu2013

[edit]

Will have comments very soon. Bneu2013 (talk) 17:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead
  • "Bush became first lady in 1989 after her husband was inaugurated as president." - consider mentioning that her husband was the 41st president; not mentioned in the lead.
  • I don't know that you need to mention the number of her children twice in the lead; in the second mention, you could reword to something like "Her children were born between 1946 and 1959, and she had to endure the loss of her four-year-old daughter Robin to leukemia in 1953."
Early life
  • If I understand correctly, her father was not a direct descendant of Franklin Pierce, just a descendant of his family, correct? I wouldn't change anything if this is correct.
  • No need to mention that she was the third of four children twice in this section.
  • What was her previous religious affiliation before Episcopalianism?
Entering political life
  • Link "needlepoint; not sure most people would know what this is.
  • Which paper(s) was "Washington Scene" published in?
    • The source says "for the Houston papers".
  • "As with the previous failed senate race, Barbara took an emotional toll from her husband's electoral defeat." - redundant per previous sentence.
  • Typo in third sentence of 1970s subsection.
  • Inconsistent capitalization of "senate" when used alone.
  • Where was her column published when she lived in China?
    • The source says "Texas weekly newspapers".
  • "With this, and the fact that her children were all grown and had moved away, she was overcome by a feeling of isolation." - her youngest child would have been 16 in 1975, I wouldn't consider that "grown".
  • "She did not take his advice, though she later wished that she had." - suggest rewording to "She did not take his advice, but later regretted this decision."
  • Did George announce his candidacy without telling Barbara that he planned to do so?
    • "Barbara realized, too, that her husband was planning a run for national office. He never actually told Barbara that he was running for president; she assumed it because two Bush fund-raising groups had been formed, and all her husband's actions of the past twenty years had been preparing him for this race. When she was asked if her husband had discussed the matter with her, she responded, 'Did he ask me if he could run for president? ... The answer is no, but he didn't ask me to marry him either.'"
  • "Early in the campaign, there were worries that she would be a liability; she was outspoken, and she looked significantly older than George in a primary election where age was an issue.
  • Not particularly fond of the terms "pro-choice" and "pro-life"; I know they are commonly used, but they are terribly euphemistic. Suggest rewording to something like "supported the legalization of abortion" or "supported abortion rights" and link to United States abortion-rights movement.
  • I feel like there are two many uses of "she" in this section, particularly the second half. Shouldn't be too hard to reword.
Second Lady of the United States
  • "it was to that point the home that they had lived in longer than any other." - awkward wording; suggest changing to something like "it became the home that they had lived in for the longest time up to that point."
  • "First lady Nancy Reagan strongly disliked the Bushes." - suggest rewording to something like "First Lady Nancy Reagan developed a strong dislike for the Bushes." as this appears to have developed over time as opposed to all at once.

Bneu2013, I've made changes for everything to this point except for where I replied above. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:18, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I've been busier than expected in the last week or so, and had hoped to be further along on my review by now. I will take a look and have more comments tomorrow. Bneu2013 (talk) 03:53, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First Lady of the United States
  • Consider inflation adjustment for $25 million. Ditto any other monetary figures.
  • "Publicly, she dismissed it "much ado about nothing" by twenty-year-olds.[95] Privately, she was angered by the protest." - these sentences could be combined.
  • Flip refs 97 and 96 at the end of the fifth paragraph.
Post-White House years
  • "Bush described January 20, 1993, the day of Bill Clinton's inauguration, as a "tough day" for her and her husband."
  • "The Bushes felt that George had earned a second term as president, and Barbara blamed Bill Clinton for her husband's loss." - this is kind of vague. Did she think that Clinton ran a better campaign than her husband or that his campaign tactics contributed to his loss? Did she think that circumstances beyond her husband's control, such as the recession, contributed to his loss?
  • What was Nancy Reagan critical of the Bushes for?
  • "she corrected a false accusation Nancy had made against them, she lied that reporters were harassing her to make Nancy feel guilty, and she hung up after saying "don't you ever call me again"." - awkward wording; suggest rephrasing.
  • What year was her memoir published?
  • Flip refs 120 and 119.
  • Suggest linking "long legal battle" to Bush v. Gore. Alternatively, you could mention that the election went to the Supreme Court and link there.
  • "After the invasion, she felt that he was being unduly influenced by Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and Andy Card; she repeatedly urged her son to reconsider his decisions on Iraq until he sternly rebuked her." - change to "After the invasion, she felt that her son was being unduly influenced by Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney, and Andy Card; she repeatedly urged him to reconsider his decisions on Iraq until he sternly rebuked her." Also include the titles of the three men; pretty sure they aren't mentioned before in the article.
  • Move ref 135 to the end of the sentence.
  • No need to mention the name of the George and Barbara Bush Center in the following sentence after it is first named.
  • "Trump was elected president, and Bush was remained critical of him during his presidency.
  • "Bush fell and fractured her vertebrae on March 16, 2018, and she was hospitalized."
  • Unlink second link to Donald Trump in this section.
I've already done the first half. I was waiting for the last batch of notes before I went through and fixed the rest of it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 19:31, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bneu2013 I've made all of the changes you suggested to this point. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:39, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Bneu2013, how is this looking now? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:52, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Political beliefs
  • "Bush's friends and relatives cited the death of her daughter for social beliefs, saying that she became highly empathetic for the unfortunate after Robin died." - add something like "the inspiration for" before "social beliefs".
  • Again, not particularly fond of the terms pro-choice and pro-life, but if she explicitly identified as "pro-choice", then it is fine as is.
  • Suggest providing a brief description of Naftali; I don't think most people would know who he is.
  • Did Bush switch her party affiliation before her death?
Bneu2013, I've made all changes for this section. The source doesn't say that she switched her party affiliation, just that she personally didn't consider herself a member, so I adjusted the wording accordingly. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:20, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:47, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Legacy
  • Flip refs to proper order at the end of first sentence. Ditto anywhere else.
  • Do we need to have dashes in "second-from-right" in the photo caption?
  • Swap "5th-highest" and "ranked" or reword to "ranked the 5th-highest".
  • Cut "century" after "20th".

Support pending comments are addressed. Bneu2013 (talk) 00:47, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:57, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]



Vat

[edit]

Placing a header. I reviewed at GAN, but the article has expanded around 2k words since then, so I'll take another look through before commenting. Vaticidalprophet 01:52, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Starting a serious read-through now -- not totally finished. Will just do the early sections of the article for now.

Lead and early life
[edit]
  • Among the most prominent of her actions as first lady was the commencement speech she gave at Wellesley College; it which saw considerable publicity -- did I miss that at GAN? Mea culpa :) If it's a more recent addition, there's either a missing or extra word there.
  • I see the lead image has changed. These things are, of course, subjective. I'm not sold on this image being an improvement, though -- it obscures her features somewhat and, as the most agonizingly nitpicky of MOS points, faces a suboptimal direction. I see on the talk this was discussed from a "the other portrait is lower-resolution" perspective, which is also a valid point, but I think the prior resolution is fine for an infobox and am not sure the "graininess" wasn't unavoidable-film-grain. (The new image has a lot of film grain itself.)
  • Her father was a businessman who worked at the McCall Corporation, descended from the Pierce family that included U.S. president Franklin Pierce I don't know that these clauses are connected enough to be comma'd (I'd probably write with a semicolon (McCall Corporation; he was descended from), but I probably overuse them).
  • Just noting, from an accessibility POV, that Google Books is not equivalent to IA and that its previews are much more capricious. I have no gbooks access to Page; if you use the links for accessibility/easy-source-checking purposes, gbooks doesn't give that for many/most readers, especially outside the US. (Personally I just omit gbooks links entirely even if using IA links, because gbooks is so unlikely to show the same thing to any two people.)
  • While the family lost some of their comforts during the Great Depression, her father's successful career kept them from poverty -- I'll try secure a copy of Page to see exactly what the source says here, but this stands out. "Kept from poverty", with its specific implications of coming close to it or seeing dramatic loss of status, juxtaposes poorly with "maintained a successful career". Is the source clearer on "some of their comforts"?
  • attending Milton School -- is this school one that matters, has a particular reputation, has an article, etc?
  • harshly judged the other children -- the definite article here doesn't pair well with the much more generalized statement after it. "her peers", "her schoolmates", etc?
  • The early discussion of their relationship (first noticed at They kept a correspondence after returning to their respective schools, and they) feels suboptimal. I first noticed the sentence structure, but while redoing the sentence in my head I realized "respective schools" felt like a slightly circumlocutory way of alluding to the fact they both attended boarding school. Specifying this complicates trying to trace the chronology of their relationship -- it's clear it was a long-distance relationship for some time, but the reader can't get a solid impression of when that timeline started and ended. It may be better to redo this chronology in a slightly less concrete manner, emphasizing the geographic distance between them in their early relationship rather than individual aspects of that distance. (I'm only thinking about the first paragraph of "Courtship and marriage" here -- the second and third are solid, and much clearer. Also, wow, today I learned about the Chichijima incident.)
  • Do we have any articles on Presbyterian classes/structures that might be worth linking in "Early married years" to contextualize?

More to come. This is still very good work; I'll probably have a lot of comments in absolute terms, but that's an "8000-word article" situation. In relative terms, I don't have much to say. Vaticidalprophet 05:00, 28 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vaticidalprophet, I've made all of the changes to this point, except where I've replied above. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:43, 29 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Continued review
[edit]

Initially intended to do more precise subsectioning, but it ended up being a little short.

  • Bush suffered from depression, which became severe enough that George insisted that she seek out a mental health professional. Looking at the Schneider source, the decision on what to emphasize seems a little off. The source talks more about her disinterest in professional help generally, while the wording choices here and dichotomy imply that she was specifically rejecting mental health treatment. The source also implies she was diagnosed with Graves' around this time, while the article places the diagnosis later; looking at the source used for that, it doesn't mention the timeframe of her diagnosis, just that she was known to have it.
    • I changed insisted to suggested, but otherwise I think it's a fair summary. She was diagnosed with Graves' in 1989, so I'm not sure what Schneider is trying to say. I double checked with Carlin and Caroli, and they both confirmed 1989. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Early in the campaign, there were worries that Barbara would be a liability; she was outspoken and looked significantly older than George in a primary election where age was an issue. She eventually came to be seen as an asset. This jumps a little -- is there some sort of clarity on how and when that perspective shifted? It might make more sense to excise the second sentence entirely, because context makes it clear that it was the case.
  • She often ignored order of precedence -- link United States order of precedence?
  • Barbara become known for her tendency to wear blue while she was second lady; Nancy commonly wore red, and for Barbara to also wear red would invite conflict. This sentence...raises far more questions than it answers. Is this a necessary inclusion? I can see how this might be interesting from a role-analysis perspective, but the relatively plain statement of it here just makes the reader wonder if Nancy was defensive about red or something.
  • Though she was not as widely recognized as other people associated with the president -- is this what the source says as Mrs. Bush commented that if not for the Secret Service agents who accompanied her, "she would just be another face in the crowd"? I don't think the former follows from the latter.
  • Bush declined to change herself or develop new skills -- sounds a bit harsh on her :) If you want to talk about the hair/weight issue in particular, I don't think it needs that intro.
  • This photograph was credited with a significant shift in public perception of the disease -- inclined to want a statement from the HIV/AIDS literature for this, not the first-lady-biographical literature, in the same sense as the "disentangling how much a political campaign impacted a presidential run" issue. This is around the time that public perception started shifting generally.
    • This is a good point, and I'm not sure where to find such a source, or whether they exist (which I guess is the issue here). After a few searches without her name coming up, I've removed this sentence. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • Barbara blamed the press [...] She also blamed the press
  • Barbara had lied about not receiving a tour of the White House in 1988 and then falsely stating that the Bushes never invited the Reagans to a state dinner -- is "then" necessary?

Vaticidalprophet 03:50, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Vaticidalprophet, I've addressed this set of notes. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 04:52, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Vaticidalprophet? Gog the Mild (talk) 13:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry for delay, had an extremely busy week and now have the flu. Looking over other reviews, it looks like my other potential comments have been covered, so support at this juncture. Vaticidalprophet 02:00, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie

[edit]
  • "She enjoyed the role and living in the White House": this works as a zeugma, but I think we should avoid it in encyclopedic prose. Suggest making it "life in the White House".
  • "though it was complicated by her protectiveness": here "it" refers to both the role and living in the White House -- suggest either "they", or rephrase.
  • Suggest giving the date of her diagnosis of Graves' disease in the lead, to make it unambiguous that the diagnosis occurred during her term as first lady.
  • "two of her sons both ran for office in gubernatorial and presidential campaigns": suggest "two of her sons ran for office in both gubernatorial and presidential campaigns".
  • "Insecure with her appearance as a child": perhaps this is an AmEng usage, but "about" would seem more natural to me than "with".
  • "it was soon known by their families": suggest "their families soon knew of it" to avoid the passive.
  • "She played her own part to support the war effort": any reason not to cut this to "To support the war effort"?
  • "When Bush returned to war, Pierce waited for him to return." I'm not sure this actually tells us anything.
  • "In June 1944, she feared him dead after learning that his plane was shot down, but she learned soon after that he had been found and rescued." Can we avoid the repetition of "learn"?
  • "as she had previously seen all of her needs tended to by her family": I don't understand this. Initially I thought it meant she was still living at home with her family, but then realized we've already said the couple were moving aound the eastern US, so she was already setting up house independently of her family. New Haven isn't far from Rye, but it's not next door, so her parents and their servants weren't coming over to solve problems for her. What changed when she went to Texas?
  • "By the following year, the Bushes moved to California for George's work, where they lived in several different towns": either make it "had moved" or (I think the better choice) cut "by". I would also try to rephrase so that "where" is adjacent to "California" rather than "George's work", to make it easier to avoid misparsing -- or else make it a semicolon and cut "where".
  • "While living in Texas, Bush decided to convert from Presbyterianism to her husband's religion of Episcopalianism". I would say "denomination" rather than "religion"; also in the last sentence of that paragraph.
  • "An urban legend held that her hair began to whiten in her grief, though she later dispelled this" -- dispelled, or just denied? And I don't think we need "urban".
  • "including regular events at the White House that endeared her to first lady Lady Bird Johnson": presumably it was her attendance that endeared her to Lady Bird, so how about "and here attendance at regular events at the White House endeared her to first lady Lady Bird Johnson".
  • "Living there for the full eight years of George's tenure as vice president, they had lived there longer than any other home to that point." Suggest "They lived there for the full eight years of George's tenure as vice president, longer than in any of the previous homes."
  • "Bush promoted the cause of literacy while in Washington.[70] She joined several associations and programs to promote literacy": repetitious; can we rephrase the second sentence, or perhaps just cut the first sentence completely?
  • "Bush and her literacy initiatives saw approval from the public." "Popular with the public" would be more concise, and this is the third use of "literacy" in three sentences.
  • "She was the oldest first lady to live in the White House at the time": suggest "to that date".
  • Is there a suitable link for the National Literacy Act of 1991? If not, is it worth a redlink?
  • "The Bushes initially did not have enough money to live the lifestyle they had grown accustomed to, but ... Barbara made a considerable amount of money after leaving the White House": true, I'm sure, but surely George's income is relevant here too?
  • "due to it being the location of": can we find a shorter way to say this? Perhaps "as it was"? Or make it a comma after the previous sentence, and "chosen because her husband's Presidential Library was there"?
  • "She supported causes that would support the poor and the sick, though she limited herself to aspects that were not politically charged": I don't think "aspects" is the right word here. Perhaps "limited her support to policies"?
  • "Her image of an easy going woman": perhaps AmEng, but "as" seems more natural than "of" to me here.
  • "When contrasted with her successor, Hillary Clinton, they have often been differentiated by their lifestyles": "they" doesn't work because "When contrasted with her successor, Hillary Clinton" only refers to Bush.
  • "When describing herself, she cited Eleanor Roosevelt and Bess Truman." I don't know what this is telling me.
  • This is not a source review, but just a note that FN 86, Brower, does not link to the references.

That's everything. Almost all these points are minor grammatical issues or readability suggestions. Overall the article is in excellent shape. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 10:51, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mike Christie, I've made all of the suggested changes, clarifying above when necessary. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:03, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Fixes all look good. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 21:54, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie

[edit]

Hoping to follow in the footsteps of Mike and Vati above, please ping when they are through so we don't get in each others way. Eddie891 Talk Work 19:11, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  • "She regretted the resentment that she held toward her mother as she grew older" I'm not sure I see this reflected in the sourcing. It establishes that she understood her mother better as an adult, but where does it say she regretted it?
    • Agreed, reworded it accordingly.
  • "Her interest in reading began early in life; she recalled gathering and reading with her family during the evenings" Is this really encyclopedically relevant? It would not have been uncommon, especially at this time, for people to be interested in reading. I get that you talk about literacy later on, but what does this add?
    • Removed.
  • "They kept a correspondence after returning to their respective schools," I don't think it's chronologically clear which school this would be for Barbara, especially
    • Reworded to specify the school, and I also moved her graduation to the correct spot chronologically.
  • "To support the war effort, she worked at a nuts-and-bolts factory as a gofer. " presumably after dropping out?
    • The source says "one summer".
  • "Barbara forced herself to maintain her composure throughout the ordeal: George was unable to do so, requiring her support, and she made a point to never cry in front of her daughter. " I don't like the composition of this sentence : we go from Barbara to George and back to Barbara. It might read better split into two: "Barbara forced herself to maintain her composure throughout the ordeal, making a point to never cry in front of her daughter. George was unable to do so and required her support."
    • Changed.
  • "One legend held" can you be any more clear about where the 'legend' came from?
    • The source calls it "a case study in the way journalists can repeat an error without checking until it becomes widely accepted as fact". So it seems like a standard untrue fun fact.
  • "she felt she had to maintain herself for them" but not her youngest child?
    • Changed to "her family".
  • Just a note that I want to revisit this entire paragraph.
  • "When her son Neil was diagnosed with dyslexia" any chance of a date on that?
    • Added another source to specify it was in the second grade, which gives a rough estimate of when.
  • "She had initially believed that he had been appointed to the position" Two many 'had's in this to easily parse
    • Removed one
  • "Bush learned to campaign when her husband chose to run for the chairmanship of the Harris County Republican Party. " would be good to put a date at the beginning of the para
    • Added the year
  • "She took it personally when he lost the election" What do you mean by this?
    • Clarified that it was because she was personally involved with the campaign
  • "would later become a recognizable part of her public image" do you need 'later' here?
    • Cut.
  • "After George lost election to the Senate," why not just "lost his campaign"?
    • Done.
  • "which enabled Barbara to begin forming relationships in New York City with prominent diplomats" I would consider maybe putting this one or two sentences after
    • Moved down to join the other sentence about her social life there
  • "Bush was against the idea of her husband becoming the chair of the Republican National Committee in 1973, but he accepted the position against her wishes" saying "against the idea" and "against her wishes" in the same sentence is redundant
    • Fixed
  • link World Affairs Council of Washington, D.C.?
    • Done.
  • "so the people in Texas could follow her activities" maybe just "which was published in Texas"?
    • Done.
  • "and some have" possible to attribute this?
    • Changed to "some who knew her", which is as specific as the source gets.
  • "she practiced her slideshow demonstrations" maybe just "gave" slideshow demonstrations?
    • The practice part is important because she was practicing public speaking, but I agree that the sentence doesn't read right, so I've switched it to "gave" and added a bit after.
  • "and George announced his candidacy." a date on this might be helpful
    • Added the year
  • "she was outspoken" I feel like I haven't gotten this impression from the earlier prose in the article. If she was outspoken, I would expect to see it earlier in the prose
    • There's not exactly a personality section to put it in. This is the first time it's been relevant.
    I could go into more detail about how she could be cruel as a child. That's the only other example that I'm aware of based on the source I used. Or I could reword "outspoken" here if it seems undue. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 22:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems undue, to me, if that's the only other instance. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "that it affected all of the other major issues" maybe just "all other major issues"
    • Done
  • "During the 1980 primary election, Nancy and Barbara developed an animosity that lasted for the rest of their lives." so she didn't 'grow to dislike the Bushes', she entered the presidency with it?
  • " in her authority over social events as first lady" what does 'authority' mean in this context?
    • Changed to "responsible for organizing"
  • "Barbara counted 65 different nations that she had visited." why not just " had visited 65 countries"?
    • Barbara is being attributed here because it was literally her own count. I can change it if this is a minor enough fact that it can be added without attribution.
  • "she orchestrated a meeting with the RNC chair" was the meeting between her and the RNC chair, or her husband-- not clear
    • Changed to "between herself and the RNC chair"
  • "As the wife of a presidential nominee, Bush was more visible than she had previously been" I think it's strange to jump straight to Bush being the nominee, without mentioning that he got the nomination.
    • Changed this to start the sentence with George getting the nomination

To FLOTUS, pretty good overall just minor stuff. Eddie891 Talk Work 14:33, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie891, I've responded to each point so far. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:37, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Shortly after becoming first lady, Bush was diagnosed with Graves' disease," not sure this is something that needs to be in the article, but was Bush open publicly about her diagnosis?
  • "Publicly, she dismissed it "much ado about nothing" by twenty-year-olds," is there a missing 'as' here?
    • Fixed
  • "She met her goal of raising $25 million (equivalent to $55,998,472 in 2022) towards the endowment. " after how long?
    • After looking into it, it seems that this doesn't appear in the sources about Bush, only in the source about the White House. I've removed it as undue.
  • ": it contributed to the 1989 education summit, " Not sure what 'it' is here
    • Swapped with "her advocacy"
  • "The issue was controversial at the time due to its association with gay rights." Well, it wasn't really the association with gay rights, but gay people, wasn't it?
    • Changed
  • "For this reason, her work on this issue was not as widely publicize" But one of the only examples you give of her actually engaging in advocacy was privately urging her husband. So was it not publicized, or not public?
    • Not widely publicized. The other example was a public appearance meeting with children who were HIV positive.
      • I don't have access to Page, but could you elaborate here a bit on what she says about "For this reason, her work on this issue was not as widely publicized." Other sources talk about Bush's visit as a spotlight, breaking a national silence, . Sounds pretty publicized to me, no? Eddie891 Talk Work 15:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
        • The relevant quote in the source is "She never championed, but she was putting herself out there", and it dwells on the idea that she took on literacy as an uncontroversial choice while doing AIDS advocacy work "under the radar". It also says that she "challenged public attitudes about gays and HIV/AIDS". Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "such as Helmut Kohl and Brian Mulroney," you should probably mention what countries they led
    • Done.
  • "between the nations would continue in part because of Barbara's influence" Which nations? The west is not a monolith
    • Clarified
  • "Due to an injury from a sledding accident, she was limited to the White House residence for the first week of the war and walked with a cane for months after." Encyclopedically relevant? Seems to not fit in the section
    • Agreed, I've removed it.
  • "Due to her strong approval ratings compared to her husband, Barbara was made a more prominent face of the campaign. This also allowed the campaign to contrast her with Hillary Clinton, the wife of opposing candidate Bill Clinton. Bush had conflicting feelings about leaving the White House after her husband lost reelection. She was sorry to see her husband lose but relieved to return to Houston and be away from the regular criticism of her family." I'd split the para between these two sentences
    • Done.
  • " repeating the long delay by Nancy Reagan " This is written as if the reader would know that the delay happened before reading this, which as far as I can tell they don't
    • Reworded to state it as a new fact.
  • "she lied that reporters were harassing her because of the interview." I think a more grammatically correct way to put this would be "she lied, saying that..."
    • Switched to "she lied by saying that" to keep the comma structure from getting too confusing
  • You have three "after leaving the White House"'s in one para. I think that's about two too many
    • Kept the first one
  • We do have a (very short) article on Barbara Bush: A Memoir
    • Linked
  • "hat she really loved living in the White House but that she did not miss it because she and her husband were having the best time they had ever known" this feels like a direct quote, but isn't? What's going on with the phrasing?
    • I have no idea. Someone added a bunch of unhelpful content like this while the article was waiting at FAC. Removed.
  • "her sons were even more stressful" Maybe "caused her more stress"?
    • Fixed
  • "he is talking to you". Looking at, say this bio of Bush, it seems like it was more the sermon itself that convinced him.
    • Reworded
  • "She expressed worry that the decision might be a mistake" might be worth clarifying whether this was publicly or not, because that would be a big difference
    • I don't see anything saying she expressed it publicly, so I changed it to her and George worrying about it rather than "expressing" worry
  • "Her involvement in the hurricane relief efforts were further criticized" 'was' further criticized
    • Fixed
  • I think two "her daughter Robin"'s in the same sentence is a bit unnecessary.
    • Switched the second to just "Robin"
  • "Bush's opinion on abortion was a minor issue" It's not clear to me what 'issue' means in this contex
    • Reworded
  • "Bush decided that she did not identify with the Republican Party" Strictly speaking, she actually said she thought she didn't identify with the modern Republican Party, right? Not quite as definitive
    • Reworded to say that she didn't identify with it as it existed at the time
  • " an award given out annually by Jefferson Awards" The organization doing the giving out is not "Jefferson Awards", so something is off here
    • Named the organization
  • "that was under construction" 'was under construction' when?
    • Added "at the time of her death"

Another group Eddie891 Talk Work 02:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Eddie891 I've made the changes as noted above. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 02:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Thebiguglyalien, just a couple responses above. I think I might just be a bit confused about the publicity of her work with AIDs because I am interpreting 'publicized' as the attention she got, and you intend for it to mean more along the lines of what the Bush admin sought to publicize? Just not sure since I don't have access to Page. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also one more thought, I'm not sure you want to say "AIDs victims" -- maybe jsut "people with AIDs" or something. Eddie891 Talk Work 15:50, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Changed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK, can Support at this point Eddie891 Talk Work 15:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dudley

[edit]
  • I suggest calling her Barbara rather than Bush to avoid ambiguity who you are referring to, particularly as you do this with George and George W.
    • This is a perennial debate with articles like this. Others have told me I should almost exclusively use the surname. I've tried to balance it the best I could by using the surname when it's clear and using Barbara whenever George is involved.
  • "public school". This means different things in different countries. I suggest linking to State_school#United_States.
    • Done.
  • "This town was wealthier than Odessa, allowing the Bushes a more comfortable lifestyle." This seems a non-sequitur. Someone's wealth depends on how much money they have personally, not on how much their community has.
    • Removed. I checked it against the source, and it's not terribly relevant.
  • "the rector congratulated her for achieving "first-class". She was so insulted by the suggestion that members of one denomination are superior to another that she left without joining". This is unclear. Why should praise for doing well in a class imply demoninational superiority?
    • The rector said that being in that denomination meant that they were "first-class". That's what upset her.
  • "In 1962, Bush learned to campaign when her husband chose to run for the chairmanship of the Harris County Republican Party." "chose to run" is wordy. I would just say "ran".
    • Done.
  • "as false information was spread during her husband's primary election, alleging that her father was a communist.[44][45] While campaigning". This whole account appears to refer to the primary election, but as Yarborough was the incumbent Democrat, Bush "campaigning" must at some point switch to referring to the actual election. This needs clarifying.
    • Reworded so it says he won the primary
  • "she gave her slideshow demonstrations". I would delete "her". I initially wondered who the "her" was that she was giving the demonstrations to.
    • Done.
  • "she declined to give her thoughts on vice presidential candidate Geraldine Ferraro, but that "it rhymes with rich". She later apologized and clarified that she meant "witch"." What does this mean? How does it rhyme and is witch less insulting?
    • The sources tend to avoid saying "Bush called Ferraro a bitch" directly, but I found one that used the word, so I've added a sentence to make it clearer.
  • "during her tenure as second lady.[75] Throughout her tenure as second lady". You do not need to repeat "second lady".
    • Fixed.
  • RNC. This should be explained - presumably Republican National Committee.
    • Replaced the acronym with the full name.
  • "Bush explicitly rejected suggestions that she dye her hair or lose weight upon becoming first lady." This is covered above and does not need to be again.
    • Removed.
  • "LGBT community". This term seems anachronistic. According to LGBT community it did not come into common use until the 1990s.
    • Replaced with "gay community" unless there's a better term to use here.
  • More to follow. Dudley Miles (talk) 09:49, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
  • "she led the envoy to attend the inauguration of Costa Rican president". An envoy is a person. I suggest deputation.
    • Reworded.
  • "Gorbacheva was one of several global figures in which Bush's relationship was beneficial to her husband's administration". "figures in which" is ungrammatical. Maybe "Bush's relationships with several other glabal figures were beneficial to her husband's administration"
    • Reworded.
  • "relieved to return to Houston and be away from the regular criticism of her family" Maybe "relieved to return to Houston and be free from the frequent criticism of her family".
    • Much better, changed.
  • "Bush had gone some time without cooking or driving a car, two skills that she was forced to reacquire after leaving the White House". No change needed, but did she really not have servants to perform these tasks when she left the White House?
    • Apparently not. Based on what I read, they seemed to have some financial trouble in the first weeks or months after they left the White House.
  • "victims of Hurricane Katrina when she made a comment to a radio station about the situation:[130]
Almost everyone I've talked to says, "We're gonna move to Houston." What I'm hearing, which is sort of scary, is they all want to stay in Texas... Everybody is so overwhelmed by the hospitality, and so many of the people in the arenas here." I am not clear what she is saying here, maybe because I am not American. Katrina hit New Orleans in Louisiana, so is she saying that the victims wanted to move to Houston because Texans are hospitable? Also, where is "here" in "arenas here"?
  • I'm not 100% on this either. I left it in from when I found the article. My understanding is that it was interpreted as flippant about the severity of the situation. I would have no problem removing it if it's undue.
  • "She was ambivalent about women in the military during the United States invasion of Panama, believing that women were emotionally capable of handling war but less so physically. She limited her stance on the issue of women in the military to her relief that Manual Noriega had been captured." She limited her stance on women in the military to relief that Noriega was captured? This does not make sense. Dudley Miles (talk) 17:09, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reworded.
Dudley Miles, I've replied to the comments above. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source review by Tim O'Doherty (pass)

[edit]

Placing a marker, will review per the nom's request in a few days' time. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 20:23, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not looked at it extensively yet, but from a quick glance:

  • Anthony 1990, Carlin 2016, Kilian 2002, Page 2019 and Ratcliffe 1989, C. Fred's Story, Millie's Book and Reflections: Life After the White House's ISBNs are not consistent with the rest. Convert to full, hyphenated ISBN-13s: this is a good tool.

Ping thebiguglyalien. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 22:16, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tim O'Doherty Done. I use this tool, though I always manage to misplace the link to it. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:26, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

More. Done in no particular order, just noting things down as I see them.

  • No harv errors
  • Ref 195 has a slash after .edu.
  • Inconsistency between how you cite CNN in refs 135 and 144.
  • Archive link for ref 135 doesn't work for me: does it for you? All other links work for me.
  • You have some ref titles written in sentence case and some in title case. Per MOS:TITLECONFORM, a consistent style is wanted.
  • Any reason not to link the publications' names? If you want to be consistent with the other FLOTUS articles, that works for me.
  • Why do 137 and 144 have ISSNs when all the others don't? Suggest removing, for consistency purposes.
  • Can Fox News be trusted as reliable in this case? Can you find another outlet reporting on the same story?
  • What makes Ajli.org. reliable?

Ping TBUA. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 14:28, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Tim O'Doherty The archive link at ref 135 works fine for me. I don't usually link publication names just because it's not something I think to do. Ajli should be reliable for its own membership. I've fixed all other issues. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 15:14, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
After looking at WP:FACS again I don't think I've missed anything out. No spotchecks required, as it's not the nom's first FAC: I have checked Earwig, which gives 25.9 per cent for one news source, mostly just common titles and phrases like "Bush and her husband", "the U.S. House of Representatives" and "first lady of the United States". Think this one should be a pass from me. Tim O'Doherty (talk) 15:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


Drive-by comments

[edit]
  • Some books have publisher locations while others don't. Could you standardise?
  • Brower is in the references list but is not used to cite anything.
  • "have consistently ranked her in the upper-half of American first ladies." The "upper half" in what respect?
  • You use "significant" six times. A couple of them seem a bit vague and hand wavey to me and I wonder if it is possible to come up with a more precise word or phrase?
"the first Black woman to hold a significant position in the East Wing of the White House."
"caused her significant discomfort."

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:58, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild: The wording of "ranked her in the upper-half of American first ladies" is taken from the U.S. presidents articles (featured U.S. president articles include phrases like "Historians and scholars have typically ranked Reagan among the upper to middle tier of American presidents" and "Scholars have ranked Coolidge in the lower half of U.S. presidents."). I've removed the reference location and the Brower reference, and I reworded those two uses of "significant", though I'm open to further rewording. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:12, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that an otherwise HQ RS uses (what I find) a woolly phrase is not a defence for including it in Wikipedia. I (honestly) really didn't know what was meant, how is a general reader supposed to? I am of course open to persuasion: perhaps you could argue for that turn of phrase on its own merits, rather than an appeal to authority?
I mean, a poll of historians? What might one assume historians are professionally qualified to judge in a first lady? I bet you could ask ten people and get eleven serious suggestions. I would suggest either cutting it - it doesn't seem to me to be essential to the lead - or expanding the sentence briefly to explain what is being ranked. (This is where I would normally throw in a helpful suggestion, but do you know what - I'm stumped.) Gog the Mild (talk) 20:24, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I agree that it's not terribly important, so I've removed it from the lead. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:34, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Barbara_Bush/archive1&oldid=1180492944"